2001 Freedom of Expression

• Table of Contents
• Abbreviations

General situation

Violation and prevention of rights defined under the title of “freedom of thought” was widespread in the year 2001 in Turkey as in previous years. People, who criticized the arguments and practices determined by authorities as the “state policy”, faced arbitrary detention, threats and were put on trial. The activities of non-governmental opposition organizations and dissident publications were subject of bans and burdensome trials. People, who defended views different from the “state policies”, particularly, human rights defenders and representatives of non-governmental organizations (NGO) as well as associations, trade unions, political parties and publication offices, where these people met, continued their activities under the threat of State Security Courts (SSCs) and imprisonment. In the State of Emergency Region, freedom of thought, expression and communication was intensely under pressure. The distribution, sale and publication of many books, newspapers and tape cassettes were banned in the State of Emergency Region. Branches of NGOs and cultural and artistic institutions in the region faced trials or were closed down without a judicial conviction. The Governorate for the State of Emergency Region removed from office or exiled many civil servants in the Region for their “harmful views”.

Pressures on political parties, NGOs, journalists, writers and artists continued in 2001 as well, based on expressing opinions challenging the official view. According to the information gathered by the HRFTHuman Rights Foundation of Turkey , at least 457 trials were heard at the SSCs and criminal courts regarding oral or written expression of opinion. As far as the HRFT could gather, 855 persons were prosecuted in 339 such trials. Ninety-one of these trials were launched under Article 159 of the Turkish Penal Code. Twenty-eight of the trials under Article 159 concluded in 2001 and 5 ended in conviction. Eighteen of the 51 trials launched under Article 312 of the TPCTurkish Penal Code ended in 2001 (13 ended in conviction, 5 in acquittal). Seventy-one trials were launched under Article 169 of the TPC, 19 of which ended in the same year, 11 in conviction. Fifty-nine trials were launched under Article 6 of the Anti-Terror Law; all of the 25 terminated ones resulted in conviction. Under Articles 7 and 8 of Anti-Terror Law 48 trials were launched; eleven trials ended in 2001, 4 of which in conviction.

The expressions and statements that were subject to prosecution in the year 2001 were mostly related to the Kurdish problem, as was the case in previous years. The persons who expressed oppositional views with regards to the death fast in the prisons faced intensive pressures and also prosecution.

In addition to trials against certain books, articles, statements and cartoons, posters have also been censored for being “harmful”. For instance, Diyarbakır Penal Court No.2 issued a decision of confiscation on claims of “containing expressions that could incite people to enmity” with regards to three posters and a special bulletin released by the HRAHuman Rights Association on the occasion of the World Peace Day on September 1. In accordance with the decision, the posters were banned in Çanakkale, İzmir, Adıyaman and Siirt.

The articulation of the Kurdish problem anywhere was perceived as a threat against “national interest and security” and those statements, articles and news reports considered to be “harmful” were punished. At the end of 2001 university students launched a “Campaign for Education in Kurdish”, which became a massive movement, when students at elementary and secondary schools and their parents joined it. Related to the campaign at least 2,731 people were detained and at least 76 were arrested in 2001. Any kind of statement that supported the campaign was regarded a “potential offence”.

Another problem that caused an intensive violation of rights in the category of freedom of thought in 2001 was the death fast that commenced in the prisons on 20 October 2000. There were attempts to silence oppositional voices concerning the hunger strikes and death fast through intense pressures, arbitrary detention and arrest during 2001. News reports and statements about death fasts and F-type prisons were banned in the media. Almost every action of relatives of prisoners faced violent intervention and any attempt by intellectuals, artists, human rights organizations and NGOs for a peaceful solution to the actions in prisons was presented as being “a spokesperson for illegal organization.”

Following the warning of the Council of Europe Parliamentarian Assembly on Turkey in the field of freedom of expression in 1999, the Council of Europe Council of Ministers took an “interim decision” in July 2001. The interim decision demanded Turkey to implement the decisions taken by the European Court of Human Rights between 1998 and 2001, to return back the rights of those mentioned in the decisions and to reform Turkey’s system in this field in conformity with Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights.

Existing Legislation Regarding Freedom of Thought

The primary legal provisions that form obstacles to the freedom of thought are Articles 155, 159, 311 and 312 of the TPC; Articles 6, 7 and 8 of the so-called Anti-Terror Law with the number 3713; The Law for Protecting Atatürk which is numbered 5816; Press Law and the Law on Radio and Television. Additionally, Law on Provincial Administration, Martial Law and State of Emergency Law allow, on certain situations, military and administrative authorities to take prohibitive measures without a judicial decision.

The Press Law numbered 5680 holds responsible not only the writer, but also the editor-in-chief and owner of publication institutions for offences committed via the press. Therefore, more than one person gets punished for just one offence. Article 31 of the same law empowers the Council of Ministers to “ban the entry and distribution of printed material published in foreign countries to Turkey in cases when they are considered to be contrary to the integrity of the State with its country and nation, to national sovereignty, to the existence of the Republic, to national security, to public order, to general order, to public interest, general morals and to general health. It also empowers the Minister of Interior Affairs to “confiscate printed material published in Turkey.”

Article 162 of the TPC states that “presenting a publication that is considered to be a crime is an offence by itself.”  According to this provision, those who quote from publications with the intention to criticize it, discussing it or inform the public may get punished. However, the persons who are accused by the SSCState Security Court prosecutors of “making propaganda for a terrorist organization” may get punished on claims of being the direct source of the quotation.

Article 159 of the TPC defines the offence of “openly insulting and ridiculing the fact of being Turkish, the Republic, the Grand National Assembly, the moral character of the Government, Ministries, the military or security forces of the State or the moral character of the Court,” and prescribes heavy imprisonment of between 1 to 6 years. In Turkey where the border between criticism and insult is determined arbitrarily, this provision makes any criticism, particularly of human rights violations or the role of the Turkish Armed Forces and the National Security Council an offence.

Article 155 of the TPC provides for sentences of persons, who make oral or written statements that “endanger the security of the country” or “alienate people from military service”, ranging from 2 months to 2 years’ imprisonment.

Article 312 of the TPC regulates the offence of “inciting people to hatred and enmity.” Article 312 has frequently been used against “offenders of thought” particularly following the amendment made to Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law in 1995. National and international legal circles and human rights organizations have seriously criticized Article 312.

Article 168 of the TPC, which regulates the offence of “membership to and administration of armed gangs" is often used to prosecute human rights defenders and journalists for their views and actions. People, who worked for legal newspapers and journals defined by security authorities as “publication of an illegal organization,” were often put on trial on accusations of “being an executive or member of an armed gang” depending solely upon the files prepared by the security officers, even when there was no other material evidence.

The authorities also used Article 169 of the TPC, which regulates “aiding and abetting members of an armed gang” defined within “offences committed for terrorist ends”, against members of oppositional media on claims that they paved the way for the activities of the illegal organization through news reports. In 2001, there was an increase in the number of people, who were put on trial under Article 169 in connection with speeches they delivered or books they wrote.

The offence defined by Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law as “making written and oral propaganda and holding meeting, demonstrations and marches aiming at destroying the unbreakable integrity of the State of the Republic of Turkey with its country and nation” has not only been frequently applied against persons having oppositional opinions concerning the Kurdish problem, but also against persons, who expressed or cited contrasting information and views regarding the “national security”. Article 8 prescribes a heavy prison term from 1 year to 3 years and heavy fines. The owners of publications convicted for such an offence can be fined heavily and their editor-in-chiefs can be imprisoned from 6 months to 2 years and be fined as well.

Article 7 of the Anti-Terror Law regulates offences of “founding or joining terrorist organizations apart from those defined by the TPC” or “aiding members of and making propaganda for such organizations.” Expression of any information and opinion considered by authorities to be in favor of “terror organizations” is sentenced under this article.

Article 6 of the Anti-Terror Law regulates the offences of “printing and publishing newsletters and statements of terrorist organizations” and “showing civil servants, who took part in the struggle against terror as targets.” This article can be used as a shield for public officers, who are on trial for torture, rape, extra-judicial execution or similar human rights violations.

Paragraph (b) of Article 3 of the Martial Law numbered 1402 empowers the martial law commanders to “censor, record or stop broadcasting and communication by any kind of means such as telephone, wireless, radio and television, and to have priority in using these means whenever necessary.” According to line (c) of the same article, martial law commanders are authorized to “control any communication means such as publication, correspondence, letters or telegrams either orally, in writing, as pictures, videos and sound; to ban or censor the publication, distribution, keeping or carrying more than one copy of newspapers, journals, books and other publications, and their admission to the state of emergency region; to confiscate any document, publication or communication means such as books, journals, newspapers, leaflets, posters, statements, banners, LP or cassette, whose publication and distribution was banned by the martial law commander; to close down publishing houses that printed these documents or the production places of cassettes and LPs, and even if a confiscation decision is not taken for certain products, the necessary measures should be taken for their destruction if the martial law commander objects to hand them back to their owners; and to ask for authorization for release of new newspapers and journals.”

Paragraph (e) of Article 11 of the State of Emergency numbered 2935 authorizes the governors to “ban or base on permission the publication, reproduction, release and distribution of newspapers, journals, leaflets, books, posters or fliers and admission and distribution of those published and reproduced outside the state of emergency region into the region; to confiscate books, journals, newspapers, leaflets, posters and similar material, whose publication had been banned. Paragraph (f) of the same article authorizes governors to “control and, if necessary, to record or ban any statement, article, picture, film, LP and sound and visual bands and broadcast of sounds”.

Paragraph (a) of Article 1 of the Decree with the Force of Law numbered 430, which is known in public as the SS (Exile and Censor) Decree empowers the Governor of the State of Emergency Region or the provincial governors in the State of Emergency Region “to ban or base on permission the publication, reproduction, release and distribution of any printed material, books, journals, newspapers, leaflets, posters and the like, which might cause the destruction of the public order seriously by misrepresenting the activities in the region or producing untrue news reports or broadcasts or which might cause anxiety among the society or prevent security forces to fulfill their duties properly. If such material is printed or reproduced outside the State of Emergency Region, it may be banned. Their admission to and distribution in the region is subject to permission. In accordance with this provision, the Minister of Interior can, upon proposal or after taking the opinion of the Governor of the State of Emergency Region, “send a written warning to owners or publication directors of these publications for stopping the publication without taking into account whether they were published within or outside the state of emergency region. S/he can ban for an indefinite or definite period the reproduction, publication or distribution of them”. The article also empowers the Minister of the Interior to close down the publishing houses that published these publications up to 10 days and in case of reoccurrence, up to 1 month.

The Law on Turkish Radio and Television (TRT) numbered 2954 includes clauses that seriously restrict the freedom of communication and receiving information. The Law defines the duties of the TRT in domestic broadcast as follows:

“To contribute to 1. Atatürk’s principles and revolutions to take root and realization of national objectives that envisage the rise of the Republic of Turkey above the contemporary civilization level; 2. to protect and strengthen the existence and independence of the State with its indivisible integrity of the country and the nation, the peace of the society and the qualities of democratic, secular and social state in an understanding of national solidarity and justice, respectful for human rights and based on Atatürk’s nationalism; 3. development of national education and national culture; 4. to protect national security policy and national and economic interests of the State; 5. constituting the public opinion freely and healthily in line with the Constitutional principles.” (Article 9-e)

The regulation concerning “prohibition of broadcasts with regards to national security” is as follows:

“The Prime Minister or a minister in his/her place is authorized to prohibit a news report or program in cases that national security openly requires so. The ban should be announced in writing. But in cases of emergency the decision of prohibition can be communicated orally. In that case, the prohibition decision should be repeated in written form at the shortest. In cases the prohibition involves programs not produced under the responsibility of Turkish Radio and Television Institute, the general directorate communicates the prohibition decision to the relevant persons within 24 hours.” (Article 23).

Article 22 of the Regulation concerning Broadcast Principles and Methods for Radio and Television Broadcasts brings the following arrangement: “Broadcasts cannot be inspected and stopped beforehand with reservations for judicial decisions. But in cases national security obviously requires so or in case of a strong possibility that the public order can be seriously destroyed, the Prime Minister or the Minister in his/her places can stop the broadcast”. In this context Istanbul SSC prohibited any broadcast of news about the death fasts in prison on 14 December 2000 and trials were brought against people who did not stick to the prohibition. The media institutions that did not abide by the decision were confiscated or closed down. News reports and sights about the hunger strike in 1996 had been prohibited for the same reason.

The “Law on Establishment and Broadcast of Radios and Televisions” (called RTÜK like the High Council for Radio and Television) numbered 3984 and entered into force on 13 April 1994 also includes clauses that restrict freedom of expression, communication and getting information. For instance, Paragraph (a) of Article 4 of the RTÜK Law sanctions broadcasting in violation of the principle of “not allowing broadcast contrary to the existence and independence of the Republic of Turkey and the indivisible integrity of the State with its country and nation, paragraph (b) sanctions broadcasting in contrast to “national and moral values of the society, paragraph (c) “the principle democratic rules and personal rights mentioned in the general principles section of the Constitution, paragraph (d) “general ethics, social peace and Turkish family structure, paragraph (e) “freedom of expression, principle of pluralism in communication and broadcast”, paragraph (f) “principle of never condemning people for their race, sex, social class or religious beliefs” and paragraph (g) “not allowing broadcast that could incite people to violence, terror and ethnic discrimination and create feelings of hatred in society”. According to these provisions, the RTÜK has the authority to determine which programs are “in the interest of the country and people”, which are “ethical”, “in agreement with pluralist democratic principles”, and “developing tolerance and joint life culture against differences”. The article authorizes the RTÜK to “warn” or “close down” radios and televisions that broadcast about Armenians and Assyrians or play Kurdish music.

Constitutional Amendments

On 3 October the Grand National Assembly adopted the constitutional amendment package of 34 articles formulated in the Compromise Commission. The constitutional amendments were the most comprehensive amendments that the Parliament adopted in the history of the Republic, except for periods under martial law. The 23 articles in the package aimed at realizing the short-term targets mentioned in the EU Partnership Document presented to Turkey on 7 November 2000 and the National Program announced on 19 March.

Articles 1, 2, 3, 7, 9 and 10 of the constitutional amendments concerned the freedoms of thought, expression and communication. The law was published in the Official Gazette on 17 October. Article 1: The expression of “no thought or consideration” in the fifth paragraph in the initial part of the Constitution was changed to “no activity”. This means that only an “activity” against the bans defined in the provision can restrict freedom of thought and expression. Article 2: Article 13 of the Constitution entitled “restriction of fundamental rights and freedom” was amended and among the reasons for restriction of fundamental rights and freedoms “the indivisible integrity of the State with its country and nation, the Republic, national security, public order, public interest, general ethics and general health” were removed. According to the new version fundamental rights and freedoms can only be restricted “in connection with reasons determined in the relevant Articles of the Constitution without touching their essence and only by a law”. Article 3: Article 14 of the Constitution entitled, “Prohibition of Abuse of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms” was re-arranged. The clauses now are: “the aim of violating the indivisible integrity of the state with its territory and nation, and endangering the existence of the democratic and secular order of the Turkish Republic based upon human rights”. Article 7: Article 22 of the Constitution entitled “Freedom of Communication” was re-formulated. Reasons such as “national security, public order, prevention of crimes, protection of general health and general ethics and protection of others’ rights and freedoms” were added to reasons of special restriction in the frame of the article. Article 9: Article 26 of the Constitution entitled “Freedom of Expression and Dissemination of Thought” was amended and certain special restrictions were added. The statement, which reads, “In expressing and disseminating opinion any language prohibited by law cannot be used”, as well as the paragraph starting with this statement was omitted. This amendment means that citizens can use different languages, dialects or regional accents. Article 10: Article 28 of the Constitution entitled “Freedom of Press” was amended and the paragraph that read, “No publication or broadcast can be made in a language prohibited by law” was excluded from the text. This brings constitutional guarantees to publications and broadcast in different languages, dialects or regional accents According to the amendments of 17 October 2001 (publication in the Official Gazette) on Articles relating to freedom of expression the corresponding Articles in the 1982 Constitution now read: Preamble (paragraph 5) The recognition that no protection shall be accorded to an activity contrary to Turkish national interests, the principle of the indivisibility of the existence of Turkey with its state and territory, Turkish historical and moral values or the nationalism, principles, reforms and modernism of Atatürk and that, as required by the principle of secularism, there shall be no interference whatsoever by sacred religious feelings in state affairs and politics… ARTICLE 13. (As amended on October 17, 2001) Fundamental rights and freedoms may be restricted only by law and in conformity with the reasons mentioned in the relevant articles of the Constitution without infringing upon their essence. These restrictions shall not be in conflict with the letter and spirit of the Constitution and the requirements of the democratic order of the society and the secular Republic and the principle of proportionality. ARTICLE 14. (As amended on October 17, 2001) None of the rights and freedoms embodied in the Constitution shall be exercised with the aim of violating the indivisible integrity of the state with its territory and nation, and endangering the existence of the democratic and secular order of the Turkish Republic based upon human rights. No provision of this Constitution shall be interpreted in a manner that enables the State or individuals to destroy the fundamental rights and freedoms embodied in the Constitution or to stage an activity with the aim of restricting them more extensively than stated in the Constitution. ARTICLE 22. (As amended on October 17, 2001) Everyone has the right to freedom of communication. Secrecy of communication is fundamental. Unless there exists a decision duly passed by a judge on one or several of the grounds of national security, public order, prevention of crime commitment, protection of public health and public morals, or protection of the rights and freedoms of others, or unless there exists a written order of an agency authorised by law in cases where delay is prejudicial, again on the above-mentioned grounds, communication shall not be impeded nor its secrecy be violated. The decision of the authorised agency shall be submitted for the approval of the judge having jurisdiction within 24 hours. The judge shall announce his decision within 48 hours from the time of seizure; otherwise, seizure shall automatically be lifted. ARTICLE 26. (As amended on October 17, 2001) Everyone has the right to express and disseminate his thoughts and opinion by speech, in writing or in pictures or through other media, individually or collectively. This right includes the freedom to receive and impart information and ideas without interference from official authorities. This provision shall not preclude subjecting transmission by radio, television, cinema, and similar means to a system of licensing. The exercise of these freedoms may be restricted for the purposes of protecting national security, public order and public safety, the basic characteristics of the Republic and safeguarding the indivisible integrity of the State with its territory and nation, preventing crime, punishing offenders, withholding information duly classified as a state secret, protecting the reputation and rights and private and family life of others, or protecting professional secrets as prescribed by law, or ensuring the proper functioning of the judiciary. ARTICLE 28. (As amended on October 17, 2001) The press is free, and shall not be censored. The establishment of a printing house shall not be subject to prior permission or the deposit of a financial guarantee. The state shall take the necessary measures to ensure freedom of the press and freedom of information. In the limitation of freedom of the press, Articles 26 and 27 of the Constitution are applicable. Anyone who writes or prints any news or articles which threaten the internal or external security of the state or the indivisible integrity of the state with its territory and nation, which tend to incite offence, riot or insurrection, or which refer to classified state secrets and anyone who prints or transmits such news or articles to others for the above purposes, shall be held responsible under the law relevant to these offences. Distribution may be suspended as a preventive measure by the decision of a judge, or in the event delay is deemed prejudicial, by the competent authority designated by law. The authority suspending distribution shall notify a competent judge of its decision within twenty-four hours at the latest. The order suspending distribution shall become null and void unless upheld by a competent judge within forty-eight hours at the latest. No ban shall be placed on the reporting of events, except by the decision of judge issued to ensure proper functioning of the judiciary, within the limits specified by law. Periodical and non-periodical publications may be seized by a decision of a judge in cases of ongoing investigation or prosecution of offences prescribed by law, and, in situations where delay could endanger the indivisible integrity of the state with its territory and nation, national security, public order or public morals and for the prevention of offence by order of the competent authority designated by law. The authority issuing the order to confiscate shall notify a competent judge of its decision within twenty-four hours at the latest. The order to confiscate shall become null and void unless upheld by the competent court within forty-eight hours at the latest. The general common provisions shall apply when seizure and confiscation of periodicals and non-periodicals for reasons of criminal investigation and prosecution takes place. Periodicals published in Turkey may be temporarily suspended by court sentence if found to contain material which contravenes the indivisible integrity of the state with its territory and nation, the fundamental principles of the Republic, national security and public morals. Any publication which clearly bears the characteristics of being a continuation of a suspended periodical is prohibited; and shall be seized following a decision by a competent judge. Official Translation by the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (GNATGrand National Assembly of Turkey ). Full text can be found under http://www.GNAT.gov.tr/anayasa/constitution.htm

Adjustment Laws

The “draft adjustment law concerning amendments to relevant articles of the TPC” prepared and submitted to the Prime Ministry by the Secretary General for the EU in order to make the implementation of the amendments to the Constitution easier, was opened for signature at the Council of Ministers in November. Prime Minister Bülent Ecevit declared that the draft law called the “Mini Democracy Package” would be considered at the GNAT on 13 November. The mini package included amendments to Articles 159 and 312 of the TPC, Articles 7 and 8 of the Anti-Terror Law, Article 445 of the Law on Legal procedures, Articles 107, 128 and 327 of the Criminal Procedure Code (TCPC) and Article 53 of the Law on Administrative Prosecution Procedures. However, the draft was not put on the agenda of the GNAT in November.

Minister of Justice Hikmet Sami Türk held a press meeting on 1 December and stated that he was the first to sign the draft adjustment law. Weeks after Türk’s statement, MHPNationalist Movement Party ministers stated that they had not seen the draft. The draft law was considered at the leaders’ summit on 24 December. Prime Minister Ecevit and Minister of Justice Türk held the draft law extremely important for “the development of freedom of thought and expression, the democratic regime and the adjustment to principles of freedom and democracy as mentioned in the National Program. However, ANAP Chairman Mesut Yılmaz did not think the draft law to be democratic enough and MHP Chairman Devlet Bahçeli considered it to be “extremely dangerous.” Human rights defenders and judicial authorities commented that the draft law was an unfortunate and coercive draft that would worsen the already bad situation.

The draft adjustment law, i.e. the “Mini Democracy Package” was not passed in 2001, because of the difference of opinion and disharmony among the coalition leaders. It included the following amendments to Articles 159 and 312 of the TPC and Articles 7 and 8 of the Anti-Terror Law, fundamental obstacles before freedom of thought, expression and communication in Turkey:

In Article 159 TPC the offence of insulting “the Republic and the moral personality of parliament” was replaced by the offence of insulting “the Turkish Nation, the State of Turkey and the Council of Ministers.” With the amendment, the upper prison sentence for that offence would be reduced from 6 to 3 years. If the offence of intimidating the Turkish nation and Turkish state were to be committed in a foreign country, the sentence to be given would be raised by two-third.

The first paragraph of Article 312 of the TPC would provide for a sentence from 6 months to 2 years’ imprisonment for openly praising an offence and for encouraging people not to obey the law. The main change, however, would be made in the second paragraph that is usually applied. The offence of inciting people to hatred and enmity would have to be committed under the condition of the “possibility of destroying the public order”. The amended paragraph would be as follows:

“The person who openly incites people to hatred and enmity on the basis of differences in social class, ethnicity, religion, sect or region, in a manner to bring about the possibility of destroying public order shall be sentenced to imprisonment from 1 to 3 years.”

With a third paragraph added to Article 312, “provocation in a manner to intimidate and damage human dignity of one section of people” would become a crime demanding 2 years’ imprisonment for it. In case the crimes defined in the article were to be committed via media, the sentences would be increased twice.

The condition of acting “in a manner to encourage employing terror methods” would be added to Article 7 of Anti-Terror Law in committing the crime of “making propaganda for or aiding terrorist organizations”. Article 7 would read as follows: “Those persons who aid members of a terrorist organizations or those who make propaganda for the organization in a manner to encourage employing terror methods are sentenced to imprisonment from 1 to 5 years and fined TL 1 billion, even if their acts constitute a different crime.”

The new criteria for Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law, which is widely used for “separatist propaganda” would be as follows: “People who make written, oral or visual propaganda or hold meetings, demonstrations and marches with the objective of destroying the indivisible integrity of the State of the Republic of Turkey with its country and nation, shall be sentenced to imprisonment from 1 to 3 years and fined TL 1 billion up to TL 3 billion. If this crime is committed in a manner to encourage employing terror methods the sentence shall be increased by one-third, and in case of re-committing this crime, the sentence is not commuted into a fine.”

Freedom of Expression

The major source for pressures and prosecution of journalists, writers, human rights defenders, artists, representatives of political parties and non-governmental organizations were their views, opinions or the information they presented.

Akın Birdal

Ankara Public Prosecution Office launched a trial against Akın Birdal, former Chairman of the Human Rights Association (HRA), in February on claims that during a panel in Germany on 20 October 2000 he stated, “Everybody knows, what has been done to the Armenians. Turkey should apologize to the minorities for what she has done”. The trial launched under Article 159/1 of the TPC commenced on 1 March. In the first hearing at the Ankara Criminal Court No. 2 Birdal related that he had expressed his views about democracy, the rule of law and minorities and mentioned the unjust practices that minorities had faced in certain periods in Turkey. “I did not say anything to mean that Turkey should apologize for the Armenian massacre. I expressed the faults regarding minorities.” Birdal stated that journalists had distorted his speech. “Is it an offence to mention certain incidents that happened? Many people had to leave their homes when their possession was taxed in 1942. Is it an offence to say this?” Birdal reminded that there had been a decision by international organizations about the journalist, who had misrepresented his words, not to be accepted to meetings in Germany.

The court held eight hearings in 2001 in order to establish the identity of the reporter from the daily "Gözcü" who had written the news report. The trial was to continue on 29 January 2002.

Lawyer Sedat Aslantaş filed two separate complaints demanding compensation from the daily “Hürriyet” for distorting the speech of Birdal.

Yavuz Önen

The trial launched against HRFT Chairman Yavuz Önen and Fikret İlkiz, editor-in-chief of the daily “Cumhuriyet”, because of a statement by Önen published in the paper on 19 January 2000 with the title, “Human Rights Defenders on Trial”, ended at İzmir Penal No. 2 on 27 March. Önen and İlkiz were sentenced to 1 month in prison and fined TL 91.260.000 for “criticizing the decision of the court” under Article 30/2 of the Press Law. The prison term was commuted to a fine and they were each fined TL 182.520.000.

The press statement of Yavuz Önen was made in connection with the following event. On 3 October 1999 68 people were detained during the funeral of Nevzat Çiftçi, who was killed in Ankara Central Closed Prison on 26 September 1999. Fourteen of the detainees were arrested, including HRFT staff Günseli Kaya and Alp Ayan from the İzmir Representation Office. HRFT İzmir representative Prof. Dr. Veli Lök made a statement that was reported in the daily “Cumhuriyet” on 31 October 1999 with the title “They Punish Combating Torture.” Because of the statement, Veli Lök, Fikret İlkiz and Bahri Akkan, Chairman of the İzmir branch of Eğitim Sen, were prosecuted under the same law.

Eşber Yağmurdereli

The blind lawyer Eşber Yağmurdereli, who was put in prison on 21 October 1997, was released on 19 January in accordance with the Law on Conditional Release and Suspension of Sentences.

On 26 June 1997 the Court of Cassation had confirmed the sentence of 10 months’ imprisonment Istanbul SSC had passed on Yağmurdereli in the trial launched in connection with a speech he had delivered at a meeting the HRA held in Istanbul on 8 September 1991. In 1978 Eşber Yağmurdereli had been sentenced to life for “the violent attempt to overthrow the system of the Republic of Turkey” under Article 146/1 TPC. He had conditionally been released according to the Anti-Terror Law of 12 April 1991. This decision by Samsun Criminal Court was cancelled after he had been “sentenced for another offence during the conditional release period.” Eşber Yağmurdereli was imprisoned on 21 October 1997. This led to reactions inside and outside the country and on 9 November 1997 his sentence was suspended for one year for health problems. The decision was based on the fact that “his body had lost the ability to function due to coroner heart disease, chronic bronchitis and complete blindness.” After his release, Eşber Yağmurdereli indicated that he would not accept a special amnesty and refused to get a health report. Thereupon, Çankırı Public Prosecution Office annulled the decision of suspension and Yağmurdereli went to prison again on 1 June 1998.

Eren Keskin

Eren Keskin, Chairwoman of the Istanbul Branch of the HRA, was put on trial on accusations of “insulting the army” in a news report entitled, “That is What You Deserve” published in the daily “Yeni Gündem” on 10 January. The news report was about torture of 5 people, who had gone to Northern Iraq on behalf of the “Mothers of Peace Initiation” in an attempt to end the clashes between YNK and PKKKurdish Workers' Party . The indictment asked for imprisonment of Eren Keskin and Erdal Taş, editor-in-chief of the paper, under Article 159 TPC in the trial heard at Beyoğlu Criminal Court No. 2.

The trial launched against Eren Keskin on claims of “insulting the army” in an interview published under the title “We complained about the General Staff to the German Minister”, published in the journal “Yeni Aydınlık”, commenced on 9 November. In the trial, Eren Keskin, Gültekin Kaya, editor-in-chief of the journal, and interviewer Uğur Yıldırım are prosecuted under Article 159 TPC.

Eren Keskin, Vahit Genç, Mustafa Aytaş, Doğan Erbaş, Kamil Tekin Sürek, Celal Beşiktepe, İbrahim Kudiş

The trial launched against Eren Keskin, Chairwoman of the Istanbul Branch of the HRA, Doğan Erbaş, Chairman of HADEP Istanbul Provincial Organization, Vahit Genç, Chairman of ÖDPParty for Peace and Solidarity Istanbul Provincial Organization, Mustafa Aytaş, Chairman of DBP Istanbul Provincial Organization, Kamil Tekin Sürek, Chairman of EMEPLabour Party Istanbul Provincial Organization, Celal Beşiktepe, executive member of the TMMOB and İbrahim Kudiş, KESKConfederation of Trade Union in the Public Sector executive, on charges of “insulting the security forces” in a complaint they had made against soldiers, who participated in the operations against prisons on 19 December 2000, ended in acquittal in a hearing conducted at Istanbul Criminal Court No. 3 on 15 November.

Ahmet Altan

Turkey accepted the proposal of the European Court of Human Rights (ECoHR) to pay Ff 30 thousand to writer Ahmet Altan, who had been tried at Istanbul SSC and sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment. Altan was sentenced in 1995 under Article 312 TPC in connection with his article “Atakürt” and he applied to the ECHR when the Court of Cassation confirmed the verdict.

At the end of 2001 the situation concerning the trials launched against Ahmet Altan and Murat Tunalı, editor-in-chief of the journal “Aktüel”, in connection with 6 articles of Altan was as follows:

The trial launched on claims of “insulting the army” in the article entitled “To be scared one morning” ended in acquittal at Istanbul Criminal Court No. 2 on 2 February.

