- Journalist Elif Akgül and politician Mehmet Saltoğlu were acquitted in the case in which they were tried on the charge of “membership in an organization” on the grounds of participating in the activities of the Peoples’ Democratic Congress.
- In response to the prosecutor’s request for punishment, the court ruled that there was not sufficient evidence regarding either of the defendants; during the trial process, allegations of violations of freedom of expression and the right to communication came to the forefront.
Semra Pelek
The third hearing of the case in which journalist Elif Akgül and politician Mehmet Saltoğlu were tried on the charge of “membership in an organization” on the grounds of the activities of the Peoples’ Democratic Congress (HDK) was held on January 19 at the 25th High Criminal Court of Istanbul. The hearing, which was expected to begin at 10:45, started at 12:38 due to workload.
The prosecution repeated its opinion as to the merits, which it had submitted at the previous hearing, and requested punishment for the defendants. Upon this, journalist Elif Akgül began her defense statement.
Akgül: “Freedom of expression and assembly was violated”
Akgül stated that the indictment violated the freedom of expression and assembly that is guaranteed by the Constitution, and that the opinion also repeated this violation. Emphasizing that there is no ban decision regarding HDK, Akgül said that the prosecutor did not conduct sufficient research on this matter and abused his authority.
Stating that the phone records included in the file were obtained through illegal means by the Fethullahist police of the time, Akgül expressed that these records are unlawful evidence. “As it stands, the indictment and the opinion are a series of delusions. I did journalism, I request my acquittal,” she said.
Saltoğlu: “HDK is a publicly open formation”
Mehmet Saltoğlu, on the other hand, stated that HDK has a democratic structure and is not related to any illegal organization or activity. Saltoğlu said, “There is not even a single piece of evidence related to this in the indictment. Excel files such as general assembly guest lists were presented as evidence. However, these lists are documents belonging to publicly open events,” he said.
Sümeli: The indictment is like a copy-paste text
Akgül’s lawyer Didare Hazal Sümeli from the MLSA Legal Unit stated that HDK is not an illegal organization, and that in the indictment, HDK was accused by being accepted as a continuation of the Democratic Society Congress (DTK), which is accused of being a “terrorist organization,” whereas, contrary to the indictment, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) did not define DTK as an organization in the Aysel Tuğluk and Selahattin Demirtaş rulings. “First of all, there is a discussion on whether HDK is an organization. In the indictment, it is alleged that HDK is a continuation of DTK. We do not accept this claim. The co-chair of HDK, which is associated with terrorism in the indictment, Meral Danış Beştaş, met with the President a few weeks ago. The prosecution of our client due to such a legal formation is a clear violation of rights,” she said.
Sümeli stated that the wiretaps in the file were unlawful and that this situation violated the freedom of communication. She also said that the analyses of HDK in the indictment gave the impression of being “written into Google or ChatGPT and copied,” and that these assessments did not reflect reality.
Lawyer Tora Pekin also stated that the prosecutor misinterpreted the Court of Cassation decision about Aysel Tuğluk. Pekin said, “The Court of Cassation did not say that DTK is a terrorist organization. The prosecutor simply took a police report that was cited in the Court of Cassation ruling as if it were the ruling itself,” he said. Pekin emphasized that there are many court rulings stating that HDK is not an illegal structure.
“We want our constitutional rights to be protected”
When asked for her final words, Elif Akgül stated that the case was an attack on freedom of expression and assembly and said, “As a citizen of this country, I do not want to be accused based on wiretaps conducted by gang members 10 years ago. I want my constitutional rights to be protected.”
Saltoğlu also said that throughout his life he has conducted legal politics as an elected individual and requested his acquittal.
The court ruled that there was not sufficient evidence that either of the defendants had committed the crime and issued an acquittal decision for Elif Akgül and Mehmet Saltoğlu.
