Murat Belge Still on Trial
Journalists Hasan Cemal of the daily Milliyet and Haluk Sahin, Erol Katircioglu and Ismet Berkan of the daily Radikal were charged in December under Article 288 of the Turkish Penal Code with "attempting to influence the outcome of a fair trial" through their writing. All except Berkan also faced prosecution under Article 301 for "publicly degrading the judiciary". If convicted, they could have faced prison terms of six months to 10 years under the charges.
The court decided that according to article 26 of the Press Law, charges against the four were subject to statue of limitation due to the time lapse between the date of alleged offence and when a case was launched.
While it ruled to drop the charges against them, the court decided to continue the trial of Radikal newspaper columnist and writer Murat Belge as the only defendant in a new trial, concluding that the statue of limitation did not apply to his case.
Complaining "lawyers" leave hall angered at "observer" status
The trial which started in tension on 7 February due to the intervention of members of Hukukcular Birligi, a nationalist group of lawyers, who scuffled with the police, continued on a tense note this Tuesday with sorties from the same complainant attorneys.
When the Bagcilar Number 2 Court of First Instance rejected the lawyer group's attempt to become the "intervening party", the lawyers refused to attend the trial as "observers" only and walked out of the hall.
The court with the positive opinion by the prosecutor filed a criminal complaint to the Republic Chief Prosecutor's Office against the Hukukcular Birligi lawyers based on their remarks related to the trial and also lodged a separate complaint with the Istanbul Bar Association.
According to reports from the prosecutor's office complaints were made to the Istanbul Bar Association also with regard to remarks related to the court contained in some defence attorney petitions.
All cases dropped but that for Belge
In Tuesday's hearing the court referred to article 26 of the Turkish Press Law where the Trial Period is defined and it is stated that "cases of crimes entailing the use of printed matter or other crimes mentioned in this law should be opened within a period of two months for daily periodicals and four months for other printed matter."
Agreeing with the arguments brought forth by defense lawyers on 7 February, the court dismissed the charges for the four defendants. But as a statue of limit was not applicable in Murat Belge's case, it decided for him to be tried separately under a new file and a new hearing date to be set.
Non of the defendants were present at Tuesday's hearing where they were defended by a group of lawyers including Sehnaz Yuzer, Turgut Kazan, Bahri Bayram Belen, Gunay Erkan, Selin Ozuzun and Metin Aslan. On the intervening side were Kemal Kerincsiz and attorneys attached to the Hukukcular Birligi.
In the previous hearing, the defendants and their attorneys had argued that criticism targeting the Administrative Court decision cancelling the Ottoman Armenian Conference could not be regarded in the scope of article 288 nor that criticising a court could fall within the scope of article 301. They stated then that defending scientific autonomy could not be accepted as an offence.
RSF reacts to court case
The Paris-based international press freedom organisation Reporters Without Borders (RSF) had issued a statement on the case in support of the columnists, criticising the trial as "a disgrace for press freedom and unworthy of a democratic state," asking for the charges to be dismissed.
RSF also noted that the Hukukcular Birligi lawyers had reflected violence to the case while accusing the court of being biased and serving western observers. "The case was nearly resulting with a fiasco" the statement said. "Hanefi Aktas, a nationalist lawyer and member of a jurists' organisation, threatened the court and accused it of partiality and of backing European deputies, strongly opposed to the trial. Security forces had to intervene to remove him, after which order was restored in court." (EÖ/AD/II/YE)