The trial launched in connection with the article “Political Adultery and Murder” ended on 4 December. Altan and Tunalı, prosecuted for “insulting the government and security forces”, were acquitted in the hearing at Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2.

Four separate trials launched against Altan and Tunalı on charges of “insulting the army” did not end within the year 2001. The trials were launched in connection with the following articles: “Prosecute these Generals, publicize these Writers”, published in the issue of the journal “Aktüel” dated 9-15 November 2000; “All Generals of Turkey, Go back to Your Barracks”, published in the issue dated 14-20 December 2000; “Night Over There” published in the issue dated 22 February 2001; and “From Sarıkamış to the Mediterranean” published in the issue dated 22-28 July 2000. The next hearings of the trials were to be held on 15 February 2002 at Istanbul Criminal Court No. 2.

Fikret Başkaya

On 26 January, the 9^th Chamber of Court of Cassation confirmed the sentences passed on Assoc. Prof. Fikret Başkaya, Halis Doğan, owner of the newspaper “Özgür Bakış” and Hasan Deniz, editor-in-chief of the same, on charges of “making separatist propaganda via the press” in an article of Başkaya entitled “A historical case?” published in “Özgür Bakış” on 1 June 1999. In the trial that ended at Istanbul SSC on 13 June 2000, Assoc. Prof. Başkaya was sentences to 1 year 4 months in prison and fined TL 1.066.666.666, Doğan was fined TL 1.824.120.000 and Deniz was fined TL 960.000.000. Fikret Başkaya went to Kalecik Prison on 29 June for the execution of his sentence.

Another trial was launched against Başkaya on charges of “inciting people to hatred and enmity” in an interview entitled “Civil Society: New Means of Apolitization” published in the journal “Fırat’ta Yaşam” dated 12-19 March. Başkaya, Mehmet Boncuk, reporter with “Fırat’ta Yaşam”, and Halil Şahin, editor-in-chief of the same, are prosecuted under Article 312 of the TPC at Ankara SSC.

Trial on Conference against “Sexual Assault and Rape in Custody”

The trial launched against 19 defendants, 18 of them women, who allegedly “insulted the security forces” in speeches they delivered at the Conference against “Sexual Assault and Rape in Custody”, held in Istanbul on 10-11 June 2000, did not come to an end in 2001. The defendants Gülizar Tuncer, Fatma Karakaş, Özgül Han, Duygu Aydın, Nazlı Top, Fatma Deniz Polattaş, Hayriye Ümin Yurdakul, Suna Aras, Tülay Çağlar, Berrin Taş, Safiye Top, Sultan Seçik, Temin Salmanoğlu (father of N.C. Samanoğlu who was tortured together with Polattaş), Cemile Güçlü, Derya Engin, Songül Yıldız, Nahide Kılıç, Zeynep Ovayolu and Fatma Kara are charged under Article 159 TPC. The next hearing of the trial was to be held on 5 February 2002 at Beyoğlu Criminal Court No. 1.

Yusuf Akbulut – Priest of Diyarbakır Assyrian Mother Mary Church

On 5 April Diyarbakır SSC acquitted Yusuf Akbulut, Priest of Diyarbakır Assyrian Mother Mary Church, who was indicted for “inciting people to hatred and enmity” and faced imprisonment from 1 to 3 years. He stood trial on allegations of making statements that supported the draft law on the Armenian genocide heard at the US House of Representatives Sub-Commission. The SSC announced the reasoned verdict on 19 April and pointed out that the words of Akbulut should be evaluated within “the right of a person to express his/her thoughts and opinion” guaranteed under Articles 24 and 25 of the Constitution.

The words of Akbulut quoted “At that time not only Armenians, but also Assyrians have been subject to a genocide for being Christians” led to the prosecution under Article 312/2 and 312/3 of the TPC.

Hasan Celal Güzel

The trial launched against Hasan Celal Güzel, former Chairman of the Re-birth Party (YDP), by Kayseri Public Prosecution office on charges of “insulting the Turkish Republic, the President and its army” in a speech he delivered at the conference “Where is Turkey on the Scale of Democracy” was suspended on 16 January under the Law on Conditional Release and Suspension of Sentences.

Güzel was indicted for “insulting the judiciary” in a speech he made on leaving Ayaş Prison on 10 May 2000. The case did not come to an end in 2001. The indictment of Ankara Public Prosecution office regarded the following words of Güzel as an insult against the judiciary: “I was put in prison by tyrants because I defended the right, law, values and beliefs of the nation. Because the law that was politicized by the junta and the wrong and partial decision of a handful of politicized characters I was kept in here for 5 months, even though I defended right and law... I know best this state with any of its institutions. And as I knew it, I became more aware of the need to progress from the tyrannical state to the rule of law.” In the trial at Ankara Criminal Court No. 6, Hasan Celal Güzel faces a heavy imprisonment sentence from 1 year to 6 years under Article 159/1 of the TPC. The next hearing of the trial was to be in February 2002.

Dino Frisullo

The trial against Italian journalist Dino Frisullo, who was put on trial in connection with the 1998 Newroz celebrations in Diyarbakır, was suspended for 3 years in accordance with Law on Conditional Release and Suspension of Sentences in the hearing at Diyarbakır SSC on 17 January. Diyarbakır SSC had sentenced Frisullo to 1 year in prison on claims of “inciting the people to hatred and enmity on grounds of ethnic and regional differences”, but the Court of Cassation had quashed the decision in June 1999. Şeyh Mehmet Başkurt, Ferdi Aydın, Mansur Işık and Naif Demirci who had been prosecuted with Dino Frisullo had formerly been acquitted.

Mehmet Yıldırım – Istanbul Trade Chamber (ITO) Chairman

Istanbul Public Prosecution office launched a trial against Mehmet Yıldırım, Chairman of Istanbul Trade Chamber (ITO) on claims that he had “insulted the National Security Council” in a speech he delivered at the general meeting of the ITO on 18 December 2000. The indictment sought an imprisonment term from 3 to 18 months. The indictment related Yıldırım’s words as follows: “Turkey has a national security council. Turkey is going away, its economy is breaking. Instead of dealing with unworthy things they should deal with these matters. They poke their nose into everything. All right, they shall come and intervene in here as well. They shall say ‘Friends, you could not make it. You remain there in parliament. We shall appoint some 15-20 ministers who can make it.’ This country is in need of this.” Istanbul Penal No. 12 initially sentenced Yıldırım to one year in prison on 31 October. The sentence was later commuted to a fine of TL 456.300.000 and suspended.

İlyas Salman

Actor İlyas Salman was interrogated on instructions at Kadıköy Criminal Court No. 2 on 7 February in connection with the trial launched against him on claims of “insulting the army” in a speech he delivered at a people’s feast in Alaşehir, Manisa in 1999. The trial continued in Alaşehir with the demand of imprisonment from 1 to 6 years.

A trial was launched against İlyas Salman for he stated, “the GNAT is a barn with 550 cows in it” in a speech he delivered at a conference organized by the Science, Culture and Research Foundation in Gebze in March. Salman is prosecuted under Article 159 of the TPC at Kadıköy Criminal Court No. 1 and the next hearing was to be on 18 February 2002.

Abdurrahman Dilipak

Journalist-writer Abdurrahman Dilipak was indicted by Istanbul SSC for “inciting people to hatred and enmity” under Article 312 of the TPC in his articles “Religion of the State, Religion of the Nation, Religion of Allah” and “My Country is Unique” published in the newspaper “Akit” on 26-27 April. He stood trial at Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2 for “insulting the army” under Article 159 of the TPC in his article “This was to Happen,” published in daily “Akit” on 1 July. Four separate trials were launched against Dilipak at Istanbul Penal No. 1 for violating Article 482 of the TPC in his article “Sects and Politics”, which focused on the dubious relation of interest between the Terakki Foundation and a newspaper. All of the trials were adjourned to the year 2002 in order to wait for the adjustment laws.

The 7 trials against Dilipak, two at Istanbul SSC, two at penal courts and one at Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2 that continued in 2001 were the following:

The article entitled “Koran Courses” published in the journal “Cuma” (Friday) dated 23-29 June 2000. (Charges: violating Article 312 of the TPC)

The article entitled “Open Letter 1 to the Prime Minister” published in the newspaper “Akit” in 1999. (Charges: Violating Article 312 of the TPC)

Article that appeared in “Akit” in 1998 supporting the action “Respect for Belief, Freedom to Thought “held on 11 October 1998 (Charges: Violating Article 312 of the TPC)

Article “28 February: Day of Civil Defense” published in “Akit” dated 1 March 2001 (Charges: Violating Articles 159 and 312 of the TPC and Article 16 of the Press Law)

The speech he delivered about Atatürk at TV channel Kanal D on 22 June 1999. (Charges: Insulting the spiritual entity of Atatürk)

An article he wrote following the death of ex-Commander of the Marine Forces Güven Erkaya that appeared in newspaper “Akit” in 2000 (Charges: Violating Article 482 of the TPC, which regulates the act of “insulting the dignity, honor and pride of one person”)

Emine Şenlikoğlu

The trial against journalist-writer Emine Şenlikoğlu and her husband publisher Recep Özkan on charges of “inciting people to hatred and enmity” in the book entitled, “Whose Victim Am I?” ended on 28 March. Istanbul SSC decided to acquit Şenlikoğlu and Özkan for “lack of evidence”. Imprisonment for six years was sought for Şenlikoğlu and Özkan.

The prosecution of Emine Şenlikoğlu on claims of “inciting people to hatred and enmity” in her book, “What Are We to This Country?” continued at Istanbul SSC on 27 April. The hearing of 16 November was adjourned to 15 February 2002 in order to wait for the result of the adjustment laws. The indictment seeks an imprisonment term from 1 to 3 years under Article 312 of the TPC.

The trial launched against Emine Şenlikoğlu for “inciting people to hatred and enmity” in her speech during a TV program on Klas TV in Manavgat, Antalya, on 15 May 2000 ended on 24 May. In the trial at Izmir SSC Şenlikoğlu was sentenced to 1 year, 8 months in prison and fined TL 152.100.000 under Article 312 of the TPC. However, one other trial was launched against Şenlikoğlu because of the same speech in November. The indictment prepared by Antalya Public Prosecution Office sought imprisonment for Şenlikoğlu under Article 159 of the TPC for “insulting the Republic and government”. The words of Şenlikoğlu that led to her prosecution were: “Even if 90 thousand 28 Februarys happened you cannot detach us from Allah. We never make concessions from our beliefs. Students with headscarves are not allowed to enter universities. Why does the state behave as if we are step children?”

Hasan Mezarcı

Former deputy Hasan Mezarcı from the closed down Welfare Party returned to Turkey on 9 April from Germany, where he had lived for 3 years. Mezarcı was detained at Ipsala Border Gate, arrested and put in Bandırma Prison on 10 April in connection with certain speeches he had delivered when he was a deputy. On 16 July 2000 Elbistan Criminal Court had sentenced Mezarcı to 2 years 6 months in prison on charges of “insulting the army and Atatürk”. On 30 December 2000 Trabzon Criminal Court had issued an arrest warrant in absentia against Hasan Mezarcı. Hasan Mezarcı was released on 15 May, because the trials in question had been suspended in accordance with the Law on Conditional Release and Suspension of Sentences.

The trial against Mezarcı launched on charges of “insulting and ridiculing the military forces of the state and moral character of the court” was suspended on 15 January under the Law on Conditional Release. Mezarcı was prosecuted under Article 159/1 of the TPC at Ankara Criminal Court No. 6. In case Mezarcı commits a crime within 5 years the trial will be heard again.

The trial launched against Mezarcı at Ankara Criminal Court No. 2 for “insulting the government, president and security forces” was suspended in the hearing of 28 December under the Law on Conditional Release and Suspension of Sentences.

Ankara Penal Court of Peace No. 16 transferred the trial launched on the demand of “taking Hasan Mezarcı under observation” to Istanbul Court of Peace No. 4 ruling not to be competent. The latter referred the case file to Ümraniye Court of Peace. It appears that a decision has not been taken yet.

Melih Eroğlu, Mehmet Dağdoğan and Muhammet Akbaba – Radio Arkadaş

Melih Eroğlu, Mehmet Dağdoğan and Muhammet Akbaba, executives of Radio Arkadaş broadcasting in Çukurova, stood trial on charges of “inciting people to hatred and enmity on the basis of ethnicity, religion, sect and regional differences” and “making separatist propaganda” under Article 312 of the TPC and Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law. The trial ended in acquittal at Adana SSC on 16 July. Eroğlu, Dağdoğan and Akbaba were prosecuted for “broadcasting the song Cemo by Grup Yorum on 11 and 12 December 2000 and 3 January 2001”, “organizing a protest meeting even though their broadcast was stopped by RTÜK” and “reading a press statement intimidating RTÜK and carrying placards that read ‘We Won’t Go into the F-Type”.

Adnan Yüce – Radio İmaj

A trial was launched against Adnan Yüce, owner of the Radio İmaj broadcasting in Ankara, on charges of “aiding and abetting an illegal organization” in a program about the F-type prisons broadcasted on 9 December 2000. The trial, launched under Article 169 of the TPC, continued at Ankara SSC.

Vedat Zencir

The trial launched against conscientious objector Vedat Zencir on charges of “insulting being Turkish, the Republic, parliament, the military forces, police and the judiciary” under Article 159 of the TPC was suspended for 3 years in accordance with the Law on Suspension of Cases Committed via Press at Izmir Criminal Court. The trial had previously ended in acquittal, but the Court of Cassation had quashed the decision. The decision was published in the Official Gazette on 22 May.

Vedat Zencir had announced his conscientious objection with a press statement on 1 December 1997 and had lodged an official complaint against himself at the SSC. Thereupon, the prosecutor at Izmir SSC launched a trial against Zencir under Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Article 312 of the TPC. The military prosecutor at the General Staff launched a trial based on Article 155 of the TPC and İzmir Public Prosecution under Article 159 of the TPC. Zencir was acquitted in the trial at the SSC.

Fehmi Koru

The trial launched against Fehmi Koru, columnist with the daily “Yeni Şafak”, on charges of “inciting people to hatred and enmity” in a speech he made during a news program broadcast on Kanal 7 on 13 October 1999 did not end in 2001. An imprisonment term up to 4 years 6 months was sought for Koru in the trial at SSC because of his comments on a poster that read “Is 7.4 Not enough?” which reminded of the earthquake on 17 August. A female student at Marmara University, who was not let into the school because of her headscarf, had carried the poster. The next hearing of the trial was to be on 5 March 2002.

Sacit Kayasu

On 4 April the 9^th Chamber of the Court of Cassation removed Sacit Kayasu,  Adana ex-public prosecutor, from office for three months and sentenced him to 1-year’s imprisonment. The sentence was commuted to a fine of TL 988.000.000 and suspended. Kayasu was acquitted of the claim of “insulting the army” in the indictment he had prepared against Evren. On 15 May the Panel of Chambers at the Court of Cassation confirmed the fine passed on Kayasu for “abusing duty”, but quashed the decision of acquittal for “insulting the army”. The 9^th Chamber of the Court of Cassation reconsidered the case file and insisted on its original decision acquitting Kayasu once again on 26 September. On 24 October the Panel of Chambers at the Court of Cassation quashed the acquittal decision once again.

Noyan Özkan – Chairman of Izmir Bar Association

The trial launched against Noyan Özkan, Chairman of Izmir Bar Association, and Eren Güvener, editor-in-chief of the daily “Milliyet” because of an article that appeared in the supplement of the newspaper for the Aegean region in June 2000 ended on 29 June. In the article Noyan had criticized the prison sentence passed on Hüseyin Yıldıran, teaching at the Aegean University Department of Chemistry, and had to stand trial on charges of “violating Article 30 of the Press Law by commenting on a case that had not yet ended.” On 29 June Izmir Penal Court No. 2 sentenced Noyan Özkan and Eren Güvener to 1 month in prison and a fine of TL 91.260.000, each. Özkan’s imprisonment sentence was commuted to a fine and suspended. Güvener’s sentence was also commuted to a fine, but not suspended.

Erol Özkoray-Idea Politika

Two separate trials were launched against Erol Özkoray, Director of the journal “Idea Politika” at Istanbul Criminal Court No. 2 on charges of “insulting the Republic and army” in articles entitled “Continuous Coup D’etat and Turkish Style Totalitarism”, “Turkey’s Bankruptcy: Pandemonium” and “Oligarchic Square: Turkey is Extremely Weary” published in the autumn 2001 issue of the journal.

In the first hearing of the trial launched in connection with the former article on 9 November, Özkoray mentioned that the trial had been initiated on demand of the General Staff: “The armed forces of a country waiting at the door to the EU can still completely ignore freedom of thought and freedom of press and can lodge official complaints with judicial authorities”. Özkoray faces an imprisonment term under Article 159 of the TPC.

In the second trial launched in connection with the latter two articles, Özkoray is indicted on claims of “insulting the republic and army” by statements such as the following: “The real reasons behind the bankruptcy of the country are the 4 military coups we experienced till the day, the pressure on society since the 60s, the political order having traces of totalitarianism, the state structure that is prohibiting, commanding and becoming authoritarian and the regime being under the guardianship of soldiers... There are two obstacles before transition to democracy: army and press. The tyranny is created by soldiers, civilian bureaucrats, politicians, businessmen and press monopoly. The responsibility of bankruptcy lies with this oligarchy”. Özkoray faces imprisonment under Article 159 of the TPC.

The EU Report on Progress, released on 13 November 2001, also mentioned the pressure on the journal “Idea Politika” and Erol Özkoray and condemned Turkey’s attitude concerning freedom of the press. Alvaro Gil-Robles, Human Rights Commissioner of the Council of Europe, asked the Minister of Justice and Minister Responsible for Human Rights about “Idea Politika” and Erol Özkoray during meetings he had in Ankara on 3-4 December. In addition, Reporters Sans Frontieres (RSF) released a statement condemning the pressures concerned.

Adnan Özdemir – Sun TV

The trial launched against Adnan Özdemir, News Director of Sun TV, broadcasting in Mersin, in connection with a program about F-type prisons and death fasts ended at Mersin Penal Court No. 1 on 28 May. The court sentenced Özdemir to 3 months in prison and a fine of TL 35.591.000 on allegations of “not obeying the ban on broadcasting about death fasts” under Article 526/1 of the TPC. The prison sentence was later commuted to a fine of TL 2.372.760. Özdemir stated that he had left Sun TV before the program in question had been broadcasted and that he had not been informed of the existence of such a case and had not testified anywhere. Since the notification of the sentence had been sent to his ex-office, Adnan Özdemir missed the 7-day limit for appealing.

Şennur Yurtsever, Salih Aslan, Mehmet R. Tiryaki, Sibel Özbudun, Handan Çağlayan – Journal “Bilim ve Siyaset” (Science and Politics)

The prosecutor at Istanbul SSC prepared an indictment against Şennur Yurtsever, editor-in-chief of the journal “Bilim ve Siyaset”, and the writers Salih Aslan, Mehmet R. Tiryaki, Sibel Özbudun and Handan Çağlayan on claims of “making separatist propaganda and inciting people to enmity” in connection with the following articles that appeared in the edition on “Migration” in November 2000 of the journal: “Psychology of Displaced People”, “Migration from Homeland to Statelessness”, “Enforced Migration from the Ottomans to the Day”, “The Unnamed State of Emergency (Witnessing-Voice of the Past and Future)” and “Enforced Migration – Proposals for a Solution” by the Social Support and Culture Association for Migrants (Göç-Der).

The indictment sought imprisonment of Şennur Yurtsever under Article 312/2 of the TPC and Article 8/1-2 of the Anti-Terror Law and against the other defendants under Article 169 of the TPC and Article 8/1-2 of the Anti-Terror Law. The next hearing of the trial was to be held on 21 March 2002.

Mehmet Özer

Photographer Mehmet Özer, member of the “Intellectual and Artist Initiative” was put on trial in connection with a press statement of 3 December 2000, in which he drew attention to the death fasts in prisons. Özer is prosecuted under Article 169 of the TPC for the offence of “aiding an illegal organization”. The trial was to continue on 31 January 2002.

In protest of the trial against Özer 22 intellectuals and artists, members of “Intellectual and Artist Initiative”, issued official complaints against themselves on 24 September. Ankara SSC Prosecution office started an investigation against the artists.

Şükrü Erbaş

Van SSC Prosecution office launched a trial against poet Şükrü Erbaş on charges of “inciting people into hatred and enmity”. The indictment seeks punishment for Erbaş under Article 312 of the TPC for “inciting people into hatred and enmity” through reading poems from his book during activities organized in the framework of ‘Istanbul-Hakkari Bridge of Art’ in Hakkari on 21-25 June.

Coşkun Ak –Superonline Internet Company

Coşkun Ak, former coordinator of the Interactive sections of the internet provider Superonline, was put on trial on charges of “insulting the army, police and court” following an official complaint by Macit Musal. Musal had demanded the removal of a message sent to the website “Forum” of Superonline by someone with the nickname “A Person”. The trial ended at Istanbul Criminal Court No. 4 on 27 March. The court sentenced Ak to 40 months in prison for “violating Article 159 four times”. Lawyer Fikret İlkiz stated that Ak had been prosecuted for an article “whose writer he did not know and whose contents he did not agree with” and emphasized that “there was no legal arrangement concerning the crimes committed on the internet in Turkey”. Fikret İlkiz said, “Based on the principle of law that ‘there is no crime without definition in law’ I argue that my client has been prosecuted as perpetrator of a non-existent law and an undefined act of crime”. The 9^th Chamber of the Court of Cassation quashed the decision on grounds of “inadequate investigation” on 14 November.

Ahmet Zeki Okçuoğlu – Journal “Serbesti”

Istanbul SSC sentenced lawyer Ahmet Zeki Okçuoğlu to 1 year and 4 months in prison and a fine of TL 1 billion 352 million in connection with his article published in the third issue of the journal “Serbesti”. The trial ended on 18 June and an order of closure for 30 days was issued for the journal.

Muammer Ketençoğlu

Musician Muammer Ketençoğlu and Şerif Erol, broadcasting coordinator of the Açık Radio (Open Radio), stood trial on claims of “inciting people to hatred and enmity” by playing an Armenian song in the program, “This side of the Danube” broadcasted on 7 October 2000. The trial at Istanbul SSC ended in acquittal, since the elements of crime had not materialized. Ketençoğlu said in the hearing that he had “included old Armenian songs from the Muş region. Music is a universal language. It is not separating, but uniting”. The indictment sought a prison term between 2 and 6 years for Ketençoğlu and Erol under Article 312 of the TPC.

Mehmet Kutlular

On 16 January the 8^th Chamber of the Court of Cassation confirmed the sentence passed on Mehmet Kutlular, owner of the religious daily “Yeni Asya”, by Ankara SSC. Ankara SSC had sentenced him to 2 years and 1 day in prison on claims of “inciting people to hatred and enmity” by saying “the earthquake on 17 August 1999 was a divine warning” in his speech at Ankara Kocatepe Mosque during the commemoration of the 39^th anniversary of the death of Saidi Nursi on 10 October 1999. Kutlular could not benefit from the Law on Conditional Release for the crime had been committed after 23 April 1999 and he was put in Metris Prison on 22 May. Kutlular was to remain in prison for 9 months 23 days in line with the Law on the Execution of Sentences.

Kasım Tırpancı – Newspaper “23 February”

Kasım Tırpancı, owner of the newspaper “23 February” published in Ardahan, was arrested for “insulting the prosecutor Gökhan Şen during a hearing at Ardahan Penal Court on 2 May. Tırpancı was released on 29 May. In the hearing of 2 July he was sentenced to 1 year and 1 day in prison and fined TL 277.000.000 on charges of “insulting an officer on duty” under Article 266 of the TPC.

Fatih Altaylı – daily “Hürriyet”

The investigation lodged by the prosecutor at Istanbul SSC against Fatih Altaylı, columnist with “Hürriyet”, on allegations of “aiding the PKK” ended in the decision of non-prosecution. When the interview of Fatih Altaylı with PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan in 1996 was broadcasted on Star TV on 3 October, the Association of Support and Solidarity of Families of Martyrs lodged an official complaint against Altaylı. The investigation initiated because Altaylı told Öcalan, “Dear Chairman, you are playing for the leadership of Turkey”.

Fatih Altaylı testified at Diyarbakır SSC in November on allegations that he had “made propaganda of Hezbollah” in his TV program, “Teke Tek” broadcasted on Kanal D. Altaylı stated that he did not accept the testimony of Mehmet Yasin Aslan, who participated in his program. Altaylı said, “We sorted out the parts that could constitute a crime or insult the security forces. One month after recording we broadcasted the program. We never gave a text to someone and made that person read the text before the camera. Moreover, it was impossible for us to know what was to be told.”

Mustafa Demir (Imam)

Mustafa Demir, Imam at Mahmutpaşa Mosque in Istanbul, faced trial for saying that the economic crisis had come “due to the ban on headscarves and closure of places of worship” in his speech during the Friday prayer on 6 April. Recai Kutan, Chairman of the Virtue Party (FP) attended the Friday prayer in question. Demir was to be tried at Istanbul SSC on claims of “inciting people to enmity” under Article 312 of the TPC.

Kemal Kamahlı – Radio of Iran’s Voice

The prosecutor at Erzurum SSC indicted Kemal Kamahlı, speaker at Iran’s Voice radio from 1996 to 2000, in early July. The trial was reportedly based on a report by the Turkish Embassy about Kamahlı, who presented the program “Voice of the Molla” broadcasted in Turkish. Kamahlı was accused of “inciting people to commit a crime” under Article 311 TPC.

Hakan Kızılarslan-Ankara SSC Public Prosecutor

An investigation was launched against Hakan Kızılarslan, Ankara SSC Public Prosecutor, in connection with his speech during the commemoration of Atatürk on 10 November. Kızılarslan stated that the future of the society was mortgaged: “Many decisions regarding the state are being dictated by some imperialist countries... The rulers of the country take into account not the national considerations and needs of the country, but the values of domestic and international developments.” The investigation was reportedly initiated on the demands of Minister of Justice Hikmet Sami Türk.

Lütfi Kırayoğlu, Fahir Çam-EMO Bursa Branch

Lütfi Kırayoğlu and Fahir Çam, editor-in-chief of the journal of Chamber of Electricity Engineers (EMO) Bursa branch, were indicted on charges of “insulting the government” in an article entitled “Apologize”. The trial commenced at Bursa Criminal Court No. 2 on 14 November.

Lawyer Hacı Ali Özhan

Lawyer Hacı Ali Özkan, registered with Ankara Bar Association, was put on trial on claims of “insulting Minister of Justice Hikmet Sami Türk” in his article, “The Ministers Have Committed a Crime”, which was published in the daily “Yeni Şafak” on 14 January. Ankara Criminal Court No. 2 acquitted Özkan in the hearing on 22 November on grounds that “the elements of the crime had not materialized”. Özkan had criticized the attitude of Türk concerning death fasts and hunger strikes.

Şevki Yılmaz

The trial against Şevki Yılmaz, former MP from the closed down Welfare Party (RP), at Sivas Criminal Court No. 2 was suspended for 3 years in accordance with the Law on Conditional Release and Suspension of Sentences. Yılmaz had faced imprisonment for 6 years on claims of “insulting and ridiculing the moral entity of the GNAT and government” in a speech he delivered in Sivas. The trial had been launched on 23 October 1994, while Şevki Yılmaz was the Mayor of Rize, because of his response to an invitation in Ulaş, Sivas: “They sent me an invitation on 30 August, it says come to the cocktail, come to the monument. Am I a demon to go to a cocktail?”

Ahmet Turan Demir, Aydemir Güler, Turgut Koçak

The trial against Ahmet Turan Demir, former Chairman of the HADEP, Aydemir Güler, SİP Chairman, and Turgut Koçak, TSİP Chairman, launched in connection with speeches they delivered at the 4^th General Assembly of HADEP on 26 November 2000 continued on 22 November. Ankara SSC decided to wait for the amendments to be made to Article 312 of the TPC and Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law in accordance with the constitutional amendments. The trial was postponed to 5 February 2002.

Ahmet Mahmut Ünlü (Ahmet Hoca with Robe)

The 8^th Chamber of the Court of Cassation confirmed the 3-year imprisonment sentence passed on Ahmet Mahmut Ünlü, known in public as “Ahmet Hoca with the robe” by Istanbul SSC. The decision pointed out that to state that those who did not live in accordance with religious rules should be punished was to be considered within Article 312 of the TPC.

Ünlü had commented on the earthquake of 17 August 1999 by saying: “The people who were subjected to disaster were people, who did not live in line with religious requisites, involved in adultery, prostitution and usury, who acquired undeserved income and that is why they suffered the disaster.” The decision stated: “In this way, he characterized people having an economic and social life in line with contemporary needs around the country as people who should be punished. Thus, we are convinced that he openly incited people to hatred and enmity on the basis of religious difference and taking into account the density of his intention and the reaction his speeches created in public, we see it appropriate to differ from the bottom level while determining the sentence.”

Journalists and Writers Under Prosecution

Defendant: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled, “The Emphasis on Socialism and Brotherhood” published in the issue dated 11 September 2000

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; violating Article 312 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law.

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 22 December 2001. The SSC sentenced Erdal Taş to 1 year 8 months in prison, fined him to TL 152 million and decided on the closure of the newspaper for 1 month.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled, “Talabani wishes to escalate the war” published in the issue dated 29 July 2000

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 28 February 2001. The SSC fined M.Emin Yıldız TL 1.000.481.220, and Erdal Taş 740.610.000.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled, “Revolution of the Kurds” published in the issue dated 31 August 2000.

Charges: “Making separatist propaganda”; violating Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law.

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 10 April 2001. The SSC fined M.Emin Yıldız TL 997.000.650, and Erdal Taş TL 955.000.125. The Court of Cassation confirmed the verdict.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: News reports entitled “Tragedy Has Been Prevented” published in the issue dated 9 September 2000 and “There was a Game in the Game” published in the issue dated 10 September 2000.

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law.

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 22 August 2001. The SSC sentenced Erdal Taş to 4 years 6 months in prison and ordered the closure of the newspaper for 5 days.

Defendant: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled, “Suicide” published in the issue dated 20 October 2000

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; violating Article 312 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 22 May 2001. The SSC fined Erdal Taş TL 1.993.000.000.

Defendant: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “An Immense Protest – Reply on Pressures with Actions in Köln as well” published in the issue dated 28 January 2001.

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law.

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The SSC fined M.Emin Yıldız TL 1.481.220.000 and Erdal Taş TL 740.610.000.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled, “The PKK Presidential Council Announced a Peace Plan Including Concrete Proposals for Democracy and Peace” published in the issue dated 6 November 2000.

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law.

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 28 August 2001. The SSC sentenced Erdal Taş to 3 years 9 months in prison and decided on the closure of the newspaper for 15 days.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled, “The EU is not Sincere, Speak to the Kurds as well” published in the issue dated 12 November 2000.

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law.

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 26 July 2001. The SSC fined M. Emin Yıldız TL 881.400.000 and Erdal Taş TL 440.700.000.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Denial of KOB and Kurds” published in the issue dated 17 November 2000.

Charges: “Making separatist propaganda”; violating Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law.

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 30 October 2001. The SSC fined M. Emin Yıldız TL 1.057.680.000, sentenced Erdal Taş to 1 year in prison and fined him TL 1.622.400.000. In addition, the newspaper received an order for closure for 3 days.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Call from Öcalan to ECHR” published in the issue dated 18 November 2000

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 22 March 2001. The SSC fined M. Emin Yıldız TL 881.400.000 and Erdal Taş 440.700.000. In addition, the newspaper received an order of closure for 3 days.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Öcalan’s trial Commences in Strasbourg Today: Kurds are Rising Everywhere” published in the issue dated 21 November 2000.

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 22 June 2001. The SSC fined Erdal Taş TL 4.988.880.000. In addition, the newspaper received an order of closure for 3 days.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled, “Great Success” published in the issue dated 29 December 2000

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Imralı Worse than the F-type” published in the issue dated 05 January 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 11 April 2001. The SSC fined M. Emin Yıldız TL 1.632.375.000 and Erdal Taş TL 816.187.000. In addition, the newspaper received an order of closure for 3 days.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Torture in Siirt Prison” published in the issue dated 10 January 2001

Charges: “Showing as targets those who take part in the fight against terror”; Violating Article 6/1 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 15 June 2001. The SSC fined M. Emin Yıldız TL 1.632.375 and Erdal Taş 816.187.500.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Öcalan: Turkey shall not be Deceived” published in the issue dated 12 January 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 26 April 2001. The SSC fined M. Emin Yıldız TL 1.632.375.000 and Erdal Taş TL 816.187.500. In addition, the newspaper received an order of closure for 3 days.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “We Shall Invalidate the Plan” published in the issue dated 15 January 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 15 June 2001. The SSC fined M. Emin Yıldız TL 1.632.375.000 and Erdal Taş TL 816.187.500. In addition, the newspaper received an order of closure for 3 days.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Turkey in Decision Process” published in the issue dated 23 January 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 02 August 2001. The SSC fined M. Emin Yıldız TL 1.511.458.000 and Erdal Taş TL 755.729.000.

Defendant: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Quo Vadis” published in the issue dated 24 January 2001

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; violating Article 312 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 9 September 2001. The SSC fined Erdal Taş TL 284.731.000. In addition, the newspaper received an order of closure for 15 days.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Kurdish Language under Discussion” published in the issue dated 29 January 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”, “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Articles 6/2 and 8 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 26 September 2001. The SSC fined M. Emin Yıldız TL 1.360.312.500 and Erdal Taş TL 816.187.500. In addition, the newspaper received an order of closure for 7 days.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Diyarbakır Gives Message of Peace – People Say Peace” published in the issue dated 30 January 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Articles 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 8 May 2001. The SSC fined M. Emin Yıldız TL 1.632.375.000 and Erdal Taş TL 816.187.500. In addition, the newspaper received an order of closure for 3 days.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “PKK: A New Plan in Force” published in the issue dated 4 February 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Articles 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 11 July 2001. The SSC fined M. Emin Yıldız TL 1.425.825.000 and Erdal Taş TL 712.912.500. In addition, the newspaper received an order of closure for 7 days.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Proposal for Joint Resistance” published in the issue dated 13 February 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Articles 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 26 July 2001. The SSC fined M. Emin Yıldız TL 1.320.208.000 and Erdal Taş TL 664.104.000.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Solution Lies in Democracy” published in the issue dated 15 February 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Articles 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 28 May 2001. The SSC fined M. Emin Yıldız TL 1.425.825.000 and Erdal Taş TL 712.912.000.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “PKK’s Call for Ending Violence” published in the issue dated 16 February 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Articles 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 24 August 2001. The SSC fined M. Emin Yıldız TL 1.425.825.000 and Erdal Taş TL 712.912.000.

Defendant: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Progressiveness by Drinking Raki” published in the issue dated 26 February 2001

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; Violating Article 312 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 06 July 2001. The SSC sentenced Erdal Taş to 2 years in prison and fined him TL 284.731.000.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Women are Mirrors of Politics: 8 March Meeting” published in the issue dated 10 March 2001

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; Violating Article 312 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Out to the Streets at Newroz,” published in the issue dated 13 March 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The SSC fined M.Emin Yıldız TL 1.481.220.000 and Erdal Taş TL 740.610.000.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news reports entitled “Peace March is Possible” and “Massacre in Halepçe Condemned,” published in the issue dated 16 March 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 26 September 2001. The SSC fined M. Emin Yıldız TL 1.140.750.000 and Erdal Taş TL 570.375.000. In addition, the newspaper received an order of closure for 7 days.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news reports entitled “Message of Öcalan: Peace will Warm us like the Sun in Spring” and “New Games” published in the issue dated 20 March 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 19 June 2001. The SSC fined M. Emin Yıldız TL 1.368.900.000 and Erdal Taş TL 684.450.000. In addition, the newspaper received an order of closure for 7 days.

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “PKK Criticized: the National Program is not democratic” published in the issue dated 27 March 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 21.08.2001. The SSC fined M. Emin Yıldız TL 1.140.750.000 and Erdal Taş TL 570.375.000.

Defendant: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Ali Karataş

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Policemen Threatened a Student” published in the issue dated 30 December 1999

Charges: “Insulting the security forces”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 6 February.

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, writer Fatih Polat

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Democracy under Command” published in the issue dated 21 April 2000

Charges: “Insulting the army”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 4 December

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, writer Cemal İmre

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Heart of Galatasaray Mother” published in the issue dated 10 September 2000

Charges: “Inviting people to illegal and unauthorized meeting and demonstration”; violating the Law on Meeting and Demonstration Marches numbered 2911

Heard by: Zeytinburnu Penal Court of First Instance No. 1

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 5 November.

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, writer Kamil Tekin Sürek

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “12 September” published in the issue dated 13 September 2000

Charges: “Insulting the army”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 8 May

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, owner of the newspaper Fevzi Saygılı

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The announcement published in the issue dated 27 January 2001

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization “; Violating Article 169 of the TPC

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 4 September.

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, owner of the newspaper Fevzi Saygılı

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Compassion, Justice and Mr. Hikmet of Wisdom (Hikmet)” published in the issue dated 25 December 2000

Charges: “Showing the Minister of Justice as a target to an illegal organization”; violating Article 6/1 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: On 19 June, the SSC fined Fevzi Saygılı TL 594.360.000 and Bülent Falakoğlu TL 297.180.000, and the newspaper received an order of closure of 3 days. The decision was appealed and the case file was sent to the Court of Cassation.

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, owner of the newspaper Fevzi Saygılı

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Reserve and Use” published in the issue dated 3 December 2000

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; Violating Article 312 of the TPC

Verdict: On 18 July the SSC acquitted Fevzi Saygılı, but sentenced Bülent Falakaoğlu to 2 years in prison and fined him TL 282.520.000. The imprisonment term was subsequently converted into a fine and the total fine was TL 2.403.180.000. In addition, the SSC decided on the closure of the newspaper for 2 days. The decision was appealed and the case file was sent to the Court of Cassation.

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, owner of the newspaper Fevzi Saygılı

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The announcement entitled, “We Shall Overcome the Terror of Isolation” published in the issue dated 23 February 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of terrorist organizations”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: In the hearing on 2 October, the SSC fined Fevzi Saygılı TL 750.080.000 and Bülent Falakoğlu TL 378.540.000 and decided on the closure of the newspaper for 3 days. The decision was appealed and the case file was referred to the Court of Cassation.

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, owner of the newspaper Fevzi Saygılı

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The announcement entitled, “We Shall Overcome the Terror of Isolation” published in the issue dated 23 February 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: In the hearing on 2 October, the SSC fined Fevzi Saygılı TL 750.080.000 and Bülent Falakoğlu TL 378.540.000 and decided on the closure of the newspaper for 3 days. The decision was appealed and the case file was referred to the Court of Cassation.

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, owner of the newspaper Fevzi Saygılı

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The announcement entitled, “To the Public” published in the issue dated 23 October 2000

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: In the hearing on 17 April 2001 the SSC fined Fevzi Saygılı TL 10.995.840 and Bülent Falakaoğlu TL 5.497.920. The decision was appealed and the case file was referred to the Court of Cassation. The Court of Cassation quashed the decision on 17 September on the grounds that “the fines were calculated wrongly”. The trial was re-heard. In the hearing on 11 December the SSC fined Fevzi Saygılı TL 366.480.000 and Bülent Falakaoğlu TL 183.240.000. The newspaper received an order of closure for 3 days. The decision was appealed.

Defendant: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Fake Minutes from the Gendarmerie” published in the issue dated 15 November 2000

Charges: “Insulting an official on duty”; Violating Articles 480/4 and 273 of the TPC

Heard by: Zeytinburnu Penal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 10 December.

Defendant: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The announcement entitled, “To our People” published in the issue dated 12 July 2001

Charges: “Inciting people to commit a crime via press”; Violating Article 311 of the TPC

Heard by: Zeytinburnu Penal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 10 December.

Defendant: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Soldiers, Defendants of Massacre, Prosecuted” published in the issue dated 10 July 2001

Charges: “Commenting about a case brought before the judiciary”; Violating Article 30 of the Press Law

Heard by: Zeytinburnu Penal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 28 November.

Defendant: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu

Charges: Violating the ban on publishing about death fasts and operation in prisons issued by Istanbul SSC No. 4

Heard by: Zeytinburnu Penal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 5 October.

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, owner of the newspaper Fevzi Saygılı

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Official Complaint against Responsible People for F-type” published on the front page of the issue dated 13 May 2001

Charges: Violating the Law on Meeting and Demonstrations numbered 2911

Heard by: Zeytinburnu Penal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 28 November.

Defendant: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu

Reasoning: The allegation that the newspaper was published on 21 March 2001 despite the sentence of closure against it.

Charges: Violating Appendix 2/3 of the Press Law

Heard by: Zeytinburnu Penal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 22 August.

Defendant: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Punishment for Arresting Evcil” published in the issue dated 25 December 2000

Charges: “Commenting about a case that had been brought before the judiciary”; Violating Article 30 of the Press Law

Heard by: Zeytinburnu Penal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 26 July.

Defendant: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The announcements entitled “It is Our Call” published in the issues dated 23 September 2001 and 30 September 2001

Charges: Violating the Law on Meeting and Demonstrations numbered 2911

Heard by: Zeytinburnu Penal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 13 June.

Defendants: Newspaper Radikal, editor-in-chief Hasan Çakkalkurt, writer Mine G. Kırıkkanat

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “True Address” published in the issue dated 22 April 2000

Charges: “Insulting the court”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 8 May.

Defendants: Newspaper Radikal, editor-in-chief Hasan Çakkalkurt, writer Mine G. Kırıkkanat

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “GNAT and DDT” published in the issue dated 20 December 1999

Charges: “Insulting the parliament”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 13 February.

Defendants: Newspaper Radikal, editor-in-chief Hasan Çakkalkurt, writer Mine G. Kırıkkanat

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Justice and Indolence” published in the issue dated 22 December 1999

Charges: “Insulting the parliament and court”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 13 February.

Defendants: Newspaper Radikal, editor-in-chief Hasan Çakkalkurt

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news reports about the death fasts and operations in prisons published in the issue dated 20 December 2000

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 26 September.

Defendants: Newspaper Sabah, editor-in-chief Semra Uncu, writer Gülay Göktürk

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Black Hole in the Southeast” published in the issue dated 8 February 2001

Charges: “Insulting the army”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Istanbul Criminal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 23 November

Defendants: Newspaper Sabah, editor-in-chief Semra Uncu, writer Gülay Göktürk

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: A serial of articles entitled, “MITNational Intelligence Organization Agencies in Press” published in the issues of the daily dated 30 April 2000, 2 May 2000 and 4 May 2000

Charges: “Insulting security forces”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 6 February

Defendants: Newspaper Sabah, editor-in-chief Semra Uncu, writer Ali Bayramoğlu

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Journey to Silopi” published in the issue dated 8 February 2001

Charges: “Insulting the army”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Istanbul Criminal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 2 November.

Defendants: Newspaper Sabah, editor-in-chief Semra Uncu, writer Ali Bayramoğlu

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Soldiers and Opposition” published in the issue dated 24 February 2001

Charges: “Insulting the army”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Istanbul Criminal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 2 November.

Defendants: Newspaper Sabah, editor-in-chief Semra Uncu, writer Ali Bayramoğlu

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Views from the Country published in the issue dated 18 April 2001

Charges: “Insulting the army”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Istanbul Criminal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 2 November.

Defendants: Newspaper Sabah, editor-in-chief Semra Uncu, writer Ali Bayramoğlu

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Wheat and Rice” published in the issue dated 27 April 2001

Charges: “Insulting the army”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Istanbul Criminal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 2 November.

Defendant: Newspaper Sabah, editor-in-chief Semra Uncu

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “The Colonel of White Energy is in England” published in the issue dated 6 February 2001

Charges: “Insulting the army”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Istanbul Criminal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 2 November.

Defendants: Newspaper Özgür Bakış, writer Zeynel Abidin Kızılyaprak

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Two articles included in the chronological record entitled “Kurds from 1900 to 2000” distributed by the newspaper in exchange for coupons in February 2000

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended in December 2000. The SSC sentenced Kızılyaprak to 1 year 4 months in prison and fined him TL 1.300.000.000. The Court of Cassation confirmed the sentence in May.

Defendants: Newspaper Özgür Bakış, editor-in-chief

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “PKK is the Transforming Dynamic of the Time” published in the issue dated 8 November 1999

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 5 June. The SSC sentenced Cihan Çapan to 3 years 9 months in prison.

Defendants: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, owner of the newspaper Hıdır Ateş, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: An interview with Cemil Bayık, member of the PKK Presidential Council, entitled “A Hope for Peace Created” published in the issue dated 25-31 August 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 27 December. The SSC fined Hıdır Ateş TL 4.069.800.000 and Hünkar Demirel TL 2.034.900.000. In addition, the newspaper received an order of closure for 15 days.

Defendants: Newspaper Yaşamda Atılım, owner of the newspaper Mikail Vayiç, editor-in-chief Vahit Yurttaş

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Days of Decision-Making” and a news report, “Barricades against the Cells,” published in the issue dated 22 July 2000

Charges: “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The SSC fined the defendants TL 730.080.000 in total and decided on the closure of the newspaper for 15 days.

Defendants: Newspaper Milliyet, editor-in-chief Eren Güvener, newspaper Radikal, editor-in-chief Hasan Çakkalkurt, newspaper Hürriyet, editor-in-chief Doğan Satmış, Newspaper Sabah, editor-in-chief Semra Uncu, newspaper Star, editor-in-chief Saffet Serdar Akbıyık

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Letters sent by Mafia leaders Alaattin Çakıcı and Nuri Ergin from Kartal Prison and published in the press

Charges: “Aiding a gang”; Violating Article 314 of the TPC

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 12 June.

Defendants: Newspaper Cumhuriyet, editor-in-chief Fikret İlkiz, Prof. Dr. Emre Kongar

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “How Could 550 Immune Men Destroy a Civilization?” published in the issue dated 2 April 2001

Charges: “Insulting the parliament”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Istanbul Criminal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 13 October.

Defendants: Newspaper Cumhuriyet, editor-in-chief Fikret İlkiz, writer Adnan Hunca

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Sheria Getting Wilder” published in the issue dated 22 September 2000

Charges: “Insulting religious values”; Violating Article 175 of the TPC

Heard by: Istanbul Penal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 1 May.

Defendants: Newspaper Dema Nû, owner of the newspaper Fadıl Özçelik and editor-in-chief Bülent Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue No. 2 of the newspaper

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The SSC fined Fadıl Özçelik TL 675.000.000 and Bülent Demirel TL 337.500.000. The decision was appealed.

Defendants: Newspaper Dema Nû, editor-in-chief Bülent Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Reasons of the Crisis and Ways Out of It” published in the issue No. 4 of the newspaper

Charges: “Insulting the state, government and the army”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Beyoğlu Criminal Court No. 2

Verdict: The Court sentenced Bülent Demirel to 1 year’s imprisonment. The decision was appealed.

Defendants: Newspaper Milliyet, editor-in-chief Eren Güvener, writer Duygu Asena

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Farewell Sister Duygu” published in the newspaper

Charges: “Making propaganda of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 8/1 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 10 October.

Defendant: Newspaper Hürriyet, writer Cüneyt Ülsever

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “28 February and Hezbollah” published in the newspaper

Charges: “Insulting the army”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 6 February.

Defendants: Journal “Yeni Asya International”, editor-in-chief Mustafa Döküler and writer Şükrü Bulut

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “A Disaster Equal to Earthquakes” published in the issue dated 29 September-5 October 2000

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; Violating Article 312 of the TPC

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 3 March. However, the Court of Cassation quashed the decision on 5 November arguing, “the statements of fundamentalists that targeted secularism in the article in question should be considered under Article 312 of the TPC”. Istanbul SSC will hear the case again.

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Asya, editor-in-chief Mustafa Döküler, writer Ali Ferşadoğlu

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “If This is not Enough” published in the issue dated 8 June 2000

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; Violating Article 312 of the TPC

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 22 February. The SSC sentenced Ali Ferşadoğlu to imprisonment for 20 months and fined him TL 152.100.000 and editor-in-chief Mustafa Döküler TL 1.992.510.000. The SSC also decided on the closure of the newspaper Yeni Asya for seven days.

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Asya, editor-in-chief Mustafa Döküler, writer Halil Akgünler

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Political Earthquake in on the Door” published in the issue dated 07 October 1999

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; Violating Article 312 of the TPC

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 24 January. The SSC sentenced Halil Akgünler to imprisonment for 1 year 8 months and fined Mustafa Döküler TL 1.310.000.000. The SSC also decided on the closure of the newspaper for one month. The Court of Cassation confirmed the decision on 21 June.

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Asya, writers Şaban Döğen, Sami Cebeci, Abdil Yıldırım and Cemil Tokpınar

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The articles that tried to present the earthquake on 17 August 1999 as a warning of God

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; Violating Article 312 of the TPC

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 30 May. The SSC sentenced the journalists to 1 year 8 months in prison, each.

Defendants: Newspaper Zaman, editor-in-chief Yakup Akalın, writer Hasan Sutay

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Republic of Pigs” published in the newspaper Zaman

Charges: “Insulting the Republic”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 8 May.

Defendants: Milli Gazete, editor-in-chief Selami Çalışkan, writer Mehmet Şevket Eygi

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Political Reforms” published in the newspaper

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; Violating Article 312 of the TPC

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 24 July.

Defendant: Newspaper Devrim Yolunda İşçi-Köylü, editor-in-chief Barış Açıkel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The articles entitled “Resistance Flowers are Set for a Safe Journey with the April Sun”, “to the Commemoration of Arhoğ Martyrs”, and “Marxist-Leninist Youth Union of Turkey – Interview with the Central Committee” published in the newspaper dated 27 April 2001.

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”, “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 20 December. The SSC fined Barış Açıkel TL 11.782.885.280.

Defendants: Journal Proleter Halkın Birliği, owner of the journal Salih Aksu, editor-in-chief Elif Yıldırım

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: An article published in the issue dated 16 January 2000

Charges: “Making propaganda of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 7 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 22 June. The SSC fined Salih Aksu TL 225.000.000 and sentenced Elif Yıldırım to 6 months in prison. Yıldırım’s sentence was subsequently commuted to a fine of TL 550.050.000. The journal was closed down for one month.

Defendant: Journal Genç Direnişçi, owner of the journal and editor-in-chief Erdal Tan

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: An article published in the issue dated May 1999

Charges: ...

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Verdict: The trial ended on 10 September. The SSC sentenced Tan to imprisonment for 4 years 10 months 10 days and fined him TL 888.000.000. The SSC also decided on the closure of the journal for one month.

Defendant: Newspaper “Çınar” published in Mersin, editor-in-chief Güler Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article about journalist Nadire Mater’s book “Mehmedin Kitabı” published in the newspaper dated 15 September 1999.

Charges: “Insulting the army”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Mersin Criminal Court No.1

Verdict: The trial ended on 21 June. The court board initially sentenced Yıldız to 10 months in prison on charges of violating Article 159 of the TPC, but suspended the sentence on the condition that he will not commit any crime for 5 years.

Defendant: Newspaper “Merzifon’un Sesi”, editor-in-chief Fatih Karaduman

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The articles that included the statements of Republican People’s Party (CHPRepublican People's Party ), Freedom and Solidarity Party (ÖDP) and Labor’s Party (EMEP) about F-type prisons

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC

Heard by:

Verdict: The trial ended in acquittal on 10 November.

Defendant: Newspaper “Çınar” published in Mersin, owner Bülent Ufuk Ateş and editor-in-chief Güler Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The announcement of families of TAYAD entitled, “A Call to the Public” published in the issue of the newspaper dated 23 March 2001

Charges: Violating the ban on broadcast and publication about F-type prisons and death fasts put by the Istanbul SSC, “disobedience to the orders of authorities”

Heard by: Mersin Penal Court No. 3

Verdict: The trial ended on 8 June. The court board fined Ateş and Yıldız TL 213.000.000, each.

Defendant: Newspaper Gürses published in Edirne, editor-in-chief Yasemen Yaraşır and writer Hüseyin Topçu

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “The Trumpets of Fatih Altaylı Play for Havsa District Governor”

Charges: Insulting a provincial governor via press

Heard by: Havsa Penal Court

Verdict: The trial ended on 16 March. The court initially sentenced Yaraşır and Topçu to 6 months in prison and fined them TL 91.260.000, each. The prison sentences were later commuted into a fine totaling TL 548.000.000. The case is at the Court of Cassation.

Defendant: Newspaper “Kuzeydoğu Anadolu” published in Ardahan, owner Fakir Yılmaz

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “As People Get Angry” published in the issue dated 10 August 2001

Charges: “Insulting the army”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Ardahan Criminal Court

Verdict: The trial ended on 25 December. The court board sentenced Yılmaz to 2 years in prison.

THE TRIALS THAT DID NOT END IN 2001

Defendant: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Ali Karataş

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: A joke about artist Zeki Müren in the Sunday supplementary of the newspaper dated 05 December 1999

Charges: “Insulting the army”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Next Hearing: 11 April 2002

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Ali Karataş, writer Cemal İmre

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Capital and Pashas” published in the issue dated 19 January 2000

Charges: “Insulting the army”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Next Hearing: 11 April 2002

Defendant: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Ali Karataş

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news articles about the rape of Şeyda Gergin, vocalist of the music grup Kutupyıldızı, published in the issue of the newspaper dated 18-19-22-24 December 1999

Charges: “Insulting the security forces”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Next Hearing: 6 June 2002

Defendant: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, writer Cemal İmre

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Ambition to Become a Subcontractor” published in the issue dated 8 March 2000

Charges: “Insulting the Republic”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Next Hearing: 11 April 2002

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, writer A. Cihan Soylu

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Presidential Election and the Lie of National Will” published in the issue dated 2 April 2000

Charges: “Insulting the Republic”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Next Hearing: 19 February 2002

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, writer Cemal İmre

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “The Logic is Perfect” published in the issue of the newspaper dated 3 April 2000

Charges: “Insulting the Republic”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Next Hearing: 11 April 2002

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, writer Burhan Perişan

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Democracy Theater from Evrensel” published in the issue dated 17 April 2000

Charges: “Insulting the Republic, parliament and army”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Next Hearing: 11 April 2002

Defendant: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, A. Cihan Soylu

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “The Citizens’ Will and Organized Struggle” published in the issue dated 16 July 2000

Charges: “Insulting the army”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Next Hearing: 19.02 2002

Defendant: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, writer Ali Suna

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “National Sovereignty” published in the Sunday supplementary of the newspaper dated 23 April 2000

Charges: “Insulting the Republic, parliament and army”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Next Hearing: 19 February 2002

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, writers Fatih Polat, Aydın Çubukçu, Semih Hiçyılmaz (Mustafa Çalışkan)

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Grave Tolerance to terrorist” written by Fatih Polat and published in the issue dated 24 April 2001; the article entitled “If Chechenians Were on Death Fast” written by Aydın Çubukçu and published in the issue dated 25 April 2001; the article entitled “Dog Fight” written by Semih Hiçyılmaz and published in the issue dated 26 April 2001

Charges: “Insulting the Republic, parliament, security forces and army”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Next Hearing: 19 February 2002

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, owner of the newspaper Fevzi Saygılı

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The statements made by Veli Aydoğan, Deputy Secretary General of the HADEP, concerning the disappearance of HADEP executives Serdar Tanış and Ebubekir Deniz, published in the issues dated 22 February 2001 and 07 March 2001

Charges: “Showing as targets those who take part in the fight against terror”; Violating Article 6/1 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 29 January 2002

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, owner of the newspaper Fevzi Saygılı

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Became Known with Massacres and Promoted” published in the issue dated 22 July 2001

Charges: “Showing as targets those who take part in the fight against terror”; Violating Article 6/1 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 12 March 2002

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, writer Ender İmrek

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Carrying the Newroz Fire to May Day” published in the issues dated 28 March 2001

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; Violating Article 312 of the TPC

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 18 January 2002

Defendants: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu, owner of the newspaper Fevzi Saygılı

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trials: The news report entitled “No Limit to Indifference” written by Doğan Aytaç and published in the issue dated 22 December 2000, the news report entitled “They’re Kept in a Cell in Buca” written by Emine Uyar; the article entitled “The Present Target of the Operation is the Doctors” written by Fatih Polat; the article entitled “Here is an Operation for You” written by Doctor Ata Soyer and the statement entitled “Not Compassion Human Killing” signed by 47 intellectuals

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; Violating Article 312 of the TPC

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 19 March 2002

Defendant: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Soldiers Told about the Operation” published in the issue dated 28 December 2000

Charges: “Deviation of investigation from the real objective”; Violating Article 296/1 of the TPC

Heard by: Zeytinburnu Penal Court No .2

Next Hearing: 8 March 2002

Defendant: Newspaper Yeni Evrensel, editor-in-chief Bülent Falakoğlu

Reasoning: Not publishing the denial sent against the news report entitled “Mass Statement against Cells, the Police Attacked the Families of Convicts” written by Zeki Kozan and published in the issue dated 12 November 2001

Heard by: Zeytinburnu Penal Court No. 2

Next Hearing: 15 February 2002

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, writer Ahmet Kahraman

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Hello” published in the issue dated 04 September 2000

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; Violating Article 312 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “PKK: Cease-Fire in Danger” published in the issue dated 26 September 2000

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendant: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Parallelism with Lausanne” published in the issue dated 7 November 2001

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; Violating Article 312 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “PKK Leader Öcalan Invited the Democracy Powers to Prepare Projects in Accordance with the EU Process, Who has the Project Wins” published in the issue dated 10 November 2000.

Charges: “Showing as targets those who take part in the fight against terror”; Violating Article 6 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, writer Ahmet Kahraman

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “An Age of Fear and Disgrace” published in the issue dated 24 November 2000

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; Violating Article 312 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news reports entitled, “The Parliament is not only Composed of Turks”, “Many Greetings to Imrali – Long Live the Brotherhood of Peoples” and “Our March is a Possibility for Freedom” published in the issue dated 27 November 2000

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”, “making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC, Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “PKK Prisoners also on Hunger Strike” published in the issue dated 3 December 2000.

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Kurds and Transformation” published in the issue dated 24 November 2000

Charges: “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendant: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “PKK Leader A. Öcalan: Steps should be Taken in Time, Real Attack in Spring” published in the issue dated 8 December 2000

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Protest to YNK – PKK Ready for Cease-fire” published in the issue dated 13 December 2000

Charges: “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “About the YNK Attacks” published in the issue dated 15 December 2000

Charges: “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trials: The news reports entitled “Bayrampaşa Conqueror”, “You Cannot Call Bartın from the Mobile”, “They Save the Convict by Killing: The Wounded Convicts Will Receive Medical Reports that They can Stand a Long Journey”, “Cassette Game did not Hold”, “Massacre Step by Step”, “They Opened the F-Type with Blood”, “The Real Disappearance is Concealed”, “Deaths came from the State” and “Deaths fell on Us” and articles entitled “Historical Operation, Historical Misinformation”, “Your Violence Shall not Endure” published in the issue dated 21 December 2000

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”, “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 312 of the TPC, Article 6 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendant: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news reports entitled “The Prisoners Themselves Denied the Discourse that They Had Burnt Themselves. They Burnt Us”, “They Burnt Our Children and Gave them to Us”, “Five Prisoners Shot” and “Points to be Enlightened” published in the issue dated 22 December 2000.

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”, “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; Violating Articles 169 and 312 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendant: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Blacksnake: Plan of Elimination – PKK: Plan of Elimination” published in the issue dated 25 December 2000

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “PKK Celebrated the Ramazan Feast” published in the issue dated 28 December 2000

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “PKK Reaching out to Kurdish Parties in the South in 2001” published in the issue dated 30 December .2000

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız, writer Ahmet Kahraman

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “I am a Kurd said the Wise Man” published in the issue dated 1 January 2001

Charges: “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “2001 will be the Year of Transformation” published in the issue dated 2 January 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Find an Urgent Solution to the Problem” published in the issue dated 4 January 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendant: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Uneasiness due to Military Concentration” published in the issue dated 7 January 2001

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Journey to Death Continues” published in the issue dated 8 January 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Instability Affects the Region” published in the issue dated 9 January 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş,

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “A Turk...” published in the issue dated 16 January 2001

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; Violating Article 312 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Peace Call from Imralı” published in the issue dated 26 January 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız, İrfan Cüre

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Hair Wrap” published in the issue dated 1 February 2001

Charges: “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, Ahmet Kahraman

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Massacre in Corsica” published in the issue dated 2 February 2001

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”, Violating Article 312 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Kurdish as the Language of a Nation” published in the issue dated 3 February 2001 in a supplementary of the newspaper “Additional Agenda”

Charges: “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, writer Ahmet Kahraman

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news reports entitled “PKK Strategy against Pressures” and “Actions Will Continue” and the article “Terror in Silopi and the ECHR” published in the issue dated 5 February 2001

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; Violating Article 312 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Do not Impose War on Us” published in the issue dated 6 February 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Peace Warning from Inside” published in the issue dated 7 February 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Warning against Regional War” published in the issue dated 20 February 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The interview entitled “Duran Kalkan, PKK executive Evaluates the Political and Economic Crisis: Crisis is the Bill of the War” published in the issue dated 6 March 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Call from Serhıl” published in the issue dated 8 March 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Democracy will Come through the Work of Women” published in the issue dated 9 March 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Preparing for Newroz – PKK: Peaceful Political Demonstration” published in the issue dated 19 March 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news reports entitled “The Circular Paralyzed Life” and “PKK Presidential Council Evaluated the Magnificent Newroz” and the article entitled “Being Watchful against Darkness” published in the issue dated 24 March 2001

Charges: “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “2001 Joint Concern and Direction of Solution” published in the issue dated 25 March 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “PKK: KOB and UP Shall be Renewed” published in the issue dated 29 March 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “PKK Arrestees Initiating a Hunger Strike” published in the issue dated 30 March 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, owner of the newspaper M. Emin Yıldız

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news reports entitled “PKK Calls Ankara to Dialogue”, “PKK: Dialog brings Solution” and “Kurds Should Form Their Own Program” published in the issue dated 31 March 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”, “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 6/2 and 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendant: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, Demir Küçükaydın

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Contribution to the Universal History of Vileness” published in the issue dated 10 January 2001

Charges: “Insulting the Republic, parliament, army and security forces”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Beyoğlu Criminal Court No. 2

Defendant: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Harvest Bullet” published in the issue dated 21.-22.10.2000

Charges: “Insulting the army and security forces”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Beyoğlu Criminal Court No. 2

Defendant: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, HRA Istanbul Branch Chairwoman Eren Keskin

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “That is What Befits You” published in the issue dated 10 January 2001

Charges: “Insulting the government, army and security forces”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Beyoğlu Criminal Court No. 2

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, Umur Hozatlı

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Justice on the Basis of Property and Youths” published in the issue dated 30 June 2000

Charges: “Insulting the Court”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Beyoğlu Criminal Court No. 2

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, Sema Mavi

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Democratization or Bureaucratization?” published in the issue dated 16 September 2000

Charges: “Insulting the Republic, parliament, army and security forces”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Beyoğlu Criminal Court No. 2

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, F. Aktaş

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Prosecutor of Another State in the State of Emergency region” published in the issue dated 30 June 2000

Charges: Violating Article 33/2 of the Press Law

Heard by: Beyoğlu Penal Court of First Instance

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, Savaş Aslan

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “President İzgi, Prime Minister Bahçeli or the Thing of the Skeleton...” published in the issue dated 24 October 2000

Charges: “Insulting the President via press”; Violating Article 158 of the TPC

Heard by: Beyoğlu Penal Court of First Instance

Defendants: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş, Vedat Perçin

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Not a Minister, a Hoodlum” published in the issue dated 14 July 2000

Charges: “Insulting the virtue, honor and self-respect of a person via press”; Violating Article 482/4 of the TPC and Article 16 of the Press Law

Heard by: Beyoğlu Court of First Instance No. 2

Defendant: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Murderer in Police Station” published in the issue dated 18 November 2000

Charges: “Insulting the security forces”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Beyoğlu Criminal Court No. 2

Defendant: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Eymir Pressed hard on Atasagun” published in the issue dated 14 August 2000

Charges: “Insulting the virtue, honor and self-respect of a person via press”; Violating Article 482/4 of the TPC and Article 16 of the Press Law

Heard by: Beyoğlu Penal Court of First Instance No.2

Defendant: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “A Threat of Strangling against the Provincial Chairman” published in the issue dated 05 January 2001

Charges: “Insulting the security forces”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Beyoğlu Criminal Court No. 2

Defendant: Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem, editor-in-chief Erdal Taş

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Again an Interesting Allegation from IP” published in the issue dated 07 January 2001

Charges: Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Beyoğlu Criminal Court No. 2

Defendant: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Kurdish Identity is pressing” published in the issue dated 23-29 June 2001

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 22. 01 2002

Defendant: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Legitimacy of Democratic Action” published in the issue dated 14-20 July 2001

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendant: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “The Name of Solution is Serhıldan” and “It is the Time of Serhıldan” published in the issue dated 7-13 July 2001

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendant: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news report entitled “Preparations for War in the South” published in the issue dated 21-27 July 2001

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendant: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news reports entitled “Distrustful Discussions on the Path to EU”, “looked Like a Silent Volcano”, “The First Step of Liberation”, “The First Bullet was for the Democratization of the Republic” and “As If the revolution Took Place That Day” published in the issue dated 11-17 August 2001

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendant: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news reports entitled “We Support Steps to be Taken” and “You Have Democracy Where People and Law Meet” published in the issue dated 18–24 August 2001

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, owner of the newspaper Hıdır Ateş, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news reports entitled “PKK Presidential Council: We Insist on Attaining Peace” and “1 September Message of PKK Leader A. Öcalan: Till the Victory of Peace” published in the issue dated 1-7 September 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 5 February 2002

Defendant: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news reports entitled “Warning to the State from PKK” and “Palestinians, Armenians and Kurds Marched for Öcalan” published in the issue dated 3-10 September 2001

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 5 February 2002

Defendants: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, owner of the newspaper Hıdır Ateş, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Kurds should Make their own Constitution” (A. Öcalan) and a reader’s letter entitled “Hello” published in the issue dated 15-21 September 2001

Charges: “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, owner of the newspaper Hıdır Ateş, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The news reports entitled “War is not the Solution” (A. Öcalan), “PKK Executive C. Bayık: No one shall be Engaged in Miscalculation” and the article entitled “FORUM –Agenda: Real Terror was Exerted on Kurdish People” published in the issue dated 22-28 September 2001.

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity” and “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 312 of the TPC, Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 14 March 2002

Defendant Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The supplementary entitled “ Third Re-birth” given with the issue of the newspaper dated 29 September-5 October 2001

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 19 February 2002

Defendant: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: All the articles and pictures in the supplementary of the newspaper “Third Re-birth” dated 6-12 October 2001 and the news report entitled “PKK Leader Öcalan Analyzes the 9 October Plot in its fourth year in all Aspects in the Presentation to the ECHR: Present of Solution to Humanity”

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 22 March 2002

Defendant: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Kurds are Decisive in Intervention in Iraq” published in the issue dated 20-26 October 2001

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 1 February 2002

Defendants: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, owner Hıdır Ateş, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Democratic Republic Can Overcome the Crisis” published in the issue dated 27 October-02 November 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 26 February 2002

Defendant: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The articles entitled “Çiller is the Mother of Hezbollah” and “The Middle East will Lay the Foundation for its Renaissance” published in the issue dated 3-9 November 2001

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 26 March 2002

Defendants: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, owner Hıdır Ateş, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The articles entitled “Women Evaluate Öcalan’s Defense Submitted to the ECHR from their Point of View” published in the issue dated 10-16 November 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 12 March 2002

Defendant: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The articles entitled “Çiller is the Mother of Hezbollah” and “The Middle East will Lay the Foundation for its Renaissance” published in the issue dated 3-9 November 2001

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 26 March 2002

Defendant: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The Articles entitled “People Want Freedom for Öcalan” and “They Said Freedom for Öcalan” published in the issue dated 17-23 November 2001

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 2 April 2002

Defendant: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The Articles entitled “A Movement of a Quarter Century”, “The Basis of Success was at the Initiation” and “The History of What We Gained” published in the issue dated 24-30 November 2001

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 26 March 2002

Defendants: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, owner Hıdır Ateş, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The Articles entitled “Renaming PKK is under Discussion”, “The Students Ask for Their Mother Tongue”, “Demanding Education in Mother Tongue”, ”About Identity” “You Do not Have Freedom without Identity” published in the issue dated 1-7 December 2001, and the article “Phobia of Politicization” written by Ragıp Zarakolu

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity” and “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 312 of the TPC, Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 8 March 2002

Defendants: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, owner of the newspaper Hıdır Ateş and editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Turkey Cannot be without a Solution” published in the issue dated 8-14 December 2001

Charges: “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendant: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The articles entitled “If you Want to Contact Kurds you must Produce Solutions”, “Kurds Took Steps for National Union”, “The National Policies of Kurds is Democratization and Peace” and “We’re Ready for Everything” published in the issue dated 15-21 December 2001

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”, “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Articles 169 and 312 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 2 April 2002

Defendants: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, owner of the newspaper Hıdır Çelik, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The articles entitled “Need for a New Party”, “Turkish Model for Afghanistan”, “Deprived of History, Age, Society, and Human Comprehension”, “Kurdish Politics in the World Arena”, “Union is Guarantee of Future”, “MOSSAD’s role in the capture of Öcalan”, “Censoring the State” and “Reader’s Agenda” published in the issue dated 22-28 December 2001

Charges: “ Showing as target the people fighting against terror”, “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”, “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Articles 6/1-2 and 8/1-2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper Yedinci Gündem, owner of the newspaper Hıdır Çelik, editor-in-chief Hünkar Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The articles entitled “Triple Proposal for Prisons” and “About Cultural Activity” published in the issue dated 29 December-4 January 2001 and the supplementary of the newspaper, “Balance Sheet 2001”

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”, “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”, “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Articles 169 and 312 of the TPC, Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper Radikal, editor-in-chief Hasan Çakkalkurt, writer Mine G. Kırıkkanat

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Please Go” published in the issue dated 6 April 2000

Charges: “Insulting the moral entity of the government”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Defendants: Newspaper Radikal, editor-in-chief Hasan Çakkalkurt, writer Mine G. Kırıkkanat

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Hocus, Pocus, Crime” published in the issue dated 19 January 2000

Charges: “Insulting the security forces”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Defendants: Newspaper Radikal, editor-in-chief Hasan Çakkalkurt, writer Perihan Mağden

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Why not Over?” about the death fasts in prison published in the issue dated 12 May 2001

Charges: “Insulting the Minister of Justice”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Defendants: Newspaper Radikal, editor-in-chief Hasan Çakkalkurt, writer Perihan Mağden

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Article on death Again, death Again” on death fasts under way in prisons published in the issue dated 15 April 2001

Charges: “Insulting the Minister of Justice”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Defendants: Newspaper Radikal, editor-in-chief Tuğrul Yılmaz, writer Yıldırım Türker

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “The Darkest Side of Justice” about problems in F-type prisons, published in the supplementary Radikal 2 dated 13 August 2000

Charges: “Insulting the republic”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Defendants: Newspaper Radikal, editor-in-chief Hasan Çakkalkurt, writer Tuncay Özkan

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial:

Charges: “Insulting the Minister of Justice”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Ankara Criminal Court

Defendants: Newspaper Radikal, writer İsmet Berkan

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Doubts” about the capture of the murderers of Uğur Mumcu, published in the issue dated 9 June 2000

Charges: “Insulting the security forces”, Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Defendants: Newspaper Radikal, writer Neşe Düzel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The interview entitled “Alevite Youngsters are Pushed towards Terror” that Düzel had with Murtaza Demir, Chairman of Pir Sultan Abdal Culture and Training Foundation, published on 8 January 2001

Charges: “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; Violating Article 312 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Next Hearing: 13 February 2002

Defendants: Newspaper Radikal, writer Neşe Düzel, Prof. Dr. Doğu Ergil

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The interview Düzel had with Prof. Dr. Doğu Ergil, Ankara University Political Science Department, that was entitled “Heroin Settled with Martial Laws” published in the issue of the journal dated 19 June 2000

Charges: “Insulting the State, army and security forces”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Next Hearing: 13 February 2002

Defendant: Turkish Daily News, writer Burak Bekdil

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Turkey’s De Jure Untouchables” published in the issue dated 27 August 2001

Charges: “Insulting the court”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Ankara Criminal Court

Defendant: Newspaper Yeni Binyıl, editor-in-chief Semra Uncu, writer Metin Münir

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Stop Justice, One Wants to get out” published in the issue dated 10 May 2000

Charges: “Insulting the court”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Bakırköy Criminal Court No. 2

Next Hearing: 11 April 2002

Defendants: Journal Özgür Halk, owner of the journal Gülcan Kaya, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue dated March 2001 (No. 114)

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”, “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC, Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Journal Özgür Halk, owner of the journal Gülcan Kaya, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue dated April 2001 (No. 115)

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”, “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC, Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendant: Journal Özgür Halk, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue dated May 2001 (No. 116)

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Journal Özgür Halk, owner Gülcan Kaya, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue dated April 2001 (No. 117)

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”, “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC, Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendant: Journal Özgür Halk, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue dated May 2001 (No. 118)

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”, “Inciting people to hatred and enmity”; Violating Articles 169 and 312 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendant: Journal Özgür Halk, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue dated June 2001 (No. 119)

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”, “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC, Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Journal Özgür Halk, owner of the journal Gülcan Kaya, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue dated July 2001 (No.120)

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”, “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC, Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: İstanbul SSC

Defendants: Journal Özgür Halk, owner of the journal Gülcan Kaya, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue dated August 2001 (No. 121)

Charges: “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: İstanbul SSC

Defendants: Journal Özgür Halk, owner of the journal Gülcan Kaya, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue dated September 2001 (No. 122)

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”, “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC, Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: İstanbul SSC

Defendants: Journal Özgür Halk, owner of the journal Gülcan Kaya, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue dated October 2001 (No. 123)

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”, “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC, Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: İstanbul SSC

Defendant: Journal Özgür Halk, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue dated November 2001 (No. 124)

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC, Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: İstanbul SSC

Defendants: Journal Yeni Özgür Halk, owner of the journal Gülcan Kaya, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue dated December 2001 (No. 1)

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”, “Publishing statements of an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC, Article 6/2 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: İstanbul SSC

Defendants: Journal Genç Bakış, owner of the journal Gülcan Kaya, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue No. 1 of the journal

Charges: “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: İstanbul SSC

Defendants: Journal Genç Bakış, owner of the journal Gülcan Kaya, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue No. 2 of the journal

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”, “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC, Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: İstanbul SSC

Defendants: Journal Genç Bakış, owner of the journal Gülcan Kaya, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue No. 4 of the journal

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC, Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: İstanbul SSC

Defendants: Journal Genç Bakış, owner of the journal Gülcan Kaya, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue No. 5 of the journal

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC, Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: İstanbul SSC

Defendant: Journal Genç Bakış, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue No. 6 of the journal

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC, Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: İstanbul SSC

Defendants: Journal Genç Bakış, owner of the journal Gülcan Kaya, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue No. 7 of the journal

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”, “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC, Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Journal Genç Bakış, owner of the journal Gülcan Kaya, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue No. 8 of the journal

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC, Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendant: Journal Genç Bakış, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue No. 10 of the journal

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendant: Journal Genç Bakış, editor-in-chief Ayhan Doğru

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: Certain articles published in the issue No. 12 of the journal

Charges: “Aiding and abetting an illegal organization”; Violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Defendants: Newspaper Dema Nû, editor-in-chief Bülent Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “A Last Straw to This much Distortion” published in the issue No. 8 of the newspaper

Charges: “Insulting the state, government and the army”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Beyoğlu Criminal Court No. 2

Next Hearing: 7 March 2002

Defendants: Newspaper Dema Nû, owner Fadıl Özçelik, editor-in-chief Bülent Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “Eighth Meeting of the Kurdish Women Platform” published in the issue No. 8 of the newspaper

Charges: “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 28 March 2002

Defendant: Newspaper Dema Nû, editor-in-chief Bülent Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “God Bless Ecevit” published in the issue No. 9 of the newspaper

Charges: “Insulting the Prime Minister”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: Beyoğlu Criminal Court No. 2

Next Hearing: 7 March 2002

Defendants: Newspaper Dema Nû, owner of the newspaper Fadıl Özçelik, editor-in-chief Bülent Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The articles entitled “Kurdish Democratic Union Platform” and “Spring of Kurds” published in the issue No. 13 of the newspaper

Charges: “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 7 February 2002

Defendants: Newspaper Dema Nû, owner of the newspaper Fadıl Özçelik, editor-in-chief Bülent Demirel

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The articles entitled “Federal Solution” and “About a Decision of Occupation” published in the issue No. 15 of the newspaper

Charges: “Making separatist propaganda”; Violating Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law

Heard by: Istanbul SSC

Next Hearing: 13 February 2002

Defendant: Newspaper Demokrat İskenderun, editor-in-chief Ersen Korkmaz

The Article That Has Been Subject of Trial: The article entitled “The USA Swindle” published in the issue dated 10 October 2001

Charges: “Insulting the government”; Violating Article 159 of the TPC

Heard by: İskenderun Criminal Court

Freedom to Thought Campaign

Freedom to Thought –38

Şanar Yurdatapan and Nevzat Onaran, former chairman of the ÇGD Istanbul Branch, went into prison on 24 November and 11 December, respectively, in order to serve the 2 months’ imprisonment sentence passed on charges of “alienating the people from military service” in the booklet “Freedom to Thought –38”, which included the press statement of conscientious objector Osman Murat Ülke of 1 September 1995.

Osman Murat Ülke’s statement was previously published in the booklet “Freedom to Thought-9”. When the publishers of the booklet, journalist Koray Düzgören and artist Nilüfer Akbal were sentenced, the booklet was re-published as “Freedom to Thought-38”. The Court of Cassation confirmed the 2 months’ imprisonment sentences of Düzgören and Akbal, but the sentences were suspended for 3 years under the “Law on Suspension of Trials and Sentences concerning Offences Committed via the Press” numbered 4454. Istanbul Military Court No. 1 convicted Şanar Yurdatapan and Nevzat Onaran on 1 February 2000.

Freedom to Thought-42

The trial launched against Abdülmelik Fırat, Hasan Celal Güzel, Ali Nesin and Cevat Özkaya for publishing the booklet “Freedom to Thought-42” ended in acquittal at Üsküdar Penal Court No. 2 on 17 April. The prosecutor at Istanbul SSC launched a trial in connection with the booklet, which included statement and articles of Eşber Yağmurdereli, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Erdoğan Aydın and conscientious objector Osman Murat Ülke that led to their prosecution. When the SSC declared itself not to be responsible the file was sent to Üsküdar Penal Court No. 2. The indictment wanted the defendants to be sentenced under Article 175 of the TPC concerning the offence of “insulting Allah, the religion and the prophet”.

The trial launched against the publishers of the booklet “Freedom to Thought-42” at the Military Court of the General Staff under Article 155 of the TPC on charges of “alienating the people from military service”, too, ended in acquittal in the hearing of 28 December.

Freedom to Thought – 2000

Three separate trials launched in 2000 against 16 intellectuals and artists, who signed the booklet “Freedom to Thought-2000” as editors, continued in 2001. The booklet contained a banned book and 60 articles. The defendants in all trials are the following: Vahdettin Karabay (DİSK Chairman), Salim Uslu (Hak-İş Chairman), Siyami Erdem (KESK former Chairman), Hüsnü Öndül (HRA Chairman), Yavuz Önen (HRFT Chairman), Cengiz Bektaş (Chairman of the Trade Union of Writers in Turkey), Atilla Maraş (Chairman of the Union of Writers), Yılmaz Ensaroğlu (Mazlum-DerHuman Rights Association for the Oppressed Chairman), Zuhal Olcay, Lale Mansur, Şanar Yurdatapan, Ali Nesin, Erdal Öz, Ömer Madra, Etyen Mahçupyan and Sadık Taşdöğen.

The trial launched at Istanbul SSC against the editors of the “Freedom to Thought-2000” booklet on claims of making “separatist propaganda” and “inciting people to enmity” ended in acquittal on 12 February on the grounds that “there was not enough, clear and reliable evidence to conclude that the crime was committed”.

The Court of Cassation quashed the acquittal of 15 out of the 16 intellectuals and artists in June; the one exception being Sadık Taşdöğen. The Court of Cassation gave the following reasons for its decision:

“It was established that the articles make propaganda of gang-like organizations defined in Article 169 of the TPC, include elements of the crime of inciting people to hatred and enmity by discriminating on the basis of race, religion and regional differences under Article 312/2 of the TPC and some articles constitute the crime of written propaganda that target to destroy the indivisible integrity of the state with its country and nation. The defendants have penal responsibility in the capacity of publishers, which required to quash the decision of acquittal.” The trial re-started on 27 September. The next hearing of the trial was to be held on 26 March 2002.

The trial launched at Üsküdar Penal Court No. 2 against the editors of the “Freedom to Thought-2000” booklet under Articles 175, 145 (insulting the flag), 266 (insulting a state officer) and 268 (insulting the court, prosecutor, etc.) of the TPC is still under way. The next hearing of the trial was to be held on 13 February 2002.

The trial against the editors of the same booklet at the General Staff Military Court under Article 155 of the TPC (alienating people from the military service) ended on 7 September. In the last hearing of the trial the prosecutor summed up the case. The prosecutor stated that the defendants had signed the book “for the amendment of laws that restrained Article 26 of the Constitution about ‘freedom of expressing and spreading opinion’, and for enlarging the limits of freedom of expressing opinion”. The prosecutor concluded that the moral elements of the offence of ‘publishing with the aim of alienating people from the military service’ had not materialized. The court decided for acquittal of the defendants. Şanar Yurdatapan appealed to the Military Court of Cassation.

Üsküdar Public Prosecution Chief Office launched a fourth trial against the editors of “Freedom to Thought-2000” on 18 January. The trial, launched under Article 159 of the TPC, was to commence at Üsküdar Criminal Court No. 2 on 19 February 2002.

Freedom to Thought – for Everyone

Istanbul SSC Prosecution Office launched an investigation against 77,663 artists and writers for publishing the booklet, “Freedom to Thought – for Everyone”. The editors testified at the relevant prosecution offices in groups within the year.

As a result of the investigation, 65 of the editors of the booklet, “Freedom to Thought – for Everyone” were put on trial. The trial commenced on 19 October at Istanbul SSC. The indictment of the trial claims that the defendants “committed once again the same offences” by publishing articles of Necmettin Erbakan, Hasan Celal Güzel, Akın Birdal, Murat Bozlak and Eşber Yağmurdereli that had been subject to prosecution before. The defendants charged under Article 312/2 of the TPC and Article 8/1 of the Anti-Terror Law are:

Şanar Yurdatapan, Mustafa Kahveci, Hasan Basri Çıplak, Ziver Özdemir, Yaşar Buhan, Mustafa Altunel, Murat Kaya, İsrafil Kahraman, Yılmaz Tunç, Abdullah Kaya, Dursun Güleç, Zuhal Olcay, Sabiha Ünlü, Ahmet Şişman, Mustafa İslamoğlu, İhsan Çelik, Oktay Saral, Lale Mansur, Emine Şenlikoğlu, Adalet Ağaoğlu, Canan Ceylan, Ulvi Alacakaptan, Yalçın Balaban, Erdoğan Turan, Abdurrahman Dilipak, Mustafa Yavuz, Aydın Polat, Atilla Dede, Ahmet Han Yılmaz, Hüsnü Öndül, Halil Ürün, Cengiz Tayfur, Rüstem Altunbaş, Şaban Sarı, Orhan Şahin, Bekir Gürsoy, İlhan Durmuş, Mehmet Sami Büyükyılmaz, Hatice Kübra Kalıpçı, Hayrullah Küçükdağ, Süleyman Kurnaz, Necip Bilek, Bekir Özer, Gürsoy Bilgin, Mustafa Acar, Veli Tolu, Hasibe Özlem Demirel Çepni, Kazım Batmaz, Ahmet Sorgun, Ahmet Yaradanakul, Bahattin Yıldırım, Hasan Terzi, Suat Altınsoy, Ahmet Güney, Yusuf Karataş, Ali Aşlık, Halil Güven, Hasan Ünal, Ertan Kara, Hasan Burgan, Mehmet Çelik, Muzaffer Cengiz, Mustafa Akkaş, Rıfat Çiftçi and Ali Gök.

The next hearing of the trial was to be held on 23 January 2002.

Trial on Second Istanbul Meeting for Freedom of Thought

The members of the organizing committee of the “Second Istanbul Meeting for Freedom of Thought”, namely lawyer Ahmet Selamet, lawyer Arife Gökkaya, lawyer Gülden Sönmez, Ahmet Mercan, Yalçın Akdoğan, Kemal Yabanigül and Cüneyt Sarıyaşar were acquitted in the trial launched on claims of “violating Article 3 of the Law on Meetings and Demonstrations” at Fatih Penal Court No. 5 on 5 November. Mazlum-Der hosted the meeting that took place in Istanbul on 20-21 November 2000.

The participants from outside Turkey whose speeches at the Second Istanbul Meeting for Freedom of Thought had been subject of prosecution are the following:

Jonathan Sugden (Human Rights Watch/ European Coordinator),

Hugh Poulton (Article 19/ an international organization working for freedom of expression),

Eugene Schoulgin (PEN International/ Chairman of the Writers in Prisons Committee),

Claudia Roth (Chairwoman of the Human Rights Commission in the German Parliament),

Lord Patel (member of British House of Lords),

Tilman Zülch (Union for Endangered Peoples /Chairperson),

Wolfgang Jungheim (Pax Christi/ representative of the peace organization),

Fadila Memisevic (member of United Nations Commission of Violence against Women),

Georgios Nakratzas (Writer-publisher),

Lucina Kathmann (Mexico San Miguel PEN representative)

Freedom to Thought Platform

“The Freedom to Thought Platform”, formed to work to guarantee freedom of thought and expression in Turkey, initiated the “Freedom to Thought Campaign” with the aims of “making amendments in the laws that prevent, restrict or criminalize the freedom of thought and expression, that would suit to the meaning of these freedoms, and giving an end to arbitrary and de facto prevention of freedom of expression”. The Platform consists of the following NGOs: HRA, HRFT, KESK, Mazlum-Der, Contemporary Lawyers’ Association (ÇGD), Association of Writers on Literature, Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly, Pir Sultan Abdal Culture and Solidarity Association, Social Democracy Foundation (SODEV), Union of Chambers of Architects and Engineers in Turkey (TMMOB), Turkey Middle East Forum Foundation and the Trade Union of Writers in Turkey. The campaign was made public in a press meeting at the Human Rights Association’s (HRA) Headquarters on 6 October. The call for the campaign, declared at the press meeting, reminded that the biggest obstacle before the freedom of thought was the 1982 Constitution, that restrictions were even enlarged in practice, that legal provisions were disregarded, arbitrary prevention was common and that peoples lives ended through extra-judicial executions.

The statement pointed out that many laws, particularly the TPC, Martial Law, the Law on Establishing SSCs, the Anti-Terror Law, the Law on Political Parties, the Press Law, the Law on Associations, the Law on Meetings and Demonstrations and the Law on Higher Education Institution (YÖK) included hundreds of articles that banned or restricted the freedom of expressing opinions. Article 155 of the TPC that regulated the offence of “alienating people from the military service”, Article 158 TPC that regulated the offence of insulting the President, Article 159 TPC that regulated the offence of “insulting being a Turk, the Republic, Parliament (GNAT), the moral character of the government, ministries, the military and the police forces of the state and moral character of court”, Article 312/2 TPC that regulated the offence of “inciting people to hatred and enmity by discriminating between class, ethnicity, religion and region” and Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law reportedly were the articles most frequently used to punish for expressing opinion.

The statement expressed the necessity for a new, democratic understanding and a method for the attainment of freedom of thought and listed the demands of the Freedom to Thought Campaign as follows:

- The authorities should give up presenting Turkey’s strategic location and the relating understanding of defense and economic, social and political problems in domestic and international affairs as the pretext not to practice democracy and restrict freedoms.

- It was announced that the revision in the Constitution was made for the reason of improving freedoms. For the constitutional amendments to have a meaning, the relevant laws should also be reviewed for an improvement of freedoms.

- Unjust interpretations that go beyond laws and arbitrary prevention in practice should be avoided.

- The judiciary should be given full independence in order to guarantee all kinds of freedom.

- Everyone should have equal access to means of seeking right.

- Within the campaign, a visit was paid to Dr. Fikret Başkaya at Kalecik Prison on 8 October. As a second activity, the Platform held the Freedom to Thought Panel at Çankaya Municipality Contemporary Arts Center on 10 November. Lawyer Aydın Erdoğan chaired the panel. Participants were Fikret İlkiz, editor-in-chief of the daily Cumhuriyet, writer Vivet Kanetti and Mithat Sancar, instructor at Ankara University Faculty of Law.

Confiscated Books and Trials Launched against Them

According to the data gathered by the HRFT, 51 books were confiscated in 2001, most of which were about the Kurdish problem, human rights and the Turkish left. Many trials were launched in connection with the confiscated books on charges of violating Articles 159, 169 and 312 of the TPC and Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law. In 2001, some cartoon books were also confiscated on claims of being “detrimental publications”.

Brightness Like Love, Darkness Like Death -Mehmet Uzun

Istanbul SSC Prosecution office confiscated the new edition of the novel of Mehmet Uzun, “Brightness Like Love, Darkness Like Death” published by Gendaş Publishing House.

Gendaş Publishing House first published the novel in January 2000 and no trial was launched in connection with the first 9 editions. The indictment prepared by Istanbul SSC Chief Prosecution office made the following statement: “Jointly evaluating the section BLOOD on pages 195-228, the section FEAR on pages 229-242, the section PAIN on pages 243-262, the section GLANCE on pages 263-283 and the section MEMORY on pages 283-306, the male character is Baz and the female character is Kevok and they are involved in an armed struggle for the Kurdish people. They get armed and go to the mountains, the soldiers burn down and evacuate the villages of Kurdish people, guerillas in the mountains clash with Turkish soldiers. This fight is said to be waged for the future of the Kurdish people. All these denote that although the name of the illegal PKK organization is not mentioned, activities of members of the organization called PKK is narrated and the members of the organization are praised and talked about with passion. This means to openly make propaganda for an illegal organization and provide assistance to the illegal organization in question by making people, who feel sympathetic for the organization, read the book to raise their political and ideological consciousness.”

The trial against writer Mehmet Uzun and publisher Hasan Öztoprak in connection with the book “Brightness Like Love, Darkness Like Death” on charges of “aiding and abetting members of an illegal organization” under Article 169 of the TPC ended in acquittal in the first hearing on 4 April.

Pomegranate Flowers –Mehmet Uzun

Mehmet Uzun’s book “Pomegranate Flowers – Essays on Multi-Culturalism” published by Gendaş Publishing House was confiscated. The indictment prepared by Istanbul SSC Chief prosecution office alleged that “the book involved separatist propaganda targeting the indivisible integrity of the State of Turkish Republic on pages 76 and 79”. The trial launched against Mehmet Uzun and publisher Hasan Öztoprak under Article 8/3 of the Anti-Terror Law on charges of “making separatist propaganda” ended in acquittal on 3 April.

Creating a Language - Mehmet Uzun

The book “Creating a Language” written by Mehmet Uzun and published by Gendas Publishing House was confiscated by Istanbul SSC in October on charges of “inciting people to hatred and enmity on the basis of racial discrimination” before its distribution. Previously Belge Publishing House had published the same book, but no investigation had been lodged.

Kurdish Enlightenment - Dr. Celilé Celil

Istanbul SSC confiscated the book of Dr. Celilé Celil, “Kurdish Enlightenment During the Late 19^th and the Early 20^th Century” on 24 April on charges of “containing separatist propaganda”. The book was the doctorate thesis of Celil submitted to Erivan University in the 1980s and it was translated from Russian to Turkish by Arif Karabağ and published by Avesta Publishing House. The confiscation decision was taken on the grounds that the book included “articles about Kurdistan, Kurdistan newspapers, the Kurdish national movement, Kurdish scholars and philosophers, and about Kurdish revolts from the beginning to the end and these constituted separatist propaganda”.

The trial against Abdullah Keskin, owner and editor-in-chief of Avesta Publishing House, opened on charges of “making separatist propaganda” under Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law and Appendix 1/2 of the Press continues at Istanbul SSC.

Passions and Prisoners -Evin Aydar Çiçek

In June Beyoğlu Penal Court No. 2 confiscated the book, “Passions and Prisoners” written by Evin Aydar Çiçek and published by Peri Publishing House in May 2000. The confiscation decision was taken on the grounds that the words of a prisoner, interviewed for the book, included insults against Atatürk and were published in the book. The decision was lifted on objection.

The trial against Ahmet Önal, owner and editor-in-chief of Peri Publishing House, launched on charges of “insulting Atatürk” in the book “Passions and Prisoners” continues at Beyoğlu Penal Court No. 2.

Kurdistan History - M. S. Lazarev and Ş. X. Mıhoyan

In June Istanbul SSC confiscated the book titled “Kurdistan History” published by Avesta Publication House, on claims of making “separatist propaganda”.

The trial launched against Abdullah Keskin, owner and editor-in-chief of Avesta Publications, for making separatist propaganda in the book under Article 8 of Anti-Terror Law, Article 36 of the TPC and Appendix 1/2 of the Press Law is under way at Istanbul SSC.

Temple of Fear -Celal Başlangıç

On 22 August, Istanbul Penal Court No. 2 confiscated the book, “Temple of Fear” written by journalist Celal Başlangıç and published by İletişim Publishing House in July. The confiscation decision was taken on demands of the Ministry of Justice Directorate of Prisons and Detention Places on claims of “including insults against the security forces”.

The indictment about the book included the following statements:

“In the ‘Introduction’ part on pages 7-8, ‘the priests of fear’ told people ‘not to think’: “You shall not be afraid, you shall not cry out your existence, you shall not follow around your own identity and language. You shall keep quiet and in fear... “In giant temples only fear was worshipped. And the fear had rules; and everyone was required to submit themselves absolutely to the rules of fear. Fear is created, fear is produced and fear is reproduced in temples of fear. These are the real stories of people living without fear in temples of fear. In Lice, in Tunceli, in Güçlükonak, in Silopi we as journalist have witnessed what has been done, what violence created, how massacres made people worship fear. However, when we bring together the real stories of all victims in all temples of fear, it becomes visible with all the horror how we were made to submit ourselves to a religion whose god was fear, how we were made to worship it absolutely in a temple of fear for years.” With such statements, the book asserts that a temple of fear was created by giving place to claims such as the military forces are responsible for many incidents. Similar claims were presented in part “Journey to a Massacre” on pages 9-72, “Disappearances in Silopi and Republic of Şırnak” on pages 73-200, “The Cry of Lice” on pages 201-244, and “Tunceli, half-open Prison” on pages 245-304. “By doing so, the book holds the Turkish Armed Forces responsible for disappearances in detention, murders by unknown assailants and terror acts that took place in the Southeastern Anatolia region. The limit of criticism is exceeded and the Military Forces are insulted and ridiculed in the book”.

Journalist Celal Başlangıç and publisher Osman Nihat Tuna were put on trial on charges of “insulting the army” under Article 159 of the TPC and Article 16 of the Press Law. The trial was to commence at Istanbul Criminal Court No. 2 on 25 January 2002.

From Sümer State of Priests to Democratic People’s Republic

The book “From Sümer State of Priests to Democratic People’s Republic”, which includes the defense of PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan submitted to the ECoHR, was confiscated in November on claims of “making propaganda for an illegal organization”. Publisher Gülcan Kaya, Mem Publishing House, was put on trial at Istanbul SSC under Article 169 of the TPC.

How to Live? - Abdullah Öcalan

The book, “How to Live?” written by Abdullah Öcalan was confiscated on claims of “making separatist propaganda” and “aiding and abetting an illegal organization”. Istanbul Public Prosecution Chief Office indicted Eylem Tandoğan, owner of Mem Publishing House, which had published the book, under Article 169 of the TPC.

The Reality of Oligarchic Republic – Abdullah Öcalan

The book “The Reality of the Oligarchic Republic” written by Abdullah Öcalan was confiscated under Article 169 of the TPC. Gülcan Kaya, editor-in-chief of Mem Publishing House, was put on trial.

Kurdish Humanism and New Human Being – Abdullah Öcalan

Abdullah Öcalan’s book, “Kurdish Humanism and New Human Being” published by Aram Publishing House in May, was confiscated on claims of “making separatist propaganda” and “aiding and abetting an illegal organization”. Publisher Fatih Taş was put on trial at Istanbul SSC for violating Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law. On 27 December the court sentenced Taş to 3 years’ and 9 months’ imprisonment. The sentence was later commuted to a fine of TL 8.781.890.000.

American Interventionism–Noam Chomsky

In September Istanbul SSC confiscated the book “American Interventionism” by Noam Chomsky, published by Aram Publications, on charges of containing “separatist propaganda”. The indictment by Istanbul SSC Chief Prosecution Office regarded the following statements in the book as separatist propaganda: “This is the location where the most serious attack against human right was realized and actually still continues...”, “The Kurds were severely oppressed throughout the whole history of the modern Turkish state but things changed in 1984.” In 1984 the Turkish government initiated an immense war against the Kurdish population in Southeastern Turkey. And it continued. Actually, it still continues... This, as can easily be seen, has nothing to do with a cold war. It is based on an opposing revolt... An ethnic cleansing of ten thousands of people killed, two or three million migrants, and around 3500 villages evacuated...”.

Fatih Taş from Aram Publications was put on trial under Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law on claims that the book included “separatist propaganda”. The trial was to commence at Istanbul SSC on 13 February 2002. In the meantime, Noam Chomsky’s commented on the trial in a letter he sent to Aram Publications:

“I have heard it with much amusement and surprise that you are accused of violating the laws for publishing my articles... My writings about Kurds being under oppression in Turkey and the involvement of the United States of America in those affairs were derived from reports of leading human rights organizations (Human Rights Watch and others), from very respectable and serious studies and from official documents of the USA government. There is no need to say that the accusations are unjust.” The trial “is a very serious attack against the most fundamental human rights and civil rights,” wrote Noam Chomsky. “I believe that the state authorities will accept this fact and withdraw the accusations before long. By doing so, they can reveal their respect for democracy and fundamental human rights.”

Language of Life on Mountains – Halil Ünsal

The book “Language of Life on Mountains” written by Halil Ünsal and published by Aram Publishing House in June was confiscated on charges of “making separatist propaganda” and “aiding and abetting an illegal organization”. Publisher Fatih Taş was put on trial under Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law.

I Engraved my Heart to the Mountains–Gurbetelli Ersöz

The book “I Engraved my Heart to the Mountains” written by Gurbetelli Ersöz, former editor-in-chief of the closed down daily Özgür Gündem, and published by Aram Publishing House, was confiscated on charges of “making separatist propaganda” and “aiding and abetting an illegal organization”. Publisher Fatih Taş was put on trial under Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law at Istanbul SSC.

Signs of Ammar – Hüseyin Kaytan

The book “Signs of Ammar”, written by Hüseyin Kaytan and published by Aram Publishing House in June, was confiscated on charges of “making separatist propaganda” and “aiding and abetting an illegal organization”. Publisher Fatih Taş was put on trial under Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law.

Blue is the Color of Water of Avaşin – Selçuk Şahan

The book “Blue is the Color of Water of Avaşin”, written by Selçuk Şahan and published by Aram Publishing House in August, was confiscated on charges of “making separatist propaganda” and “aiding and abetting an illegal organization”. Publisher Fatih Taş was put on trial at Istanbul SSC under Article 169 of the TPC and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law.

Two Red Lights – Ali Sapan

The book “Two Red Lights1 written by Ali Sapan, spokesman for PKK’s First Peace Group and imprisoned in Van Prison, was confiscated. Mem Publishing House published the book in May. The trial launched against publisher Gülcan Kaya on charges of “aiding and abetting an illegal organization” ended on 27 December. The SSC initially sentenced Kaya to 3 years 9 months in prison and commuted it to a fine of TL 8.781.890.000.

Voice and Courage - EKB Bulletin

The book “Voice and Courage” released by the Laborer Women’s Union was confiscated on 5 July on charges of “inciting people to hatred and enmity by discriminating among people on the basis of class, ethnic, religious, sect and regional differences”. The book consists of stories of women, subjected to sexual torture in detentions and war, which they presented during the conference on “No to Sexual Harassment and Rape in Detention”, held on 10-11 June 2000. Nahide Kılıç, editor-in-chief of the Laborer Women’s Union Bulletin, was put on trial at Istanbul SSC in connection with the book “Voice and Courage”.

Deep-Rooted State and the Tradition of Opposition - Ahmet Özcan (Seyfettin Mut)

The book, “Deep-Rooted State and the Tradition of Opposition” written by Ahmet Özcan (Seyfettin Mut) and published by Bakış Publishing House in February 2000 was confiscated on claims of “insulting the Republic and the army”. The trial launched against Özcan on the same charges ended in acquittal at Istanbul Criminal Court No. 2 on 28 September on the grounds that “the elements of the crime did not exist”. The confiscation order was lifted.

The Hidden Face of Turkey - Neşe Düzel

The book “The Hidden Face of Turkey”, written by journalist Neşe Düzel and published by Iletişim Publication House in November, was confiscated on claims of “inciting people to hatred and enmity”. A trial was launched against Neşe Düzel and publisher Osman Nihat Tuna at Istanbul SSC under Article 312 of the TPC in connection with an interview she held with Nevzat Altun, Mayor of Gazi District, and Alevite dervish Hüseyin Gülen concerning the incidents at Gazi district in 1995.

The Bone – Bedri Baykam

Istanbul Penal Court No. 4 confiscated the book, “The Bone” written by Bedri Baykam, in April. The decision was based on the report of the Prime Ministry’s Council of Protecting the Children from Detrimental Publications claiming that the book was “in contravention to general ethics”. The trial against Bedri Baykam launched at Istanbul Penal Court No. 2 on claims that the book contravened “general ethics” ended in acquittal on 27 November. In the trial Bedri Baykam faced a fine according to Articles 419, 426 and 427 of the TPC about “publications against general ethics”.

The Cell – Nevin Berktaş

Nevin Berktaş’s book “The Cell” published by Yediveren Publishing House was confiscated on charges of “making propaganda for an illegal organization”. The trial launched against Berktaş and Elif Çamyar, owner of the publishing house, on the same allegation ended at Istanbul SSC on 7 November. SSC sentenced Berktaş and Çamyar to 3 years 9 months in prison in accordance with Article 169 of the TPC. Çamyar’s sentence was commuted to a fine of TL 4.152.000.000.

“Lives of Two Sisters - Canan and Zehra” – Ahmet Kulaksız

The book “Lives of Two Sisters - Canan and Zehra”, written by Ahmet Kulaksız, father of Canan Kulaksız and Zehra Kulaksız, who lost their lives in the death fast action on 15 April and 29 June, and published by Tavır Publishing House was confiscated by Istanbul SSC on charges that the death fast action was praised and propaganda for an illegal organization was made.

Song of Freedom – Hüseyin Turhallı

The book “Song of Freedom”, written by Hüseyin Turhallı, who lives in France and was Chairman of HEP Diyarbakır Provincial Organization and published by Belge Publishing House in November, was confiscated on claims of “making separatist propaganda”. Ayşe Zarakolu, editor-in-chief of the publishing house, faces trial under Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law in connection with the book. The trial was to commence on 21 March 2002.

New Generation New Society - Mehmet Köse

Konya Penal Court No. 3 confiscated Mehmet Köse’s book “New Generation New Society” in May. The confiscation decision was reportedly taken under Article 312 of the TPC and the Law on Crimes Committed against Atatürk numbered 5816. The decision of confiscation was taken on the complaint of Konya Public Prosecution office on 13 July 2000. The first edition of the book was reportedly released in 1983.

The Flower of Hill 3–Feyhan Güver

Beyoğlu Penal Court No. 1 fined cartoonist Feyhan Güver and Celal Metin Zeynioğlu from Parantez Publishing House in connection with the cartoon book of Güver titled, “The Flower of Hill 3”. The book was confiscated on 1 March on charges of “contravening general ethics”. Güver and Zeynioğlu will have to pay TL 1.865.000.000, each, for “publishing a detrimental book”.

Prisons of our Country and Flowers of Resistance

In April Istanbul SSC confiscated the book “Prisons of our Country and Flowers of Resistance” released by Umut Publications on charges of “making propaganda for an illegal organization”.

The Wind Blows Toward Us - Metin Akçiçek

Istanbul SSC confiscated the book “The Wind Blows Toward Us” written by Metin Akçiçek and published by Umut Publications in August on charges of “making propaganda of an illegal organization”.

Gypsies of Turkey – Assoc. Prof. Ali Rafet Özkan

In July the Ministry of Culture confiscated the book “Gypsies of Turkey” written by Assoc. Prof. Ali Rafet Özkan, teaching at Erzurum Atatürk University Theology Department, on claims of insulting the gypsies.

The other books confiscated in 2001 were the following:

Publisher	Writer	Name of the Book
Berfin Publ.	TORİ	Well-Known Kurdish Philosophers and First Generation Intellectuals
Ceylan Publ.	Mukaddes Çelik	Bizim Çakır
Çivi Yazıları	“Tarkan”
Weşanen Deng	Şemsettin Sami/ M. Emin Bozarslan	“Kurds in the First Turkish Encyclopedia in History”
Fırat Publ.	Kemal Süphandağ	“Ağrı Resistance and Haydaranlıs”
Lemanyak	Bahadır Baruter	Lombak 3
Komal	Mahsum H. Pir	End of an Illusion
Mem Publ.	Evaluation	Children Letter
Mem Publ.	Bedran Sevgat	Diyarbakır Dungeon
Mem Publ.	Mahsun Şafak	Leadership Development in Kurdistan and International Plot
Mem Publ.	Mahsun Şafak	Serhildan
Mem Publ.	Mahsun Şafak	Explanatory Notes on Defenses
Ozan Publ.	Turan Feyizoğlu	İbo
Ozan Publ.	Faik Bulut	Who is This Fethullah
Parantez Publ.	Pedro Almodaver	Patty Diphusa Stories
Parantez Publ.	Kutsi Fıkıllı	Cinsellarus
Péri Publ.	Munzur Çem	Alevilitism in Dersim
Sorun Publ.	M. Kemal Işık	Well-Known Kurdish Philosophers and Intellectuals
Su Publ.	Melih Pekdemir	Is Öcalan a State?
Tohum Publ.	Ozan Veli	Gaban
Tohum Publ.	Burhan Karam	We Keep on our Way
ASAM Publ.	Ali Nihat Özcan	PKK: History, Ideology and Method

Books Confiscated in Previous Years, Trials Ended in 2001

Mehmed’s Book -Nadire Mater

The 9^th Chamber of the Court of Cassation confirmed the acquittal of Nadire Mater (Reporters without Borders –RSF- Turkey representative), writer of “Mehmed’s Book” and publisher Semih Sökmen, Metis Publishing House. Beyoğlu Criminal Court No. 2 had acquitted them on 2 October 2000. Mater and Sökmen had been prosecuted on demands of imprisonment from 2 to 12 years on charges of “insulting and ridiculing the military forces of the state” under Article 159 of the TPC. “Mehmed’s Book” is composed of narrations of 42 non-commissioned officers and reserve officers, who had served in the Southeast of Turkey. The book was confiscated on 23 June 1999, 2 months after its release, upon an official complaint lodged by Full General Hilmi Özkök, then Deputy Chairman of the General Staff.

Code Name Hezbollah – Anatomy of Turkey’s Hezbollah - Faik Bulut, Mehmet Faraç

In October Istanbul Criminal Court No. 2 lifted the confiscation order issued for the book “Code Name Hezbollah – Anatomy of Turkey’s Hezbollah” written by researcher Faik Bulut and Mehmet Faraç. The trial launched against Mehmet Faraç, Faik Bulut and publisher Mustafa Demirci in connection with the book on claims of “insulting security forces” had ended in acquittal in September 2000. However, the Court of Cassation quashed the acquittal and therefore a new trial had been launched against the writers and publisher with the release of the new edition.

IBO–Turan Feyizoğlu

The book “IBO - İbrahim Kaypakkaya”, which narrates the life of the founder of TIKKOWorkers and Peasants' Liberation Army of Turkey , was confiscated on charges of “making propaganda of an illegal organization and separatism”. The trial launched on the same charges against the writer Turan Feyizoğlu and publisher Mustafa Demir ended on 24 September. Istanbul SSC decided for acquittal of the defendants on the grounds that “legal elements of the crime had not been constituted”.

New Eastern Campaign of the West – Hayri Argav

Istanbul SSC confiscated the book “New Eastern Campaign of the West (NATO, East, Turkey, Kurds)” written by Hayri Argav and published by Peri Publishing House in November 2000 on claims of “making separatist propaganda”. The trial against Ahmet Önal, owner of the publishing house ended on 24 October at Istanbul SSC. Önal was fined TL 1.250.000.000 for violating Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law.

Teyre Baz or a Kurdish Businessman Hüseyin Baybaşin–Mahmut Baksi

The trial launched against Ahmet Önal, owner of Peri Publishing House, on charges of inciting people to hatred and enmity” in the book “Teyre Baz or a Kurdish Businessman Hüseyin Baybaşin” by Mahmut Baksi, published in 1999, ended at Istanbul SSC on 6 September. Istanbul SSC fined Önal TL 1.992.510.000. Istanbul SSC had confiscated the book on claims of “making separatist propaganda” in early January 2000.

The Skin in Ambush - Mehmet Ergüven

Writer Mehmet Ergüven and publisher İrfan Sancı were acquitted in the trial launched in connection with the book “The Skin in Ambush” by Ergüven at Istanbul Penal Court No. 2 on 5 July. The court also lifted the confiscation order in the trial launched on charges of “publishing detrimental works to effect children and contravening general ethics”.

The Call of Portnoy–Philip Roth

The prosecution of translator Özden Arıkan and Ömer Faruk, coordinator of Ayrıntı Publishing House, in connection with the novel of Philip Roth “The Call of Portnoy” ended in acquittal at Istanbul Penal Court No. 2 on 20 March.

The Wind Blew, the Water Carried Away–Mahir Kaynak

The trial launched in May against Mahir Kaynak, ex-member of the secret service MIT, and publisher Rahim Er in connection with the book of Kaynak, “The Wind Blew, the Water Carried Away”, ended on 21 December. Istanbul Criminal Court No. 2 decided for acquittal on the grounds that “the elements of the crime had not materialized”. The trial had been launched on an official complaint of MIT. Imprisonment was sought for Kaynak and Er on charges of “disclosing information about the duties and activities of MIT that should be kept secret”.

BANNED PLAYS

Mahmud and Yezida - Diyarbakır Metropolitan Municipality Theater

Diyarbakır Governor banned the play “Mahmud and Yezida”, staged by Diyarbakır Metropolitan Municipality Theater, on the pretext that “Kurdish dialogues” and “Kurdish songs” were included in the play. The statement made by the Governor on 12 January declared that the ban was issued because the song ‘Kirivo’ by Şivan Perver had been played at the end of the play. The staging of “Mahmud and Yezida” was also banned in Batman by the Governor in January.

Citizen Abuzer – Theater Arayış

Staging of the play “Citizen Abuzer”, adapted from a book by Yücel Sarpdere, in Diyarbakır was banned on 15 January on the grounds that “the atmosphere was not suitable”. The decision was communicated orally to Theater Arayış.

Pir Sultan Abdal - ABT

Elazığ Governor banned the staging of the play “Pir Sultan Abdal” by Ankara Union Theater (ABT) in February. But the Regional Administrative Court canceled the decision. The play was staged in Elazığ on 1 March. Administrative courts in provinces and towns have banned the staging of the play “Pir Sultan Abdal” 84 times since 1991.

Komara Dinan–Teatra Jiyana Nû

Ankara Governor suspended the staging of the game Komara Dinan Şermola (Republic of the Insane) in Ankara by Jîyana Nû (New Life), theater group of Mesopotamian Cultural Center (MKMMesopotamian Culture Centre ) in May. The decision was taken because the language of the play was Kurdish.

A Beautiful Ugly King -ABT

The governors banned staging of the play “A Beautiful Ugly King” by the ABT in Mardin on 26 March and in Batman on 27 March. Diyarbakır Administration Court canceled the decisions of the governors.

The play “A Beautiful Ugly King” in Diyarbakır was banned by the governorate on 1 June. Diyarbakır Governor informed the ABT on 1 June. ABT Director Gül Göker and theater executives applied to the Administrative Court on 4 June. The court accepted the objection and decided to stop the execution of the decision. Nevertheless, the Governor managed to prevent the staging of the play at Diyarbakır State Theater Hall. When the ABT was not allowed to use the hall of the State Theater, they decided to stage the play at the Provincial Theater. ABT Staff Barış Özat went to police headquarters to notify them about the change of place. The policemen there reportedly insulted and slapped Özat and attempted to prevent that posters of the play would be put up and tickets were sold. The writer and director of the play Despite all prevention attempts, the play was staged in Diyarbakır on 5 June.

Your Love Did not Leave Me - Güneş Theater

The Governors of Kars, Bitlis, Van and Hakkari banned Güneş Theater from Ankara from staging the play “Your Love Did not Leave Me”, composed from poems of Ahmet Arif in October. The reasoning for the ban was the possibility of “constituting a crime”. Thereupon, executives of Güneş Theater applied to administrative courts in these provinces for canceling the decision of ban. Only Van Administrative Court cancelled the decision of the governor.

Death was Sleeping - Bizim (Our) Theater

The staging of the play “Death was Sleeping” by Bizim Theater was banned in Merzifon in October and in Merzifon and Kırşehir in November.

Gurzek (Ne)lédan - Teatra Jiyana Nû

On 22 November Beyoğlu District Governor suspended for one month the staging of the play, “Gurzek (Ne)ledan” by Teatra Jiyana Nü at Istanbul Muammer Karaca Theater Hall. The suspension decision was reportedly taken on the grounds that “the security of players and audiences could not be guaranteed”.

Sacco and Vanzetti - Diyarbakır Provincial Theater

Tunceli Governor banned the staging of the play “Sacco and Vanzetti” by Diyarbakır Provincial Theater in Tunceli in November with reference to the Law on the State of Emergency.

Orhan Veli

The staging of the play Orhan Veli at People’s Training Center in Eruh, Siirt, was banned for “being defective”.

OTHER ACTIVITIES PREVENTED

Displaying and reproduction of the short movie “Seventieth Day” produced by Science Aesthetics Culture and Art Foundation (BEKSAV) Cinema Atelier was banned in March under Article 9 of the Regulations concerning Inspection of Cinema, Video and Music Products. Gala premier of the movie was made in May 2000 and an application was lodged with the Ministry of Culture Copyrights and Cinema General Directorate to get the document for processing the movie.

In Boyabat, Sinop, the police banned the joint cartoon exhibition of Yaşar Topçu, art teacher Aşkın Ayrancıoğlu and Seyit Saatçi, working at Sinop Municipality, on 8 June on claims that “some cartoons included elements of insulting the state, army, and police and elements of separatism”. Ayrancıoğlu’s house was raided on 7 June and some books and journals in the house were seized. On the same day, Ayrancıoğlu and Saatçi were detained. Following their release on 8 June, the exhibition was closed down. Ayrancıoğlu and Saatçi were put on trial on charges of “making propaganda for a separatist organization and insulting the military forces of the state via cartoons. Ayrancıoğlu was laid off temporarily until the trial came to an end. Totally 60 works of the artists were exhibited in Boyabat People’s Library.

Konya Governor banned the meeting of the daily “Akit” to be held in Konya in the evening of 9 June. The decision was orally communicated. The meeting was said to be suspended for 30 days for “security reasons” due to a military operation of Israeli and USA soldiers in Konya.

The municipality of Gazipaşa, Antalya, wanted to show the movie, “September Storm”, which is about the 12 September coup, at Gökguzluk Plateau on 29 July. District Governor Ali Kazgan prohibited the movie on “security reasons”.

Erzincan Governor banned the concert of Grup Yorum organized by Radio Dost, broadcasting in Erzincan, on 24-25 November.

Mersin Police HQ banned the concert of Grup Munzur on 8 November in Mersin. Grup Munzur is attached to Yüz Çiçek Açsın Cultural Center.

The police hindered the display of the movie, “Silent Death”, which is about the isolation system applied in European and American prisons, on 27 November 2001 at Bursa Teyyare Cultural Center. The police gave no reason for the prohibition.

MUSIC CASSETTES BANNED

The ban of the Ministry of Culture on 122 music cassettes was not lifted in 2001.

The Ministry of Culture Copyrights and Cinema Directorate banned in October the last album of Grup Yorum called, “Feda” which was about the death fasts in prison. Kalan Music released the album. Hasan Saltık, from Kalan Music, stated that the album had been inspected before the release and received the “document for processing”, however, the album had gone through a second inspection and was banned afterwards.

The TRT Turkish Folk Music Inspection Board refused in December the demand of Rahmi Saltuk, which he brought in June, for the release of his album, “The Bullet Would not Pass through the Night” on TRT programs. The Board considered that all 12 songs of Rahmi Saltuk in his album could not be broadcasted. In his album Saltuk gave place to poems of Ahmed Arif and folk songs he produced from these poems. Some of the songs the Council thought in the frame of prohibition were broadcasted at TRT for years. Saltuk reacted against the decision and lodged an official complaint against the TRT for stopping the execution of the decision. Saltuk said, “I do not see any meaning that the Inspection Board considered all of these songs not appropriate for broadcast. We, as artists, are convicted to deal with prohibition for a lifetime. I will also work hard with one who works hard with me. If I cannot get any result from the court, I will take the case to the ECoHR.”

The practice of banning music cassettes in the State of Emergency Region continued effectively in 2001. Diyarbakır Governor banned the “existence, reproduction, distribution, sale and release” of 17 cassettes in 2001.

Following are the cassettes banned by the Governorate in 2001:

Artist	Cassette	Production and Distribution Place
Güler Işık	Orak’tan Mikrofona	Atlantis Recording
Koma Agıri		Hewler Koçer Production
Brader	Diçim Geribiye
Çeme Reyne		Mardifon Music Production
Diyar	Cenga Jîne	Kom Music Production
Mıhemed Şexo	Ay Lé Gule	Kom Music Production
Rezan	Em Béwelatin	Öz Diyar Music Production
Zınar Sozdar	Gula Baxçé Min	Kom Music Production
Stranén Xemgini –1	Mem û Zîn	Mardifon Music Production
Koma Çiya	Venamire	Kom Music Production
Doktor Zeki	Pisman -1	Medya Music Production
Koma Diljîyan	Memyane -2	Kom Music Production
Heme Haci	Meşe Azadiye	Silvana Music Production
Dilgeş	Ez Uyar	Kom Music Production
Hanifi Ozana Gel	Êdi Bese	At Ek Music Production
Rotinda	Naygotin	Kom Music Production
Cigerpel	Ax Wera Min	Öz Diyar Music Production
Grup Yorum	Feda	Kalan Music Production

In August the sale of 63 Kurdish or Turkish cassettes was banned in Mardin. Following the decision, police officers reportedly confiscated cassettes and posters for advertisement. The following are some of the 63 cassettes banned:

Yorgun Demokrat, Dokunma Yanarsın, Şarkılarım Dağlara (Ahmet Kaya),

Hazalım (Beşir Kaya),

İstanbul Konserleri, Vuruldu (Ferhat Tunç),

Cemo, Gel ki Şafaklar Tutuşsun, Geliyoruz, Haziranda Ölmek Zor (Grup Yorum),

Yağmur Türküleri (Ferhat Tunç, Ahmet Kaya),

Dilan-a Kurdi, Konser-a Botan (Koma Cîva),

Daré Azadi (Mehmet Şah),

Welaté Min, Rozerin (Koma Dengé Azadi),

Ya Star, Xewnamin, Stranén Bijartî, Dotmam, Dünden Bugüne-Ferzé (Şivan Perwer),

Tekoşîn û Gülistané Kurdi (Şehriban Kurdi),

Zozan û Welat (Koma Zozan),

Kawa Destanı, Böyle Olur mu (Songül Karlı),

Neçirman (Zozan Felat),

Ji Biranina (Şexo),

Şerwerbuxmeşe (Aram Tigran),

Beriwané (Koma Gelyé Zilan),

Em Békesin (Hewal),

Memo (Koma Şirvan),

Konsera Ewrupa (Siyabend),

Name, Nevşerinamin (Xelil Xemgin),

Welaté Rojé (Xanemir),

Mezrabotanim (Koma Rojhilat),

Ji Dînare Aşiti (Gulén Mezrabotan),

Adaré (Agirê Jiyan),

Naygotin (Rotinda Yetkiner),

Tutuşturun Geceleri (Grup Munzur),

Adalılar-2, Girtîyen Azadiyé, Destané Egidekî, Gula Sor, Klasikén Bijartî (Ciwan Haco).

FREEDOM OF COMMUNICATION

In 2001 the freedom of communication was restricted by arbitrary practices, as well as legal obstacles, like in previous years. Pressures on oppositional newspapers such as “2000’de Yeni Gündem”, “Yedinci Gündem”, “Yeni Evrensel” and “Günlük Evrensel” and radio channels such as “Özgür Radio” and “Çağdaş Radio” continued in 2001 for broadcasting news that contrasted the “state policies”. The security forces raided the offices of many press institutions; journalists were detained arbitrarily and got attacked in demonstrations and marches, even in the corridors of courthouses. The target of pressures and attacks was not only journalists working for leftist media institutions. The media institutions that focused particularly on the Kurdish problem, F-type prisons and death fasts, and the journalists working for those media institutions faced certain pressures and attacks. The ban on headscarves and news reports against the US-war in Afghanistan were added to the list of bans. Tens of press workers, who wanted to produce news reports about the Kurdish problem, F-type prisons, ban on headscarves and protests against war politics faced attacks.

The approach of media institutions, except for the oppositional media, towards the operation in 20 prisons, which resulted in the death of 32 people, and towards F-type prisons was far from having a human rights concern. To the contrary it blackened and condemned approaches sensitive to human rights. The operation in the prisons took place between 19 and 22 December 2000 and was conducted by almost ten thousand security officers. The media provoked the operation with a fierce and aggressive attitude. During that period, the media tried to mislead public opinion and legitimize the operations with news reports whose sources were unknown or whose truth was not verified. Severe human rights violations were either neglected or broadcasted as magazine news. The extraordinary violence used in the operations was reflected as something very natural and most of the time even as sacred, based on arguments of “national security and national interest”. When the operation in the prisons was over, the media, very insensitively, discarded the prison problem as if it had been resolved. The experiences of prisoners, who were transferred to F-type prisons, could not find a place in newspapers of high circulation; such information was regarded as non-existent.

As a result, the “big media” apart from acting under directions of the State with regards to such a critical subject, which brings about immense human rights violations, has presented an aggressiveness that from time to time contributed to the attempts of the state to restrict freedoms. During the course of the events the media could demand restriction of rights and freedoms that even exceed the existing legal and administrative basis with sharp, dramatic and sometimes provocative calls, an attitude never displayed regarding functions that a state should undertake, for instance concerning the functions of a “social state”.

However, even the big media could not refrain from facing certain pressures in that atmosphere of violence and censor created on the axis of F-type prisons and death fasts. Istanbul SSC Public Prosecution office initiated judicial proceedings against newspapers such as Sabah, Star and Radikal for acting contrary to the ban on broadcast about death fasts and F-type prisons on 14 December 2000. (See 19 December Operation)

The joint statement of 3 August prepared by the Ministries of the Interior and Justice about the operation in prisons pointed out that the allegations about the operation had been referred to the judiciary and warned the prosecutors not to leak information about the preliminary investigations. The statement also emphasized that the news reports about the investigations would be under close inspection.

A report released by the IFEX in April attracted attention to the increasing pressures on the Turkish press as a result of the death fasts and the economic crisis. The report pointed out that journalists making news reports about death fasts faced intense pressure and that many journalists and media institutions had applied auto-censorship in order not to face pressures. The report stated that the existing legal arrangements “were used as a weapon against those, who show the courage to mention issues such as the situation of minorities, human rights, influence of soldiers and police on Turkish society”.

Removal from Office

Many press workers started the year 2001 either unemployed or with an inadequate salary. The Saving Deposits Insurance Fund seized Etibank, the bank of Bilgin Group, which owned many press institutions including the newspaper Sabah and TV channel ATV. All the income sources of the Group were seized for collection of around $ 450.000 debt of the bank. When the Group had problems in payment, they decided to turn over some of the press institutions, including the newspapers Sabah and Yeni Binyıl and TV channel ATV to MTM Group owned by Mehmet Emin Karamehmet, Murat Vargı and Turgay Ciner in exchange for the payment of their debts. However, Dinç Bilgin acquired the administration of Bilgin Group once again on 7 January. The MTM was given the assurance that their expenses for the group would be covered. Aydın Doğan has reportedly been effective in Dinç Bilgin’s return to the leadership of the group.

Closing down the newspaper Yeni Binyıl was the first decision that Dinç Bilgin took after assuming the administration of the newspaper. On 8 January, Ergun Babahan, Publication Director of the newspaper announced orally that the newspaper was closed down and that some staff of it would be transferred to the newspaper Sabah. Nevertheless, no explanation was made as to the legal rights of the workers. Eighty-five journalists working on permanent basis and 35 others working on contract basis were removed from office. The next step was to curtail all media institutions attached to the Bilgin Group by 40 % and the removals from office started on 19 January.

The “take overs” in the media sector and mass dismissals continued in February and March. Around 1500 workers were fired only by the Bilgin Group, whose bank was seized by the Supreme Council of Banks and by the Ihlas Group, whose financial institution was seized. The Turkish Association of Journalists’ Press Report for February stated that the number of journalists removed from office had exceeded 3000.

The largest wave of removal from office in the media sector in Turkey caused reactions. The Initiative for a Council of Journalists (GMG), which first assembled in 1998, started to function again in January due to the crisis in the media sector. After a month’s performance, the GMG released a statement on 8 February and made a call for assembling and acting together. The GMG statement was as follows:

“The sector in the pentagon of media-banking-trade-politics and bureaucracy has become an area of corruption and degradation. All the ethical values of the profession are disregarded... Monopolization in the press field is broadening. All employee rights of journalists, who are laborers of the profession, are overthrown by unlawful practices. The journalists cannot enjoy their rights, which are openly defined in law, when they are employed or when they are fired from work. It is almost a rule that people in this sector work without insurance or a permanent position. The journalists cannot resist against all these unlawful practices and blatant breach of their employee rights. The threat of unemployment guarantees the acceptance of such practices without any resistance.”

Following the statement, many journalists who were removed from office or still worked, joined a campaign of action. Many journalists from various provinces of Turkey gathered in Ankara on 23 February in order to “protest the unemployment in the media sector that reached 10% of all workers in the sector, to support colleagues who were dismissed from work, to compel the authorities to take action for employee rights and pass new legalization for the security of employment”. The journalists met in Ankara with Zekeriya Temizel, Chairman of the Supreme Council of Banks, and Yaşar Okuyan, Minister of Labor and Social Security, as well as MPs, who were formerly journalists, and representatives of political parties. Yaşar Okuyan told the journalists that their “complaints would be taken into consideration at once” and that all media workers should be subject to the law numbered 212. In addition, the GMG initiated a signature campaign in February for an improvement in employee rights.

Professional press organizations made a joint statement on 1 March. They emphasized, “journalism faces a structural vanishing”, which they thought was more critical than unemployment of journalists. The press statement was signed by the Association of European Journalists (AEJ) Turkey branch, the Contemporary Journalists’ Association (ÇGD), the Association of Economy Reporters (EMD), the Association of Diplomacy Reporters (DMD), the Association of Photographers (FMD), the Association of Parliamentarian Reporters (PMD), the Association of Professional News Cameramen (PHKD) and the TGS. The representatives of these organizations stressed that although they had sent “letters to some 150 journalists and columnists about the situation, they had received no reactions. We regret to see the silence of journalists who are employed at the moment against the process that turned into a massacre of journalists”. They pointed out that a stronger union of journalists all over the country was inevitable.

The statement of journalists emphasized that the situation, journalists in Turkey were facing, had to be called critical on an international scale. “We will prepare a detailed and realistic report about the dismissals and the present situation and forward it to international press organizations such as the FIJ, AEJ, IPI, Committee for the Protection of Journalists (CPJ) and ICFJ and seek for solidarity.”

Nine press organizations, including the ÇGD and TGS held a meeting in Ankara on 24 March to discuss the dismissals, problems and proposals for solution. Around 100 journalists either employed or not participated in the meeting. The prominence of getting organized and forming a labor union and the increasing importance of professional solidarity more than ever was stressed. The necessity of giving priority to common interest was acknowledged. Certain projects such as releasing a new newspaper, holding a general press meeting came to the agenda. However, reactions against mass dismissals quieted down after April and May.

The “2001 Report” of the ÇGD Istanbul Branch indicated that 4.815 press workers had been removed from office within 2001. The Group Bilgin held the record of removing staff from office with 1.626 dismissals.

The GNAT Presidential Council banned the access of journalists to parliamentary backstage on 3 May. The decision was reportedly taken on proposals of Çokar, Administrative officer from the MHP, GNAT Deputy President Ali Ilıksoy, Salih Sümer, MP from the True Path Party (DYP) and the then Minister of Interior Affairs. Sadettin Tantan.

Certain media institutions reacted against the ban. Following the decision, the PMD decided not to follow the press statements, commission works and group meetings in the Parliament, and not to make any news of any written statement. When the reaction of the media institutions increased, the GNAT Presidency lifted the ban on 8 May.

Different to the oppositional media, the big media institutions’ attitude toward the US-war against Afghanistan has been what it had been against F-type prisons and the Kurdish problem. The winds of war blown after the attacks against Pentagon and World Trade Center in New York on 11 September, reached a peak level through “media operations” implemented in many countries.

The “big media institutions” assumed the duty of being the voice of the USA in the aftermath of the attacks and any statement made by these centers were taken as true and presented to the public without any investigation. Even when the US State Department stated that they did not have sufficient evidence to comment that Usame Bin Ladin had been responsible for the attacks, Prime Minister Bülent Ecevit could say, “America should not only enter Afghanistan, but should wipe out Taleban”, and his words were at the headlines of newspapers. The big media steadily put forward the thesis that the USA “should make use of Turkey’s extensive experience in fighting terrorism” in the attack against Afghanistan and “if America was fighting against terrorism, this was Turkey’s fight as well”. On 7 October, when the attack against Afghanistan commenced, TV channels such as ATV, Interstar, Kanal D and CNN Turk celebrated the “operation for everlasting freedom”.

On 9 October the newspapers Hürriyet and Milliyet made attempts to make public opinion get used to the idea of joining the war with the headlines “Authorization for Soldiers” and “The Path was Opened for the Soldiers”, respectively, even before authorities had made a comment. The criticism and reservation of Islamic or leftist-oppositional newspapers were almost never quoted and civilians killed in the attack were regarded as unavoidable “losses” of any war.

Some other media institutions in Turkey criticized the pro-war attitude of the big media. The Istanbul branch of the ÇGD made a statement on 11 October condemning the US attack on Afghanistan: “We, as workers of the press, are concerned about the war and war propaganda made voluntarily by the media. The duty of a journalist is to report news”.

In the press statement entitled, “We Shall not Forget: The Journalist is the Non-Fighting Party”, of the AEJ Turkey branch, ÇGD; DMD; EMD; FMD; PMD; PHKD; TGC Ankara Branch and TGS, the attitude of the media concerning the war was criticized and the following views were expressed:

“... Unfortunately, we observe a great desire among the executives of our “big” media for fighting, since the terrorist attacks against the Twin Towers and the Pentagon on 11 September. People, who oppose war, are regarded as “romantic” even “defenders of terror”.

The basic principle of journalism to verify information from two sources is disregarded and the news reports of American tabloid newspapers or of internet sites, where you can find any kind of gossip, make their way to the cover page. The army is invited to neighboring Iraq by saying, “Taleban is in Northern Iraq”. Even when the World Bank states that the real reason behind terror is unequal income distribution and poverty on a global scale and makes calls for global alliance against poverty, our media goes on the air with “let’s go to Afghanistan right in front of the military alliance”. While we compliment arms and war by talking about “smart bombs”, “veteran B-52”, “radar guided missile” and “splendid Tomahawks”, the shares of arms companies rise in stock markets like a rocket!

We want to remind the public opinion and colleagues that it cannot be regarded as journalism to do something closing ears to the opinion of 80% of the society...”

Another subject that determined the agenda of the “big media” in 2001 was the economic struggle between the Doğan Group owned by Aydın Doğan and Rumeli Holding owned by Kemal, Cem and Hakan Uzan. Newspaper Hürriyet, belonging to the Doğan Group, announced in a headline that Motorola and Nokia companies had not been able to collect $ 2.5 billion owed by the Telsim Company belonging to the Uzan family. Reciprocal accusations started and the Uzan Group charged the Doğan Group with manipulating the shares of the newspaper Milliyet on the stock market.

In the news reports published in Doğan Group’s newspapers Hürriyet, Milliyet, Radikal and Posta and broadcasted on Kanal D, the Uzan family was accused of causing financial damage to their partners with the construction of the Berke Dam and by manipulation shares of Çukurova and Kepez Electricity companies. They were also accused of tax evasion. Uzan Group’s newspaper Star and TV channels Interstar, Kral and Kanal 6 and radios gave place to accusations against the Doğan Group. Aydın Doğan was accused of tax evasion through writing fake invoices and of receiving unjust credits from Vakıfbank, a state bank, with very low interest rates.

In this media fight that reached a point to damage the credibility of the press and deride the freedom of communication, newspapers, televisions and radios of Doğan and Uzan groups accused the bosses of each other with being “bandits, blackmailer, terrorist, bribery, tax evader and black marketers”. The Council of Capital Market initiated investigations about both groups because of the mutual official complaint of the two groups concerning the allegations. On the other hand, the High Council for Radio and Television (RTÜK) decided, in its meeting on 10 October, to close down TV channel Kanal D of Aydın Doğan for 3 days, and Interstar, Kanal 6 and Kral TV for 6 days on grounds of violating the broadcast principle that “one cannot broadcast for private objectives and interests”. In its meeting on 21 November RTÜK decided on the closure of Interstar for another 15 days on the same grounds.

Pressures on Media and Journalists

Newspaper Özgür Ülke

Two trials launched at administrative courts against the Ministry of the Interior by the family of Ersin Yıldız, who died in a bomb attack to the premises of newspaper Özgür Ülke, and by the lawyers of the newspaper ended in December.

In the trial launched by the Yıldız family, the administrative court ruled on the “social risk” factor that the death had occurred in the area of responsibility of the Ministry of the Interior and that the incident might not have taken place had the Ministry taken the necessary precautions. Therefore, the Court ordered the Ministry of the Interior to pay moral compensation of TL 500 million for “negligence” and another TL 500 million as material compensation. The Ministry of the Interior appealed to the Supreme Administrative Court, which asked the Ministry of the Interior as a party to the case to inquire whether there was negligence in the incident or not. The appeal file is still on the agenda of the Supreme Administrative Court.

In the trial launched by the lawyers of the newspaper against the Ministry of the Interior, Istanbul Administrative Court No. 4 again ruled that the Ministry of the Interior should pay compensation of TL 22 billion for the crime of “negligence” in consideration of the “social risk” factor. The court’s reasoning for its decision was as follows: “Defending the security of life and property of persons, and property of institutions is among the foremost duties of the state, and the administration has to constitute the necessary organization to assure security of life and property. As a rule, the administration is obliged to compensate damages that are caused directly by its services. As an exception, the administration should also compensate damage, though not caused directly by it, but taking place in its activity area and because of its failure in taking necessary precautions for the prevention of that damage. The Ministry of the Interior took this case to the Supreme Administrative Court.

The administrative courts reached the verdict without considering the circular, released by then Prime Minister Tansu Çiller, on measures against the oppositional press and the Susurluk Report, prepared by Kutlu Savaş, Chairman of the Prime Ministry’s Inspection Council, which evaluated the bombing of the newspaper as an action of gangs connected to the state. The investigation initiated by Istanbul Public Prosecution Office in line with statements and evaluations in the Susurluk report about the bombing of the newspaper is still pending.

Newspaper Ülkede Gündem

In December the European Court of Human Rights (ECoHR) announced that it accepted the application made in connection with the ban of the newspaper Ülkede Gündem in the State of Emergency Region.

The State of Emergency Regional Governor had banned the newspaper Ülkede Gündem for Diyarbakır, Tunceli, Siirt, Hakkari, Şırnak and Van provinces, which were within the State of Emergency Region at that time. The newspaper was released from 7 July 1997 until 24 October 1998, and the ban started on 1 December 1997 for an indefinite period. 90 people among the staff and readers of the newspaper filed an application with the ECoHR in January 1998, maintaining that the decision violated Articles 9 and 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights. The ECoHR declared the applications of İsmet Bakaç, Diyarbakır representative of the newspaper Ülkede Gündem, and the reporters Zeynel Bağır, Ahmet Sümbül, Naif Kılıç, Mehmet Kaya, Kemal Şahin and Metin Dağ admissible, but refused the applications of four staff members of the daily arguing that they “have partially been affected by the ban of the newspaper’s in the region, but have not become victims.” The defense submitted by Turkey to the ECoHR stated that the releases of the newspaper “broke the will of security officers” and that the staff of the newspaper had not faced any pressure.

Sinan Tanrıkulu, lawyer of the newspaper Ülkede Gündem, stated that the decision of the ECoHR was very important with regards to freedom of thought and expression and that it was the first decision of the ECoHR concerning prohibition in the State of Emergency Region. The decision of the ECoHR will provide a sample for the applications filed by other newspapers such as “Özgür Bakış”, “2000’de Yeni Gündem” and “Yedinci Gündem”, which were also subject to a ban of distribution in the State of Emergency Region. The ECoHR has not yet declared whether it would accept the applications of 80 readers of the newspaper in Diyarbakır.

The writers, reporters, staff, distributors and administrative staff of the newspaper Ülkede Gündem had been subject to intense pressures and threats, detention and arrest at the time, when the paper was published. Their offices were raided tens of times. A total of 278 trials were launched against the daily and 125 news reports, 63 articles, 9 photographs and 14 announcements were censored between 5 June and 24 October 1998.

Newspaper Özgür Bakış

The newspaper Özgür Bakış was released from 18 April 1999 to 22 April 2000, when it had to close down. Istanbul SSC Prosecution Office began investigations and launched trials against 125 out of 370 issues of the daily and decided for the closure of the daily totaling 1009 days. 6 trials ended in acquittal and 101 in conviction. Eighteen trials were still continuing at the SSCs.

The editor-in-chiefs of the daily, namely, Hasan Deniz, Zeynep Tosun and Cihan Çapan received sentences totaling 31 years’ imprisonment and fines of TL 631.189.616.000. The SSC prosecution offices launched 52 trials under Article 169 of the TPC following the guiding decision of the Panel of Chambers at the Court of Cassation. Nine of the other trials were launched under Article 312 of the TPC, 64 under the Anti-Terror Law. The daily’s access to the State of Emergency Region had been forbidden on 7 May 1999.

Newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem

The newspaper 2000’de Yeni Gündem started press life on 27 May 2000 and 72 of the 308 issues of the daily were confiscated due to 71 news reports and 8 articles published on various dates. 73 trials were launched at the Istanbul SSC and 12 trials at Beyoğlu Criminal and Penal Courts. Twenty-six of the trials ended in 2001. In the concluded trials Erdal Taş, editor-in-chief of the newspaper, and Mehmet Emin Yıldız, owner of the newspaper, were sentenced to a total pf 12 years and 11 months in prison and fined TL 761.707.100 and the newspaper was ordered to close down for a total of 116 days. The newspaper could not handle the economic problems because of the trials, sentences and confiscation orders it faced and had to close down on 31 March. The admission of the newspaper to the State of Emergency Region had been forbidden on 1 June 2000.

The pressure against representatives and staff of the daily lessened, but still continued in 2001. The police raided the house of Mehmet Ali Çelik, distributor of the newspaper in Nusaybin, on the night of 14 February. Mehmet Ali Çelik filed an official complaint with the Nusaybin Public Prosecution Office against the police officers on 19 February.

Ayşe Oyman, Malatya reporter of the daily, was detained on 13 December 2000 while she was following the hunger strike at HADEP Malatya office in protest of F-Type prisons. The prosecution office released Ayşe Oyman on 17 December 2000. In early 2001, Oyman and other detaineees were put on trial on charges under Article 169 of the TPC.

The police detained Zeriman Dağdelen, reporter for “2000’de Yeni Gündem”, in a raid on her house on 8 January. The prosecutor at Istanbul SSC, where she was referred to, released her after obtaining her testimony on 11 January.

Evrim Alataş and Ayten Akgün, reporters for the daily, were detained on 20 March in Hakkari, where they went to follow the Newroz celebrations. They were kept at Hakkari Gendarmerie Station and were released on 21 March when the celebrations were over.

The police raided and searched the Urfa office of the newspaper on 20 March and detained the reporter Ramazan Pekgöz. Pekgöz was subsequently released.

Newspaper Yedinci Gündem

The press life of the weekly Yedinci Gündem started on 23 June and 26 of the 28 issues published by the journal until the end of 2001 were confiscated. The admission of the newspaper to the State of Emergency Region was forbidden right after the release of its first issue. A total of 89 trials were launched in connection with the news reports and articles published in the newspaper. Istanbul SSC heard 73 of them. Thirty of these trials ended in 2001.

The police raided the Urfa office of the newspaper on 28 August and detained Ramazan Pekgöz, representative of the newspaper in Urfa, Musa Farisoğulları, Chairman of the HADEP Urfa Provincial Organization, Mehmet Ural, Chairperson of the Central District, Ayşe Demir, Secretary of the women’s branch, Bozan Kırgözoğlu, executive of the HADEP, Gülsüm Yazar, Selime Peynir and another person whose named could not be obtained.

The police raided the central office of the newspaper Yedinci Gündem in Istanbul on 29 November and detained staff member Hakan Kemaloğlu. Kemaloğlu was released the same day.

Hamit Arslan, distributor of the newspaper in Ceyhan, Adana, was detained on 23 July. Aslan was released after a short while but 30 copies of the newspapers, he had, were seized.

The police detained reporter Salih Batman under beating while he was following HADEP members, who wanted to depart from Batman to Ankara on 31 August to participate in the 1 September World Peace Day. Salih Batman was released on 1 September and he received a medical report from Batman State Hospital stating that he had bruises on several parts of his body. Batman issued an official complaint on 3 September against the police officers, who beat him.

Ramazan Pekgöz, Urfa representative of the newspaper was detained in the evening of 20 October. He was taken to the gendarmerie station in Bozova, Urfa, and was released later in the evening. Pekgöz was reportedly detained to find out whether the issue of the newspaper, Pekgöz had with him, had been confiscated.

Recep Karayel and Naci Temel, who sold the newspaper Yedinci Gündem in Dağlıoğlu district of Adana, were detained on 3 December. The policemen reportedly offered the distributors, who were released after a short while, to become informers for the police in exchange for money.

The police detained Hakan Kemaloğlu, İdris Karademir, Haydar Şahin and Mahsun Eldemir, staff of Yedinci Gündem and reporters Zeriman Dağdelen, İhsan Polat, Bayram Arslan and Fatih Atabey on 13 December. The detainees were released 4 hours later.

The police raided the representation offices of the newspaper Yedinci Gündem and journal Özgür Halk in Batman on 26 December. In the raid, the police detained İrfan Aydın, representative of Yedinci Gündem and Kemal Onar, representative of Özgür Halk. The police officers seized many publications and documents during the raid.

Newspaper Yeni Evrensel

The newspaper Yeni Evrensel was first released on 25 September 1998 and confiscation orders were issued for many of its 1016 issues. The distribution of the newspaper in the State of Emergency Region was banned on 27 April 2000. The newspaper encountered 68 trials because of news reports and articles published. In 18 trials that ended in the year 2001 Ali Çalışkan and Bülent Falakoğlu, editors-in-chiefs, and Fevzi Saygılı, owner of the newspaper, were fined TL 6. 273 billion. Yeni Evrensel stopped publishing on 22 July.

On 21 March the Court of Cassation confirmed the decision of Istanbul SSC for the closure of the newspaper Yeni Evrensel for a period of one week, and the decision came into force on the same day. The decision of closure was given in connection with a news report entitled “I Must Definitely Follow” published on 8 January 2000 on the occasion of the anniversary of the killing of journalist Metin Göktepe. The article allegedly “presented those, who struggle against terror as targets to illegal organizations”. The article criticized that those who were responsible for the murder of Metin Göktepe, particularly Orhan Taşanlar, then Chief of Istanbul Police, and Kemal Bayrak, then Deputy Chief of Istanbul Police, had not been prosecuted. The police prevented the press statement to be held in Malatya office of the newspaper on 24 March.

The police detained Savaş Velioğlu, reporter with the newspaper Yeni Evrensel, and lawyer Fevzi Saygılı, owner of the newspaper, when they followed the press statement of the EMEP Bahçelievler District Organization on 1 March in protest of the increase in prices. Velioğlu was released in the evening the same day and Saygılı on 12 March.

Düzgün Akbaba, reporter of the newspaper in Erzincan, was detained on 1 March at SSK Hospital, where he went for a news report. Akbaba, against whom an official complaint had allegedly been lodged, was released on the same day.

Jülide Kalıç, reporter with the newspaper Yeni Evrensel, was detained during the commemoration ceremonies for Hacı Bektaş-ı Veli on 17 August 2000 in Hacıbektaş, Nevşehir. Kalıç stated that she had been detained under beatings and kept in custody for 24 hours. Although she stated that she was a journalist, she had been beaten, insulted and threatened in custody and her press card and camera films had been seized. The trial launched against Kalıç on charges of “resisting police officers” at Ankara Penal Court No. 24 did not end in 2001.

Erdoğan Koşan, reporter with the newspaper Yeni Evrensel, was reportedly beaten and threatened with death by plainclothes policemen on 13 April and 22 May.

Policemen and the owners of the company Burak Textile threatened Hüseyin Kırcal, reporter with the newspaper Yeni Evrensel, while documenting the action of workers at that company on 10 July in Istanbul.

Newspaper Günlük Evrensel

The newspaper Günlük Evrensel was banned entry to the State of Emergency Region on 24 July, one day after it started its press life. On 8 September, the decision of closure of the newspaper “Yeni Evrensel” for a period of one month was communicated to the lawyers of the newspaper, which had already closed down on 22 July. The communication claimed that Günlük Evrensel was the successor of Yeni Evrensel and the closure decision should be executed against this paper. Günlük Evrensel was confiscated every day for 30 days starting from 8 September 2001 by the decision of Istanbul Zeytinburnu Penal Court. Additionally, Fevzi Saygılı, owner of the newspaper, and Taylan Bilgiç, editor-in-chief of the newspaper, faced 19 trials in connection with these confiscations. The final hearing of the trials was held at Zeytinburnu Penal Court No. 2 on 26 December 2001. The court examined the relevant issues of the newspaper and taking into account the defense of Günlük Evrensel decided that the newspaper was not the successor of Yeni Evrensel. The prosecutor also demanded the acquittal of the defendants and the court acquitted Saygılı and Bilgiç.

Adnan Mutlu, distributor of the newspaper Günlük Evrensel, was detained while selling copies of the newspaper in Sincan, Ankara, on 4 October. Mutlu was subsequently released.

Nuran Doğan, reporter with the newspaper Yaşamda Atılım, and Hacer Yüksel, reporter with Günlük Evrensel, were detained while following the HRA members who were collecting signatures on Istiklal Street in Istanbul on “No to War” on 6 October. Doğan and Yüksel were subsequently released.

Yusuf Ziya Özışık, reporter with Günlük Evrensel, was detained while shooting the anti-war action of tradesmen in Eyüp on 17 October and was released after a short while.

Newspaper Yaşamda Atılım

Varyos Publishing House first released newspaper Yaşamda Atılım on 22 July 2000 and till the end of 2001 all 32 issues of the newspaper were confiscated. The newspaper faced 56 trials in 2001 due to news reports and articles published in the newspaper. Twenty-two trials were launched in connection with special editions of the newspaper Yaşamda Atılım and the journals “Özgürleşmek İçin Özgür Genç” and “Teoride Doğrultu”, released by the same publishing house. Fifty-eight of the trials continue at Istanbul SSC, 17 at Fatih Penal Court No. 2 and 2 at Istanbul Criminal Court No. 2.

Most of the trials at the SSC were launched under Articles 169 and 312 of the TPC, 6/2 and 8 of the Law numbered 3713 and Appendix 2/1 of the Press Law.

The Adana office of the newspaper Yaşamda Atılım was raided many times throughout the year. Erdal Gülmüş, Antep representative of the newspaper, was detained on 27 February for “distributing a banned announcement about F-type prisons and death fasts. Gülmüş was arrested on 1 March.

Reporter Yüksel Bulut was detained in the raid against the Antep office of the newspaper on 27 April and he was arrested the following day.

Ayşegül Yüksel and Hüseyin Öğretmen, staff members of Ankara office of Yaşamda Atılım were detained in the raid against the office on 6 June. Yüksel was subsequently released, but Ankara SSC arrested Öğretmen on 13 June.

In the raid against the Mersin office of the newspaper on 11 October representative Uğraş Güzel was detained. On the same day, Bursa distributor of the newspaper, Veli Güngör’s house was raided. On 16 October the Iskenderun office was raided and representative Murat Alver was detained. He was released the following day.

In the raid against the Ankara office of the newspaper Yaşamda Atılım on 6 November, representative Münevver İltemur and reporter Server Orman were detained. İltemur and Orman were released on 10 November.

The Istanbul office of the newspaper was raided on 29 November and staff members Mehmet Şencan, Hüseyin Akçiçek and Ulaş Bekar were detained. Şencan, Akçiçek and Bekar were released on 3 December.

The police raided offices of the newspapers “Devrimci Demokrasi”, “Mücadele Birliği”, “Alınteri” and “Atılım” in Istanbul on 10 October. In the raid against the office of “Alınteri”, a woman named Melek Tukur was detained. Melek Tukur had participated in the death fast action in prison and she had been released in June. The police raided the Iskenderun office of the newspaper “Alınteri” on the same day and detained Emel Gültekin. Tukur and Gültekin were released the following day.

Newspaper Devrim Yolunda İşçi-Köylü (Workers-Peasants on the Path of Revolution)

The first issue of the newspaper Devrim Yolunda İşçi-Köylü was released on 27 April 2001 and 17 of its 18 issues released till the end of 2001 were confiscated. The newspaper faced 18 trials in connection with news reports and articles published in the newspaper.

In Ankara, the police raided the houses of and detained Derya Binay, Ankara representative of the newspaper Devrim Yolunda İşçi-Köylü, Gülşen Aslan Fadime Kılıç and Tamiş Akpınar, executives of Tohum Cultural Center, and SES member Cevdet Avcı on 27 April. They were arrested on 4 May.

Memik Horoz, Director of the newspaper Devrim Yolunda İşçi-Köylü, was detained in Istanbul on 18 June. Memik Horoz was taken to Tokat and arrested on 24 June. He was first put in Tokat Prison and subsequently in Sincan F-type Prison. Horoz was put on trial at Ankara SSC on charges of “membership to an illegal organization”. In the hearing on 3 September, a repentant named Erol Çetin testified about Memik Horoz. Çetin claimed that Horoz had made an interview with TIKKO militants in Tokat using the code name “Zeki”. Horoz said the following about Çetin’s testimony: “Erol Çetin stayed in Tokat Prison where I spent some time. We had the opportunity to talk in prison. Çetin told me that the gendarmerie had prepared two testimonies and one of them included accusations against me. Çetin told me that if he were to sign the testimony, which put blame on me, he would get a lower sentence. It is clear now that Çetin testified what he memorized”. Lawyer Filiz Kalaycı pointed out that the interviews in question had been published in the journal “Özgür Gelecek”, not in the newspaper Devrim Yolunda İşçi-Köylü, and that Ali Kemal Kahraman, editor-in-chief of the journal Özgür Gelecek had been prosecuted at Istanbul SSC on claims of “aiding an illegal organization” in connection with the interviews. Kalaycı also stated that Metin Çiçek, reporter with “Özgür Gelecek”, had accepted that he made the interviews and he had sent his identity information to Istanbul SSC. Lawyer Filiz Kalaycı demanded the release of her client in the hearing on 28 November. The SSC refused to release Horoz and adjourned the trial to a later date for the completion of lacking documents and preparation of defenses.

Betül Kılıçaslan, Samsun representative of the newspaper Devrim Yolunda İşçi-Köylü, was detained in Bafra, where she went for a news report on 28 June, on charges of “working for an illegal press organization”. The prosecution office released Aslan in the evening of the same day.

The police raided the office of Devrim Yolunda İşçi-Köylü in Turhal, Tokat on 24 July and detained Sefagül Keskin and Derya Gökmen. Keskin and Gökmen were released in the morning on 25 July, but detained again on the same day. They were put on trial for keeping banned publications.

Selma Kaan and Murat Deniz, staff of the newspaper Devrim Yolunda İşçi-Köylü, were detained in Istanbul on 3 September. In the evening of the same day police raided the house of Kaan. When Ufuk Balçık, staff of the newspaper, asked the policemen whether they had authorization for searching, the policemen reportedly threatened him with death by putting a gun to his head. Besides Balçık, other people in the house, namely, Seza Horuz, Sema Gül, Kamil Taş, Kitty Holland from the Irish Times, Julien Behal and Alia Bruno were detained. Holland and Behal were deported on 6 September and Alia Bruno was released. Deniz, Kaan and Taş were released on 7 September to be prosecuted without arrest.

Ufuk Balçık and Kamil Taş were detained again at Yenibosna Cemevi, where they went to make news reports of the funeral of Sinan Günel, a TIKKO militant, who was killed in a clash in the vicinity of Tokat. Balçık and Taş were released on 10 September.

Derya Gökmen and Sefagül Keskin, reporters for the Turhal office of Devrim Yolunda İşçi-Köylü, were detained in Almus, where they went to make a news report on 8 September. Gökmen and Keskin were released on 9 September. On 2 October, the police raided the house of Sefagül Keskin once again and detained her and Malatya reporter Lütfiye Uluk. Keskin and Uluk were arrested on 5 October and put on trial on claims of “membership to an illegal organization”. Keskin and Uluk were released in the hearing on 20 November at Ankara SSC. As reasons for the charges that Keskin and Uluk were “members of an illegal organization” the indictment cited that the phone numbers of lawyers Zeynel Polat and Filiz Kalaycı and HRA Elazığ branch Chairman Cafer Demir were registered in the mobile phones of both defendants. Another reason was that pictures of Almus were found in the Turhal office of the newspaper.

The police raided the headquarters of the newspaper Devrim Yolunda İşçi-Köylü on 4 September and detained Barış Açıkel, editor-in-chief of the newspaper, and staff members Beşir Kasap, Erdinç Özbay and Güven Genç. Istanbul SSC prosecution office released the detainees on 7 September.

Newspaper Azadiya Welat and Journal Pine

Azadiya Welat started press life on 21 January 1996 and the pressure on the newspaper and its workers lessened in 2001 in comparison to previous years, but still continued.

The ban on Azadiya Welat and the journal Pine concerning admission to the State of Emergency Region continued in 2001. Because of the prevention, the competent persons of the newspaper and journal attempted to send their publications to the region in form of a series of books. However, Diyarbakır Police HQ prevented the entrance of the publications to the region on the grounds that “no declaration was given with regards to the relevant books.” The journals “Sator” and “Rojeva Welat”, sent by the competent persons of the Azadiya Welat and Pine to the region were also banned. Thereupon, the publications cited below were sent to the region in the form of a series of books and Beyoğlu Public Prosecution Office launched trials against them:

Rojev Kurdî, Rojev Baş, Rojev Yek, Rojev Çağ, Rojev Nûçe, Rojevname, Rojev Salveger, Rojev Bûyer, Rojev Jiyan, Rojev Rojî, Rojev Strasbûrg, Rojev Bang, Rojevdank, Rojevziman, Rojev Amed, El Sator, Sator Time, Sator Best, Sator Man and Sator Kéş.

Meanwhile, the trial launched at Diyarbakır Penal Court against Suat Özalp, Ali Kemal Çalışkan and Mehmet Karataş for “bringing illegal publications into the State of Emergency Region” did not end within the year 2001.

At the end of the year 2000 the Azadiya Welat released the diary Pine 2001. Van SSC issued a confiscation decision against the diary on 20 December 2000 and the relevant trial launched at Istanbul SSC ended in acquittal on 5 April.

The police raided the Diyarbakır office of Azadiya Welat and Pine on 9 December 2000. In the raid, police officers seized copies of newspapers in the office and detained Diyarbakır representative Suat Özalp. On the same day, Ali Kemal Çalışkan, distributor of the newspaper, was also detained in Diyarbakır. Upon that, Seyit Karabaş, director of the newspaper, went to Diyarbakır Police HQ to discover the whereabouts of Özalp and Çalışkan, but he himself was also detained. Özalp, Karabaş and Çalışkan were put on trial at Diyarbakır SSC under Articles 8/1 and 8/2 of the Anti-Terror Law on charges of making “separatist” propaganda by statements and pictures in the diary Pine 2001. The indictment sought an imprisonment term from 18 months to 5 years. The SSC released Çalışkan on 19 December 2000 and Özalp and Karataş on 15 February after keeping him under arrest for two months. Diyarbakır SSC Prosecution Office demanded that the defendants be punished under Article 169 of the TPC on the grounds that the “nature of the offence” had changed. The next hearing of the trial was to be on 21 March 2002.

The police detained under beatings Sabahat Demir, working at the Mersin office of the newspaper Azadiya Welat, in Tarsus on 4 January. She was kept in detention for 3 days and arrested on 7 January. Demir was released 15 days later. The staff members in the Mersin office of the newspaper, Elif Doyan and Gülizar Bor, were detained on 6 January. Doyan and Bor were released 24 hours later. In attempt to protest the pressures, the staff held a press conference on 11 January and afterwards the police raided the office and detained them. Mersin Brigade Commander and soldiers searched the Mersin office of the Azadiya Welat on 26 January.

On 15 January, Fatma Demirtaş, Çukurova Regional representative of the Azadiya Welat and Adana representative Necat Ayaz were threatened.

In April, the police officers reportedly threatened a franchiser selling Azadiya Welat in Keşan, Edirne, and seized the copies of the newspaper on the grounds that they were “banned”.

Newspaper Dema Nû

The first issue of the newspaper Dema Nû was released on 15 March and its access to the State of Emergency region was banned on 11 April. Nine out of 20 issues of the newspaper published in Kurdish were confiscated.

A trial was launched against Diyarbakır representative Mehmet Eren, reporter Ahmet Bulut and distributor Mehmet Şah Çınar, who were detained in the raid on the Diyarbakır office of the newspaper on 12 March, on claims of “bringing banned publication into the State of Emergency Region”. Bulut and Çınar were acquitted while Eren was sentenced to 8 months in prison in the hearing of 29 December at Diyarbakır Penal Court No.1.

Journal Yaşadığımız Vatan

Confiscation decisions were issued for all issues of the journal Yaşadığımız Vatan published in 2001. The headquarters of the journal in Istanbul and representation offices in Adana, Antakya, Zonguldak and İzmir were raided more than once throughout the year 2001. The staff of the journal was reportedly threatened during the raids.

Aydın Yavuz, staff member of the journal, was detained by the gendarmerie, who intervened in the action of relatives of prisoners, while making a press statement in front of Kandıra F-type prison on 6 March.

Antakya representative Sebahattin Filizoğlu was detained by police officers, who came to the office of the journal on 24 January and stated that he had to testify at the prosecution office. Filizoğlu was arrested on charges of “distributing a confiscated journal and making children sell it”. He was put on trial under Article 168/2 of the TPC.

Uğur Bülbül, Zonguldak representative of the journal and Devrim Kalaycı, Samsun ex-representative, were detained on 25 January at the entrance of Ereğli. Bülbül and Kalaycı were released on 9 February.

Songül Ergül and Duygu Eygi, reporters with the journal Yaşadığımız Vatan, were detained while following the action held by families from TAYAD to be able to meet Justice Minister Hikmet Sami Türk on 12 February. Ergül and Eygi were arrested on 14 February.

In the raid against the Izmir office of the journal on 24 August, Can Erkan, Arzu Yetik, Güneş Mutlu, Sadık Altınöz, Gülüş Demirpençe, Izmir representative Nurhan Yılmaz, Dursun Göktaş, Burcu Kaya and Birol, Çağlar, Sebahattin, Gökhan and Şahin, whose surnames could not be revealed, were detained.

In the raid against the headquarters of Yaşadığımız Vatan in Şişli, Istanbul, at around 5am on 10 December, Publication Director Metin Yavuz, editor-in-chief Ruken Kılıç, the reporters İsmail Özmen and Yılmaz Kaya and the guests Ercan Gökoğlu and Kudret Sarıgül were detained. The journal’s statement concerning the raid pointed out that the policemen had entered by breaking the door of the office with a sledgehammer, although they had permission for a search.

Newspaper Radikal

Minister of Justice Hikmet Sami Türk applied to Press Announcement Institution on claims that Perihan Mağden had insulted him in her article “Death Again Death Again” published in the daily Radikal on 15 April. He asked the Press Announcement Institution to do whatever necessary. The Press Announcement Institution decided to “cut the announcement income of the daily Radikal for 2 months”. When his application was publicized in a news report in the daily, Minister of Justice Türk applied to the same institution once again on 31 May. On 1 June the Press Announcement Institution contemplated the second application and decided to cut the announcement and advertisement income of the daily Radikal for 5 days.

Ali Suat Ertosun, Director of Prisons and Detention Places, lodged another complaint against the daily Radikal. Ertosun complained against the daily to the Press Announcement Institution on 24 July on charges that “the operation in prisons was denigrated in the news report entitled “The Judicial Vacation Starts Today” and the article “For God” by Mine G. Kırıkkanat published in the daily Radikal on 20 July.

On 5 September Minister of State Yılmaz Karakoyunlu met members of the Press Council and told that the practice of the Press Announcement Institution to cut the income of announcement on the grounds of “publishing against the Law on Press Ethics” could not be approved.

Newspaper Yeni Asya

Thirty-nine trials were launched against writers and editors-in-chief of the newspaper Yeni Asya in connection with news reports and articles published in the newspaper until the end of 2001. Twenty-four of these trials were launched at Istanbul SSC. In the trials that ended in 2001, 6 writers of the newspaper were sentenced to 10 years in prison and fined TL 682.520.000 in total. The newspaper was punished with closure for 37 days.

Ali Suat Ertosun, Director of Prisons and Detention Places, applied to the Press Announcement Institution on allegations that the Article entitled, “Civilian Organizations and Bediüzzaman” by Ali Ferşadoğlu and published in the daily Yeni Asya on 27 March “violated the principles and revolution of Atatürk and the rules of revolution written in Article 74 of the Constitution”. The institution considered the application and decided to cut the announcements of the daily for 3 days.

The closure sentence of one month issued against the daily Yeni Asya started on 9 September and the daily started publishing again on 9 October.

Pressures on Local Media

On 21 January İlhan Kaya, director of the local newspaper Olay, published in Çanakkale, got wounded in an attack with clubs by an unknown assailant, while he was on his way home with his wife.

Six persons raided the office of the newspaper Batman Ileri, published in Batman, and beat editor-in-chief Kerem Korkmaz in the night of 26 January. The attack was reportedly related to a news report against the Motherland Party (ANAP) Batman Deputy Ataullah Hamidi that appeared in the paper. Korkmaz received a medical report certifying his inability to work for 7 days and he stated that Hamidi had threatened him on the phone many times.

The trial launched against Erhan Palabıyık, owner of the local newspaper Demokrat Baykan, and Sönmez Palabıyık, editor-in-chief of the same, under Article 159 of the TPC was suspended in accordance with Law No. 4454 on Suspension of Trials and Sentences concerning Crimes Committed via Press and Broadcast in the hearing at Iskenderun Criminal Court on 30 January.

Mehmet Aybatılı, former Mayor of Isparta, harassed Muhsin Tufan, reporter with the newspaper Akdeniz (Mediterranean) published in Isparta, in the courthouse on 2 February. The camera of Tufan was forcibly taken and the film inside was burnt.

On 12 February Sıddık Tayılan, reporter with the newspaper Prestij, published in Van, was beaten up at the State Water Affairs Regional Directorate No. 17 where he had been to follow the fuel oil auction by representatives of companies. Tayılan was hospitalized and got 8 stitches to his head.

On 6 March Zafer Çakıroğlu, reporter with the local newspaper Özgür Kocaeli, was detained by gendarmerie soldiers, who intervened in the press conference of relatives of prisoners in front of Kandıra F-type prison. Çakıroğlu was reportedly released when he handed over his films.

A group of people from Alperen Society raided the premises of local TV channel Kanal 54, broadcasting in Sakarya, during a live program titled “Ortam (Environment)” on 12 March. Three members of the Republican People’s Party (CHP) got wounded in the incident and 2 persons, who took part in the attack, were detained, but were released after a while.

On 30 March Cengiz Karaduman, reporter with TV channel Kanal 27, broadcasting in Antep, was beaten during the press conference held by Mustafa Taşar, Gaziantep Deputy from ANAP, because of a question he directed to Taşar, and he was removed from the room under beatings. Karaduman was reportedly beaten on demands of Taşar. Likewise, Aydın Sert, cameraman for Kanal 27, and Mehmet Bulut, cameraman for Hisar TV, were harassed and insulted during the meeting.

Bahattin Arı, owner and editor-in-chief of the local newspaper Susma (Don’t Keep Quiet), published in Zonguldak, was arrested on 12 January on claims of “keeping an illegal publication” and making “terrorist propaganda”. Arı was released on 3 April, but detained again on the same day.

Three unknown assailants attacked Recep Çakmak, owner of the journal Temmuz, published in Erzurum, in early April.

Hacı Boğatekin, writing for the newspaper Gerger Fırat published in Adıyaman, reported that the deputy governor had threatened him in connection with an article he had written in April. The deputy governor reportedly said to Boğatekin: “If the reports and criticisms you directed towards district governors were directed towards me, I would make you ‘disappear’ in two days-time”.

Esen Aliş, reporter with the newspaper Cumhuriyet and the owner of the newspaper Bartın, lodged an official complaint on 10 April against Bartın Governor Fatih Eryılmaz on claims that he had threatened him with death. Aliş stated in his petition that in a meeting at the Governor’s House on 6 April, Eryılmaz had told him, “if someone wants to be taught good manners, he gets the lesson. If someone does not want to listen, he goes. I will kill you.”

Ramazan Keskin, Publication Director of the weekly Medeniyet, published in Malatya, was arrested on 19 April because of his article entitled, “The Light of Islam is Everlasting” which appeared in the weekly on 13 April. An order for confiscation was reportedly issued for the weekly because of the article and Şevket Başıbüyük, editor-in-chief of the weekly, was also interrogated.

Staff members of Çarşamba TV, broadcasting locally from Çarşamba, Samsun, were attacked, while they were shooting the illegal production of meat in the installation of Çarşamba Municipality on 8 May. Faruk Tak, owner of Çarşamba TV, cameraman Umut Hızal, and reporter Yaşar Karaman received medical reports certifying their inability to work for 7 days.

Cemalettin Bilgin, owner of the newspaper Yeşil Niksar, published in Niksar, Tokat, survived an armed attack on 19 May.

Samim Özsoy, owner of the Samim TV broadcasting in Ceyhan, Adana, survived an armed attack on 7 June. Özsoy had 5 bullet wounds to his body and was taken to Ceyhan State Hospital.

Following the football match between Rize Çayspor and Telekomspor on 14 June, the police attacked Alihan Telatar, Rize chief of the newspaper Karadeniz and sports reporter for the internet site www.rizede.com, and Mustafa Bayrak, Rize reporter of the daily Akşam.

Yücel Bayluk, cameraman of Kanal A, a local TV channel broadcasting in Çukurova, was beaten on 20 May while he was filming the press conference of workers who had been fired from work. Personnel from the company that had dismissed the workers reportedly beat Bayluk. Bayluk was hospitalized and had 15 stitches to his head.

Halil Şahin, editor-in-chief of the newspaper Fıratta Yaşam and Servet Özdemir, reporter with the newspaper Alınterimiz, were detained while following the protest act in front of the Gaziantep Courthouse on 25 June. Şahin and Özdemir were released late at night without their testimonies taken.

Cameraman Ahmet Aydın, working for TV channel VIP, broadcasting from Antalya, was arrested for not listening to Judge Belgin Ayçil, who warned him not to “shoot” at Antalya Peace Court No. 3. On 15 June the court conducted an onsite inspection in a market place in Antalya in connection with a dispute between the owner and Antalya Metropolitan Municipality. Judge Ayçil warned Ahmet Aydın for a few times to give an end to shooting during the investigation. When he continued, he was arrested upon the instruction of Ayçil. Ahmet Aydın testified at Yenikapı Police Station and was arrested by Antalya Penal Court on the grounds of “resisting an official on duty”.

Cameraman Ahmet Özlü, working for the local TV channel Kanal 2000 broadcasting from Mersin, went to Opet Petrol Filling Installation for a recording on 5 July, but was attacked by the guards of the company.

Akay Aktaş and Alpaslan Şiftaş, owners of the newspaper Dilucu published in Iğdır, and Aydın Deniz, Iğdır reporter with Anadolu Agency, were attacked with knives on 4 August. Muharrem Güven, an ex-staff of the Agriculture Provincial Directorate, and his sons Alper Güven and Mete Güven reportedly Conducted the attack because of a news report about “corruption at the Agriculture Provincial Directorate” published in the newspaper on 18 July.

Batman Penal Court decided to stop the release of the newspaper Batman Ekspres, publishing weekly in Batman, on 8 October. The decision was reportedly taken for violating Article 9 of the Press Law numbered 5680 because the change of address was not notified in due time.

Ahmet Ayvacı, editor-in-chief of the newspaper Güne Bakış, published in Trabzon, was beaten by unknown persons in the evening of 7 October.

Mustafa Karatay, Personnel Director of Istanbul Esenyurt Municipality, beat Hüsamettin Erbaş, reporter with the newspaper Hürbakış published in Büyükçekmece, Istanbul. According to the information received Karatay harassed Erbaş, who went to Esenyurt Municipality to distribute the newspaper, saying, “I don’t want to see you in this building from now on”. On 31 October Erbaş went to the municipality again and was beaten up by Karatay. Erbaş was taken to a health center in the neighborhood and subsequently to Bakırköy State Hospital. Erbaş received a medical report from the Forensic Institute certifying his inability to work for 17 days. Erbaş stated that he had been beaten for having written about the tension experienced during the ceremony of placing a wreath at the Atatürk Monument on 29 October Day of the Republic: “Some citizens and municipality assembly members wanted to place a wreath to the monument on behalf of Esenyurt Mayor Gürbüz Çapan, but some municipality officers and the director in question opposed it. I wrote about that incident. That is why Karatay attacked me.”

Ersen Korkmaz, owner of the newspaper Demokrat Iskenderun and writing for the same, testified at Iskenderun Prosecution Office on 1 November in connection with the Human Rights Panel on 10 December 2000.

An armed attack was directed at the premises of the newspaper Kent published in Kilis, on 19 December. The building of the newspaper, owned by Ahmet Barutçu, Chairman of Kilis Journalists’ Association, was damaged in the attack.

Other Incidents

Küçükçekmece Public Prosecution office lodged an investigation against Uğur Dündar, News Director of Star TV channel and Süleyman Sarılar, director in charge, because of broadcasting the resume of the gendarmerie regarding the investigation carried out following the White Energy operation.

Cameraman Selfet Güner, working for Anadolu Agency, was attacked while trying to picture İsmail Mert, who had been detained in an operation against impropriety, while he was taken to Istanbul SSC. Güner’s lip was split and his camera broken.

In the opening ceremony of in industrial establishment in Gebze by Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) Chairman Devlet Bahçeli on 4 April, some MHP adherents attacked journalists. In the incident reporter Bülent Yılmaz, working for TV channel Kanal D, got wounded to the head.

On 11 April, Metin Kayıhan, reporter with Kanal D and cameraman Adem Gümüş, were wounded heavily with stones thrown in the clash that arose among demonstrators during the march of tradesmen in Ankara. Kayıhan reportedly had an infraction of his skull and Gümüş had edema in the brain. Many other journalists received outpatient treatment.

Plainclothes policemen beat Erdoğan Koşar, reporter with the newspaper Evrensel, during the meeting of tradesman in Kütahya on 12 April. Koşar lodged an official complaint against the policemen.

Ali Kemal Kahraman, editor-in-chief of the journal Özgür Gelecek, was detained on 9 April. He was released on 12 April.

Muharrem Yiğitsoy, reporter with the journal Özgür Gelecek, was detained on 13 April at Beyoğlu Courthouse.

Unemployed journalist Semra Bazer decided to walk from Istanbul to Ankara in order to draw attention to the problems of journalists. On 11 April she was detained at the exit of Bosphorus Bridge, but released after a short while.

Kenan Kıran, reporter with the newspaper Akit, was beaten by unknown assailants in Istanbul on 11 April. Kıran got a medical report certifying his inability to work for 3 days. Kıran was reportedly attacked in connection with news reports about Dinç Bilgin, Chairman of the Administrative Board of Medya Holding and Nevzat Ak, whose name was mentioned with regards to some corruption incidents in land owning.

The Antep and Iskenderun offices of the newspaper Alınterimiz, closed down by Istanbul SSC on 29 March, were raided on 27 April. Servet Özdemir, who was detained in the raid against the Antep office, declared that he had been tortured during the two days he was kept in detention. In the raid against the Iskenderun office, staff member Emel Gültekin was reportedly detained and the archives in the office were seized.

On 4 May Ziya Yıldırım, reporter with Cihan News Agency, was detained under beatings, while he was following the protest act of wives, husbands and children of police officers because of a base station located in a mosque in their vicinity in Çamlıca district, Ankara.

Cemal Doğan, reporter with the newspaper Star, lodged an official complaint with Ankara Public Prosecution Office against Mehmet Berber, Chairman of Ankara Criminal Court No. 6 and Judge Bahattin Özbaş on claims that they had “threatened him, attempted to seize his camera and film and kept him in the court hall for minutes”. In the petition Doğan expressed that he had taken pictures during a trial where YDP ex-Chairman Hasan Celal Güzel was prosecuted. Doğan stated that Berber had yelled at the policemen and doorman to “catch that journalist”. Then, the policemen had ill-treated Doğan and Berber had asked the policemen to seize Doğan’s camera and films.

Kemal Yücel, reporter for the Adana office of the journal Devrimci Demokrasi, held a press meeting at HRA Istanbul Branch, where he stated that he had been detained by police officers on 3 July and had been threatened with death to become an agent for the police.

Some unknown assailants organized an armed attack against the headquarters of the newspaper Yeni Şafak in Bayrampaşa, Istanbul on the night of 4 July. Subsequently, the assailants reportedly called and threatened by phone Yunus Akgül, Administrative Coordinator of the newspaper.

The gendarmerie seized the videocassettes of Özgür Cebe, reporter with Doğan News Agency, and İbrahim Yakut, reporter with Ihlas News Agency, while they were shooting the inspection carried out by a human rights delegation in villages attached to Beytüşşebap, Şırnak on 9 August.

M. Emin Duman, working at the Adana office of the journal Özgür Halk, was detained in the evening of 20 August and released on the following day.

Ahmet Varol, writer with the newspaper Akit, Hamza Türkmen and Rıdvan Kaya, writers with the journal Haksöz, were detained on 7 August on claims of “inviting to an illegal action” in the press statement they made to protest Israeli Prime Minister Şaron’s visit to Turkey. Varol, Türkmen and Kaya were released after testifying.

The police threw tear-gas on people, who gathered at the exit of Beyazıt Mosque on 12 October, in order to protest USA’s attack on Afghanistan. The police also attacked journalists.

The police intervened in the press conference held by the SIP and EMEP at Kadıköy Square in Istanbul on 12 October in order to protest USA’s attack on Afghanistan. The policemen beat Likoğlu, reporter with the newspaper Yeni Şafak, and broke the camera of Ramazan Kurt, cameraman with the Ulusal Kanal.

Taşkın Polat, Chairman of the MHP Ardahan Organization, threw Alper Turgut, reporter with Ihlas News Agency, out of the meeting of MHP deputies in Posof, Ardahan, on 14 October.

The police prevented journalists from following the press statement made on 7 November by the families of Aydın Hanbayat, Murat Şahin, Hüseyin Yıldız, Cemal Keser, Yeter Güzel, Tekin Yıldız and Orhan Gül, who continued the death fast in Alibeyköy. The police blockaded the street and did not allow the journalists to enter the house with cameras and videos. The journalists followed the press conference by leaving behind their cameras. The police also seized the notes the journalists had taken at the press conference.

The police detained Murat Altıntov, Rıza Altıntov and Sena Bayraktar, staff members of the journal Kaldıraç, in the raid against their houses in the evening of 5 November. The journalists were released on 6 November.

Sema Günay, former owner and editor-in-chief of the journal Memur Gerçeği, and Çayan Güner, owner and editor-in-chief of the same, were detained at Taksim Square on 7 November. Günay and Güner were released on 11 November.

Enver Güler, reporter with Ihlas News Agency, was stabbed in the night of 17 November in Pasinler, Erzurum.

Tevhide Akıncı, editor-in-chief of the newspaper Devrimci Demokrasi, newspaper staff Gülten Kahraman and two other persons, whose names could not be revealed, were detained on the way back to Istanbul from Bursa. They had been to Bursa to make a news report about the raid against the house of Hüseyin Yıldız on 11 December, who was continuing the death fast in Bursa following the prison operation in Küçükarmutlu, Istanbul. Şükrü Duman, Fethiye Tepe, Özkan Kaygusuz, Tevhide Akıncı and Gülten Kahraman, who were detained in the raid, stated that they had been tortured in detention. Tevhide Akıncı stated at the press meeting at HRA Istanbul Branch on 14 December that the detainees had been beaten, hosed with pressurized water, the testicles of men had been squeezed and they had been subjected to threats of rape and insults.

Journalists Convicted or Arrested

The data obtained by the Human Rights Foundation of Turkey reveals that at least 13 journalists were arrested in 2001.

The names of these journalists and the media institution they worked for are as follows:

Memik Horoz, editor-in-chief of the journal Devrim Yolunda İşçi Köylü (Workers and Peasants on the Revolutionary Path); Metin Yavuz, editor-in-chief of the journal Yaşadığımız Vatan (Homeland, we Live in), Hatice Ruken Kılıç, editor-in-chief of the same, Bursa representative Semra Başyiğit, Adana representative Güzin Tolga, staff members, Züleyha Kurt, Tuğba İyigün, Selami Kurnaz and Özlem Kütük; Adnan Akdeniz Taş, editor-in-chief of the journal Hedef (Target); Mehmet Kutlular, owner of the newspaper Yeni Asya (New Asia); Tayfun Koç, Aysun Akdağ and Perihan Demirkıran, staff members of the journal Ülkemizde Gençlik (Youth in Our Country).

The Report of the Press Council on Journalists in Prisons

“The Report of Journalists in Prison”, publicized on 17 March, claimed that the only journalist “who was kept in prison because of journalistic activities” was Kemal Evcimen, reporter with the newspaper “Özgür Karadeniz” as of 1 January 2001.

The report suggested that the 39 journalists mentioned in the report had been arrested not in their “capacity as journalists”. The report stated that they could not obtain sufficient information as to the state of journalists named Ahmet Özdemir, Ali Rıza Demir, Doğan Ağrı, Özgür Çelik and Tülin Soyhan, and that “until the real situation was revealed, they would be considered within the field of interest of the Council.” In the Council reports of 1997 and 1999 Asiye Güzel Zeybek, Burhan Kardaş, Serdar Gelir, Nureddin Şirin, Mehmet Tari, Devrim Demir and Süleyman Altun were considered to have been “imprisoned for their journalistic activities, but in the 2001 Report these journalists were cited to have been imprisoned “for reasons not related to journalism” although they were still in prison.

Oktay Ekşi, Chairman of the Press Council, declared in the press meeting where the report was publicized, that the Council had cut its link with the Committee for the Protection of Journalists (CPT). Ekşi stated that the standards of the Council and that of the Committee were not in agreement: “If a person has a title as journalist and is also prosecuted and convicted for taking an active part in actions of an illegal organization, the Committee presents that person to the world public as ‘a journalist in prison’”. Eşki stated that they had saved Turkey from the shame of being commonly accepted as the country that imprisoned the highest number of journalists.

On the other hand, the 2000 Report of the RSF, released in April, enumerated around 650 journalists kept in prison in Turkey as of 31 December 2000. In the same month, the RSF made an urgent call for immediate release of journalists Asiye Zeybek Güzel, Kemal Evcimen, Mustafa Benli and Hasan Özgün and demanded “the right to fair trial” for Nureddin Şirin.

Confiscated Publications and Sentences

There was no change regarding orders of confiscation or closure passed on nation-wide and local oppositional media. Following the prohibition decision of Istanbul SSC No. 4 of “publication and broadcast about F-type prisons in written, audio and visual media” on 14 December 2000, hundreds of confiscation decisions were issued against news and articles throughout 2001. The news reports about F-type prisons and the 19 December prison operation were evaluated under Articles 159, 168, 169 and 312 of the TPC and Articles 6 and 8 of the Anti-Terror Law. Newspapers and journals that published such news reports were confiscated; many trials were launched against editor-in-chiefs and writers under the same articles. Certain local media institutions faced various sanctions for not obeying the ban on broadcast about F-type prisons and operations. For instance, certain issues of the newspapers Dost Haber, Çorum Haber, Çorum Gündem, Çorum Hakimiyet and Merhaba, published in Çorum, newspaper Katılım, published in Adıyaman and Fırat’ta Yaşam, published in Antep were confiscated on the same ground.

The confiscation of oppositional leftist media continued effectively in 2001. Almost all issues of journals such as Yaşamda Atılım, Yaşadığımız Vatan, Devrim Yolunda İşçi-Köylü, Alınteri, Devrimci Mücadele Birliği, Devrimci Demokrasi, Özgür Genç, Devrimci Çözüm and Öncü Halkın Birliği were confiscated in 2001 on allegations of reporting on F-type prison and operations, making separatist propaganda, aiding and abetting an illegal organization and publishing statements of illegal organizations.

The confiscation of newspapers and journals, which gave place to news reports and images about the Kurdish problem continued as usual. In addition to oppositional leftist newspapers, many issues of the newspapers Yeni Evrensel, 2000’de Yeni Gündem and Günlük Evrensel, distributed widely, were confiscated for that reason. More than 100 trials were launched against writers and editor-in-chiefs at SSCs and Criminal Courts. Twenty-six of the 28 issues of the weekly Yedinci Gündem were confiscated. The first issue of the journal Science and Politics starting press life in November 2000 and focusing on “Migration” was confiscated.

News reports about human rights violations and criticisms against the army and security forces frequently became the reason for confiscation. For instance, the fall edition of the liberal oriented journal Idea Politika was confiscated on claims of “insulting the army” in certain articles.

Practices of the High Council for Radio and Television (RTÜK)

In early 2002 the High Council for Radio and Television (RTÜK) High Council for Radio and Television (RTÜK) released a statement about the sentences passed by the RTÜK on media institutions from the time of the establishment of the Supreme Board until the end of 2001.

According to the statement, the RTÜK issued the following sentences from April 1994 to December 2001:

• 454 warnings and closure sentence for 272 days passed on national television institutions,
• 49 warnings and closure sentence for 256 days passed on regional television institutions,
• 477 warnings and closure sentence for 2,766 days passed on local television institutions.
• The broadcast of television institutions was stopped for a total of 3,295 days.
• The RTÜK issued 756 warnings and closure orders for 12,904 days against radio institutions within the same period.

Paragraph (g) of Article 4 of the RTÜK Law numbered 3984 that sanctions “broadcasting in a separatist and destructive manner” has been the article most frequently applied. In accordance with this paragraph, 65 radios got 253 warnings and 30 of these radios were closed down for a total of 8,573 days throughout the 7 years. Likewise, 24 television channels received 66 warnings and closure sentence for 655 days against 9 of these TV channels for “broadcasting in a separatist and destructive manner”. Overall broadcasting has been prevented for a total of 9,228 days on claims of “broadcasting in a separatist and destructive manner”.

Within the same period, the RTÜK gave 222 warnings to 52 radios and stopped the broadcast of 23 of these radios for 3,544 days on claims of “broadcasting in a reactionary manner”. Twenty-nine television institutions (national, regional and local) received 103 warnings and 9 of them received closure orders for 2,031 days for the same reason. The broadcast institutions received closure orders for a total of 5,575 days on charges of “broadcasting in a reactionary manner”.

During this period the closure orders that RTÜK issued for “separatist, destructive and reactionary” broadcasting (totaling 14,803 days) constituted 91.3 % of the total closure orders that the RTÜK issued until the day.

According to the information gathered by the HRFT, the RTÜK sentenced 32 radio channels and 28 television institutions to stop broadcasting for a total of 3,786 days, and issued 105 warnings against 69 radio and 36 television channels in 2001.

During the year the RTÜK sentenced certain radio and television channels to stop broadcasting for a total of 1,834 days in accordance with paragraph (g) of Article 4 of the RTÜK Law, which “prohibits broadcast in a manner to incite people to violence, terror and ethnic discrimination and create feelings of hatred in society”, and paragraph (t), which is about “broadcast in Turkish”.

RTÜK punished nation-wide television channels to stop broadcasting for a total of 102 days in the year 2001. An important amount of these sentences were given on the grounds of violating paragraph (k) of the RTÜK Law about “not allowing broadcast that serves special objectives and interests and causes unfair competition” and paragraph (m) about “not allowing broadcasts that could negatively affect the physical, mental, psychological and ethical development of children and youth”. In a meeting in November, the RTÜK decided on the closure of Interstar television channel for 15 days in continuation under Paragraph (k). This was the longest sentence that RTÜK issued against a nation-wide television channel since its establishment.

Some of the radio and television channels that received long days of closure sentence from RTÜK in 2001 were the following:

Channel Malatya: In its meetings on 4 January, 8 February and 21 May, the RTÜK decided on the closure of Channel Malatya, a local TV broadcasting from Malatya, for 190 days on charges of violating the principle of “not allowing broadcast that could incite people to violence, terror and ethnic discrimination, and creating feelings of hatred”.

Özgür Radio: In its meetings on 7 September, the RTÜK decided on the closure of Özgür Radio, broadcasting from Ankara, for 30 days on claims of violating paragraph (g) of Article 4 of RTÜK, which is about “not allowing broadcast that could incite people to violence, terror and ethnic discrimination, and creating feelings of hatred”. The closure sentences that RTÜK passed on Özgür Radio reached 1,365 days. Özgür Radio continues its broadcast from its internet address www.ozgurradyo.com.

Batman FM: On 23 January RTÜK sentenced Batman FM, broadcasting from Batman to close for 90 days for violating paragraph (f) of Article 4 of RTÜK by playing a Kurdish song. The song “Mi Biwazé” of Ezidi artist Bedil, played on 28 October 2000, was presented as the reason for the decision.

Mihr TV: In its meetings on 14 November the RTÜK decided on the closure of Mihr TV, broadcasting from Denizli, for 365 days on charges of violating paragraph (f) of Article 4 of RTÜK which is about “not condemning people for their race, sex, social class or religious beliefs”.

Çağdaş Radio: On 10 January, the RTÜK decided on the closure of Çağdaş Radio, broadcasting from Ankara, for 180 days on claims of violating the principle of “not allowing broadcast that could incite people to violence, terror and ethnic discrimination, and creating feelings of hatred”. The reason presented by RTÜK for its decision was the broadcast of the song “Imranlım” on the radio on 15 December 2000. Hasan Erdoğan, composer and singer of the song, indicated that he had sung the song in his album “Engel Olma Yollarıma Mahpushane (Prison Don’t Block my Way)” released in 1996, and that the song was not about Imralı, but the town called Imranli in Sivas. Upon the initiatives of Çağdaş Radio and artist Hasan Erdoğan and the reactions from public, for the first time since its establishment, the RTÜK stepped back from its decision without a court verdict and on 20 January decided to stop the execution of the sentence. However, the RTÜK decided to close down Çağdaş Radio for 7 days in it’s meeting on 20 January on the grounds of violating the same principle.

Radio Nur: In its meetings on 4 January and 14 February the RTÜK decided the stop the broadcast of Radio Nur, broadcasting from Istanbul, for 360 days on charges of violating paragraph (c) of Article 4 of the RTÜK Law which is about “the principles, democratic rules and personal rights embraced in the General Principles section of the Constitution” and paragraph (g) about “not allowing broadcast that could incite people to violence, terror and ethnic discrimination, and create feelings of hatred”.

Mihr Radio: In its meetings on 31 August and 21 November, the RTÜK decided to stop the broadcast of Mihr Radio, broadcasting from Denizli, for 730 days on the grounds of violating paragraph (f) of Article 4 of the RTÜK Law about “never condemning people for their race, sex, social class or religious beliefs”.

Anadolunun Sesi (Voice of Anatolia): In its meetings in March and August, RTÜK decided on the closure of the radio station Anadolunun Sesi (Voice of Anatolia) for a total of 150 days for violating paragraph (a) and paragraph (g) of the RTÜK Law. Paragraph (a) is about “not allowing broadcast that could destroy the existence and independence of the Republic of Turkey and the indivisible integrity of the State with its country and nation” and paragraph (g) is about “not allowing broadcast that could incite people to violence, terror and ethnic discrimination, and create feelings of hatred”.

Imparator FM: In its meeting on 14 February, the RTÜK decided to stop the broadcast of Imparator FM for 180 days on the grounds of violating paragraph (g) of Article 4 of the RTÜK Law about “not allowing broadcast that could incite people to violence, terror and ethnic discrimination, and create feelings of hatred”.

Denge Radio: In its meeting on 14 February, 22 February, 21 May and 31 August, the RTÜK decided to stop the broadcast of Denge Radio, broadcasting from Ankara, for 105 days on the grounds of violating paragraph (g) of Article 4 of the RTÜK Law about “not allowing broadcast that could incite people to violence, terror and ethnic discrimination, and create feelings of hatred in society”. RTÜK decided to stop the broadcast of Denge Radio for another 3 days for not obeying the principle of “not allowing broadcasts to humiliate, intimidate or slander persons or institutions beyond the limits of criticism” in its meeting on 31 August.

Radio Arkadaş: In its meeting on 21 May, the RTÜK decided to stop the broadcast of Radio Arkadaş, broadcasting from Adana, for 90 days on the grounds of violating paragraph (g) of Article 4 of the RTÜK Law about “not allowing broadcast that could incite people to violence, terror and ethnic discrimination, and create feelings of hatred in society”.

Radio Ekin: In its meeting on 4 January, 22 February, and 31 August, the RTÜK decided to stop the broadcast of Radio Ekin, broadcasting from Ankara, for a total of 23 days on charges of violating paragraph (i) of the RTÜK Law about “not allowing broadcasts to humiliate, intimidate or slander persons or institutions beyond the limits of criticism”.

Media Institutions Shut Down permanently by the RTÜK

BBC Turkish Broadcast Service and Germany’s Voice Radio: In April, the RTÜK allowed the transmission of BBC Turkish broadcast and Germany’s Voice Radio by radios broadcast on the FM band in Turkey. However, in its meeting on 8 August, RTÜK decided to stop the broadcast of the radio channels in question on the grounds that they were defective from a national security perspective.

The decision was reportedly taken under Article 26 of the RTÜK Law, which says, “a broadcast produced in one place cannot be transmitted to the audience by another radio or TV channel.”

RTÜK Chairman Kayış stated that he would bring a law suit against the decision: “To stop the broadcast of these two radios will leave Turkey in a difficult situation in the world and lower it to an anti-democratic, censoring country with no freedom for communication. This damages the prestige and respectability of Turkey. Additionally, the European Cross Border Broadcast Agreement, which Turkey ratified, allows transmission of broadcast via other institutions. The institutions that broadcast for half an hour or an hour are not in the scope of the new transmission system.

Nuri Kayış applied to Ankara Administrative Court on 3 September for the annulment of the decision. But Ankara Administrative Court No. 7 refused his application. The court board took the decision on the grounds that there was no interest relationship between Kayış and the proceeding that was subject of trial. Hence, the decision to stop the broadcast of radios BBC Turkish broadcast and Germany’s Voice became definite.

Following the cessation of Turkish broadcast of the BBC under Article 26 of the RTÜK Law, its broadcast on the radio on FM band was also cut on 17 November.

Hakk TV: The radical Islamic Hakk TV, broadcast from Cologne, Germany, was prevented from broadcasting upon the initiatives of the RTÜK. RTÜK Chairman Nuri Kayış stated that they had made attempts with the North Rhine Westphalia State about Hakk TV, the broadcasting establishment of the Union of Islamic Associations and Communities founded by Cemalettin Kaplan. The German authorities had replied that they had started the official process for bringing an end to the broadcasting of Hakk TV.

Draft Law on RTÜK

The Constitutional Commission started to consider the Law on Establishment and Broadcast of Radio and Televisions (RTÜK) on 17 May. The GNAT General Assembly confirmed on 7 June the draft law that the Commission had agreed on in the first meeting. The law did not bring any substantial change regarding the principles of broadcasting, but increased extensively the sentences for broadcast institutions. The law also made amendments regarding the supervision of the internet. The regulations that the draft law brought about as accepted by the GNAT are the following:

RTÜK Membership: The draft law amends the rule of the existing law, which determined that “the GNAT elects all RTÜK members” and reduced the number of RTÜK members to be elected by the GNAT to 5. The Council of Ministers was given the right to appoint the other 4 members. The Council of Ministers will appoint 2 of these 4 members from among the candidates proposed by the Higher Education Institution (YÖK), one from the candidates proposed by Association of Journalists and the other from the candidates proposed by National Security Council General Secretariat.

Sentences: While the RTÜK Draft Law was on the agenda of the Constitutional Commission, Appendix 8 was added to the Press Law, which amended the law concerning fines. With the new regulation, the fines for crimes committed via the press were increased by at least thousand times and the lowest fine was set to be TL 10 billion and the highest fine to be TL 100 billion. The law specified the ban on broadcasting as the last sentence to utilize and defined apologizing and ending the broadcast of the program in question, instead. In case these responsibilities are not assumed, the broadcast of the program seen as a violation should be stopped for once up to 12 times. Within that period the producer of the program and the speaker, if there is one, cannot make any other program under a different title. Instead of the program in question, another program prepared by the Supreme Board on education, culture, traffic, women’s and children’s rights, physical and moral development of youths, combat against drugs and harmful habits and good usage of the Turkish language shall be broadcasted without any advertisement. In case the law is violated again, the channels broadcasting on a national level shall be fined TL 250 billion and local and regional channels TL 25 billion up to 125 billion, and these fines shall be increased each year by the Ministry of Finance in line with a new evaluation.

The draft law for the first time included sanctions to be implemented concerning crimes committed via the internet. Computer technology and opening a page on the internet, or any article, picture, sign, or image with sound or not, broadcast via electronic newspaper or electronic bulletin were classified under the crimes committed via press.

The arrangement in the draft law that triggered wide discussion was the amendment admitting owners of media institutions and press organs to state auctions. The draft law lifted the ban on people possessing more than 10% share in private radios to get, directly or indirectly, any contracted work from the state or to be involved in any action in stocks and bonds market. Likewise, the law that banned newspaper owners to have more than 20% shares with real persons was also lifted.

Not only the media institutions, but also some deputies reacted against this arrangement. The statement made by the TGS emphasized that the new regulation aimed at buying freedom of the press in exchange for state auctions. And that it would serve to institutionalize the interest relation between media owners and political power. The Joint Initiative for Independent Television and Radio Broadcast indicated that the amendment to be made in the RTÜK Law aimed at turning radios and televisions to servants of the government.

The GNAT General Assembly accepted the Law on 7 June, but on 18 June President Ahmet Necdet Sezer turned the Law back to be reconsidered by the Parliament

The Reasoning of President Ahmet Necdet Sezer for Returning the RTÜK Law to the Parliament “The law envisions punishing with fines acts contrary to the bans defined in the relevant article about principles of broadcasting. As a requirement of one of the fundamental principles of penal law that there could be no offense or punishment without law, the bans and acts obliging punishment should be defined clearly without leaving room for any doubt in the legal arrangements concerning crime. Broadcasting contrary to the principles indicated in the law requires imposing a high amount of fines in accordance with Article 33 of the law. The obligation to abide by vague and in-objective principles would create tension among broadcast institutions and it would constitute an obstacle before accurate and objective broadcasting of radios and televisions and informing the public about the realities of the country and world. Hence, the right of the public to get accurate and objective information would be damaged. The qualifications that a RTÜK member should have, as defined in the former law, were not included in the new text. The condition of having adequate knowledge and experience in the new text is definitely not sufficient compared to the qualifications defined in the former text. The professional knowledge and experience does not necessarily have to be about radio and television broadcasting. It is considered to be a deficiency that members to be elected to the supreme board that undertakes very important duties regarding radio and television broadcast are not required to have accumulation in the fields of press, broadcast, communication and its technology, and culture, religion, education and law. The law stipulates that five of the RTÜK members shall be proposed by political party groups according to the allotment to be determined on the basis of GNAT Chairmanship Council component formula and elected by the GNAT General Assembly. It is a fact that persons having a political identity are usually preferred in such elections. The supreme board is to be under the inspection of the Prime Ministry Higher Inspection Board (HIB). Article 5 of the former law emphasized that the RTÜK had a public juristic personality and was an autonomous and impartial body. The inspection of an autonomous and impartial public juristic person by the HIB, which is attached to the Prime Ministry, is not compatible with its quality of impartiality. Assigning the Council of State with the duty and authority of inspecting the supreme board should be more appropriate with regards to the autonomous and impartial structure of the supreme board. The administrative fines, mentioned to be an income source for the supreme board, are passed by the supreme board. This situation might create the doubt that the supreme board could act partially and arbitrarily while giving administrative fines. The high amount of the fines and the broadness of the upper and lower fine limits would increase such a doubt. Therefore, it would be more appropriate to exclude the administrative fines from the income sources of the supreme board and to pass them on to the Treasury. Extra income of the supreme board is to be transferred to an account at a public bank in the name of the Ministry of Culture, thus a new fund is created. Keeping under discipline the public expenditures and a healthy account of expenditures has an important place in the country’s great problem of struggling with inflation. Therefore, the economic program foresaw an end to fund management, which is widely used outside the budget discipline, and the legal attempts to purify the funds gained momentum. Creating a new fund would not suit the economic program; the transfer of the annual extra income of the supreme board to the Treasury appears to be more suitable. The amount of fines projected for radios and televisions is quite high, particularly for regional and local broadcast institutions. Additionally, when the supreme board applies the ban of broadcast that produces income for up to 3 months, many radio and television institutions would have to end broadcast because of unbearable financial problems. The broadness of the upper and lower limits of fines in the law that are left to the discretion of the board might, in practice create arbitrariness that could lead to inequality, contradiction and injustice depending on differences of comments and assessment. In case a demand of compensation is esteemed to be right, the amount of compensation is to be determined in accordance with the magnitude of the act, not to be less than TL 10 billion. In trials of moral compensation to be launched in accordance with this article, the judge is to determine the approval decision and assign the expert. The lower limit of the compensation is determined by law and therefore the judge’s right of conclusion is restricted, even eliminated. In Turkish Law, it is not an established practice that lawmakers get involved in compensation trials in the field of private law and determine the lower limit. Determination of similar lower limits is special to the penal law. Such practices in private law will become a kind of penal sanction that exceeds the will of the person damaged and lead to unjust enrichment. In compensation trials, the judge is forced to assign an expert. However, even for technical matters, the opinion of the expert does not bind the judge. The ruling of that article is not compatible with the principles of general law. With the new arrangements, a real or juristic person or a capital group can have all or a part of a television or radio institution, on the condition that the ratio of annual average spectators and listeners of their televisions and radios shall exceed 20%. The owners of television or radio institutions can participate in public auctions, can make transactions in stocks and bonds market. Although paragraph (d) of Article 13 puts forward the condition of ratio of spectators and listeners of television and radios, paragraph (e) embraces the conditions of both ratio of spectators and listeners and share of spectators and listeners. This fact creates a contradiction both among the paragraphs and within paragraph (e) itself. The 20% ratio of spectators and listeners could in principle be possible, but in practice it is a very high ratio to reach. The researches indicate that the highest ratio of an annual average of spectators and listeners is around 14-16% and that only one broadcast institution reached it. The contents of the regulations could enable big capital groups particularly to monopolize in the sector of radio and television broadcasting. The fact that the capital is in hands of certain persons and groups allows these persons and groups to have many television and radio institutions. Application of immoderate fines will further make it inevitable that monopolies occur in the audio-visual media. Article 167 of the Constitution indicates that the State shall take measures to guarantee and develop the healthy and orderly management of financial, credit, capital, goods and service markets, and to prevent de facto or contracted monopolization and cartels. The regulations render the prevention of monopolies and cartels impossible. Instead of preventing the creation of monopolies and cartels, the regulations indirectly pave the way for them. It is true that there is a limit of 20% spectators and listeners per year for television or radio institutions; however, keeping the ratio so high and the fact that no television or radio institution can reach that ratio, that limit appears to be impossible to prevent the creation of monopolies and cartels. The monopolizing and cartellizing audio-visual media reaches the power that could lead to injustice in the economic sphere on the one hand, and on the other could restrict the freedom of receiving information. The freedom of the press is a freedom that completes and enables the use of freedom of thought and opinion. Freedom of thought embraces free expression of thoughts, as well as dissemination of them for the information of others. Consequently, the freedom of the press should also be evaluated with respect to depriving readers, listeners and spectators from the possibility of receiving information and learning about opinion. The right of receiving and giving information or the right of access to information cannot be considered as individual right of spectators or listeners and regulated as such. These are collective rights and freedoms of spectators and listeners. The freedom of the press should be protected not only against public powers, but also against private powers. In this context it is the State’s duty to put effective restrictions before creation of media monopolies and to take measures for the plurality of the media. The measures to be taken for sustaining independent and impartial broadcasting are also within the scope of this duty. The media, which is provided with freedom of press for performing its social duties, has to act in acknowledgement of its responsibilities. A media that draws away from a consciousness of its responsibilities through monopolization may divert from its objective sooner or later as any irresponsible power and may become a power that endangers social life and national security. It is also the State’s duty to prevent this happening. Therefore, regulations that do not have the contents to prevent the creation of monopolies and cartels in the audio-visual media contravene Article 167 of the Constitution that bans monopolization and cartelization and Article 172 that focuses on the principle of protecting consumer and violate the freedom of receiving and giving information included in the freedom of the press. When a real or juristic person or capital group can have the whole of a radio and television institution or can have more than one radio and television institution, and furthermore can participate in public auctions and make transactions in stocks and bonds market, this may cause unjust competition in auction or certain transaction tricks in the stock market with the use of the media power. Although the article about the principle of broadcast encompasses certain abstract measures, it seems difficult that these vague measures can prevent unjust competition in public auctions and tricks in market transactions. In addition, looking from the opposite concept of the regulations, we can conclude that the broadcast institutions can broadcast in a manner to support fair interests. From the point of owners of broadcast companies, who participate in public auctions, it can easily be argued that such supportive broadcasts defend fair interests. In this way the media, which in principle is a public service, faces no obstacles in acquiring a commercial character to serve individual interests. There are arguments around the world on the corruptive dangers and threats for democracies posed by the media-free market relationship. In countries like ours where democracy is not perfectly established on strong grounds and privatization is not completed, it is a vital principle that the media does not contract with the State. The doubt that media owners, who are engaged in commercial relations with the State, may create an advantage in getting public auctions by broadcasting in favor of political powers or to the opposite by putting pressure on the political power, makes it obvious, how important it is to protect the principle mentioned above. The most important character of free market economy is the formation of a competition environment. To empower a person or capital group that has many radio and television institutions to participate in public auctions does not fit this character, either. The power of audio-visual media to influence the public opinion and accordingly the high probability of abuse of this power resulted in detaching media ownership from other fields of business and taking the necessary measures for this detachment in Western countries. The predominant aspect of internet broadcast is that it is the most effective field of disclosing and disseminating opinion. There are certain problems in internet publishing such as furnishing the rule of law and protection of personality rights as well as balancing freedom of thought and expression via publishing. These problems can only be solved on the basis of freedom of expression and leaving the control of publishing to the judiciary. As a result, the best thing to do is to determine the principles of internet publishing and other regulations with a special law. If this is not done and the regulation of internet publishing is left to the mercy of public authorities entirely, this creates an inconsistency with the quality of internet publishing. There is no detailed information about the warning to be made to private radio and television institutions that do not assume the responsibilities that the RTÜK sets or about the details of apologizing. This vagueness may cause the sanction to have a degrading and exhibitive manner. According to the paragraph, in case of disobedience to the apology demand of the Supreme Board, the broadcast of the program in question can be stopped for once to twelve times and additionally, the producer and speaker of the program cannot make any other programs under any other name. The speaker’s only duty is to present the program that is prepared by others. Such a sanction on speakers may cause unjust practices. With these arrangements, a supreme board of an administrative character is authorized to restrict freedom of the press and receiving information and the administration is authorized in matters that are in the field of the judiciary. In matters of regulation and inspection, the administration has the power to apply administrative fines or put certain bans apart from sanctions that restrict freedom of a person with the objective of ensuring public order, general security, public interest, general ethics and regularity of economic and social relations. However, with regards to fundamental rights and freedoms such as disclosing and disseminating opinion, and freedom of the press and receiving information, the power of the administration should be evaluated in the context of the Constitution’s approach to these matters. In the last paragraph of Article 26 of the Constitution, the provisions that regulate the use of means of disseminating information and opinion does not include the restriction of disclosing and disseminating opinion. The third paragraph of Article 28 states that the State shall take the necessary measures to guarantee the freedom of disclosing and disseminating opinion. A rule in the same direction is included in Article 5 of the Constitution for the whole of freedoms. Furthermore, the third paragraph of Article 29 of the Constitution establishes that the law cannot put conditions to prevent or make difficult the free expression of information, thought and opinion, and Article 30 indicates that the press institutions should not be hindered from functioning apart for certain offences against the integrity of the State. Although these rules are mostly directed to the press, the objective is not to protect the press institutions, but to guarantee the freedom of disseminating opinion and receiving information. Therefore, the same principles are valid for audio-visual media and the administration should not be empowered to take measures that can hinder the use of these means. According to Article 16 of the law, the program of the radio or television channel that does not abide by the warning and does not apologize can be stopped for once up to twelve times. In case of recurrence, a fine up to TL 375 billion, much more than the upper limit that the Penal Law determines, can be given, the broadcast can be stopped for a year or for an indefinite period or the permission of broadcast can be cancelled. Hence, the fair balance between the action and the measure is destroyed and the sanction becomes an element of pressure. Furthermore, these sanctions are left to the mercy of an upper administrative council. With the reasons explained above for certain important articles, the law, which includes rules that contradict public interest, democratic tradition, fundamental rights and freedoms, law and constitutional principles, is not considered to be appropriate for publicizing and is sent back to the Turkish Grand National Assembly for review.

Cases Against the Decisions of the RTÜK:

Özgür Radyo: The administrators of Özgür Radio applied to the ECoHR in connection with the sentence of banning their broadcast for 365 days passed on 19 March 1999 by RTÜK. In its petition to the ECoHR, Özgür Radio pointed out, “the objection raised with Ankara Administrative Court No. 8 and Ankara Regional Administrative Court concerning annulment of the decision was rejected and the Supreme Court of Administration rejected the decision of stopping the execution by majority. The RTÜK issued the sentence on charges of violating paragraph (g) of the RTÜK Law, which is about ‘not allowing broadcasts that could incite society towards violence, terror and ethnic discrimination, and generate emotions of hatred in public’ in a news program about the demonstrations that took place after the transfer of Abdullah Öcalan to Turkey on 15 February 1999.”

The petition to the ECoHR argued that RTÜK’s sentence had violated the “freedom of thought as well as the freedom of acquiring and conveying these thoughts” guaranteed by the European Convention of Human Rights. For the first time, a ban on broadcasting in Turkey has been brought before the ECoHR.

The case for annulment of the ban on broadcasting for 365 days that the RTÜK passed on Özgür Radio on 25 August 2000 ended on 24 January. Ankara Administrative Court No. 3 decided to stop the execution. However, Özgür Radio will remain closed, because its broadcast was halted for 180 days on charges of “broadcasting humiliating and intimidating or slandering statements about a person or institution beyond the limits of criticism”. The sentence was issued in connection with a program about the Denktash Family on 6 December 2000. The program had given place to claims that Rauf Denktash, President of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (KKTC), had large shares in some hotels in the KKTC, that a great amount of the immovables and estates on the island belonged to the Denktash family and that the Denktash family acquired unearned income of prostitution on the island. The radio did not get any results from an objection it raised and was to close down for a temporary period on 5 August 2002.

Kanal 21: The local TV channel “Kanal 21” broadcasting in Diyarbakır won the case it had brought against the decision of the RTÜK of banning the broadcast of Kanal 21 for one year. The RTÜK had issued the ban for the broadcast of a Kurdish song, Mihemedo by Şivan Perver. Ankara Administrative Court No. 7 decided that the song was a folk song.

RTÜK’s decision had been based on the allegation that the song, broadcast at Kanal 21 on 29 September 1999, “incited society towards violence, terror and ethnic discrimination, and generated emotions of hatred”. Kanal 21 could reportedly not start broadcasting due to some economic problems.

ŞRT TV: Ankara Administrative Court No. 9 decided to stop the implementation of the ban on broadcasting for 30 days passed by RTÜK on ŞRT TV, broadcasting in Urfa. In its meeting on 7 December 2000, the RTÜK took the decision of stopping the broadcast of ŞRT TV because of “broadcasting in contrast to the principle of not allowing broadcasts to incite society towards violence, terror and ethnic discrimination, and generate emotions of hatred” in the program “Agenda in Urfa” broadcasted on 29 September 2000.

Ses FM: Ankara Administrative Court No. 8 decided to stop the implementation of the 15-days ban of broadcasting the RTÜK had passed on Ses FM, broadcasting from Mersin. The RTÜK had imposed the ban in its meeting of 7 September for including a column of Toktamış Ateş “Deniz, Hüseyin and Yusuf” published in the daily Cumhuriyet on 5 May and the press release of 68 Foundation Mersin Branch in their program. Ankara Administrative Court No. 8 heard the case upon Ses FM’s appeal and decided to stop the execution of the decision on 2 October.

On 2 October RTÜK decided on a 7-day’s ban for the broadcast of Ses FM of Kurdish music on 26-28 February and 1-2 March 2001. Ses FM brought the case before Ankara Administrative Court No. 10 to cancel the decision. The court board rejected the demand of Ses FM for stopping the implementation of the decision on 6 November.

Radio Arkadaş

The RTÜK punished Radio Arkadaş by an order to close down for 6 months for broadcasting the song “Cemo” by Grup Yorum on 15 August 2000. Radio Arkadaş brought a case against the decision to Ankara Administrative Court No. 8, which ended on 14 February. The court board cancelled the decision. Radio Arkadaş could not broadcast for 56 days because of the former decision and started broadcasting afterwards.

The RTÜK issued an order of closure of 180 days for Radio Arkadas on 13 December 2000 because it had broadcasted the speeches of 2 students, who spoke at the press meeting organized jointly by Adana Union of Democratic High Schools and Çukurova University Initiative of Associations. Radio Arkadas made an appeal to Ankara Administrative Court No. 7 for the annulment of the sentence. The case ended on 17 May and the court board decided to halt the execution of the decision.

Obstacles for Internet Sites

In 2001 certain legal arrangements with regards to the communication on the internet were on the agenda. For instance, on 7 June the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (GNAT) confirmed the Law on RTÜK, which sanctioned the crimes committed via internet and regarded them as crimes committed via the press. However, President Sezer subsequently returned the Law to the GNAT.

Ex-Minister of the Interior, Sadettin Tantan, prepared a “Draft Law on Duties and Organizational Structure of the Internet Supreme Board” in May. The draft envisaged imprisonment from 1 year to 5 years concerning a crime committed on the internet for both the person, who committed the crime, and for the company providing the internet service in case of negligence.

Even though there was no legal arrangement as to what constituted a crime on the internet and as to what kind of sanctions should be implemented for those crimes, certain internet sites faced hindrance in 2001.

Since 21 September the access to websites of the daily “Yedinci Gündem” (www.yedincigundem.com), the Kurdish site Rojev (www.rojwv.com), the daily “Özgür Politika” published in Germany (www.ozgurpolitika.org), the Kurdish journal “Azadiya Welat” (www.welat.com), the Kurdish Observer (www.kurdishobserver.com), the site of Mesopotamian Cultural Center (www.mezopotamya.org), and the site for Abdullah Öcalan (www.abdullah.ocalan.com) were prevented for the users of providers such as superonline, ixir and e-kolay. The Prime Ministry and Ministry of Interior Affairs reportedly sent a letter to the internet providers on 11 September and asked them to prevent access to the sites in question. The prevention of access to the internet sites in question continued at the end of the year.

Şişli Public Prosecution Office made an application to Şişli Penal Court on 6 December with the demand of ending the broadcast of the journal Idea Politika under the internet address, www.ideapolitika.com on the grounds that the news reports and articles about trials and investigations appeared on the website under the same name. Şişli Penal Court No. 2 decided to close down the internet site assessing the internet broadcast under printed work covered by Article 3/2 of the Press Law numbered 5680. The court board kept in mind Article 162 of the TPC, which regulated the act of “recounting publications regarded as an offence”. In the decision, the website of Idea Politika was placed under the periodical and non-periodical printed works included in Appendix 1/1 of the Press Law and the order to end the publication on the website was based on the same provision. Because a French company facilitated the internet site of the journal, the decision could not be implemented. However, access to the site was technically prevented.

As there was no legal arrangement concerning internet publishing in Turkey, jurists criticized the decision of ending the internet broadcast as it contrasted the principle that “no crime occurs without a legal prescription”.