Rabia Çetin
Journalist Elif Akgül appeared before the Istanbul 25th High Criminal Court on Tuesday in the first hearing of her trial on charges of “membership in a terrorist organization,” stemming from a broader investigation into the Peoples' Democratic Congress (HDK), a left-leaning civil platform in Turkey. Akgül, who was detained in February 2025 and released in June, denied all allegations, stating she has never been a member of any criminal or terrorist organization.
In her defense statement, Akgül told the court that her only connection with HDK was through her journalistic work, not any form of organizational affiliation. “I have never been, and do not intend to be, a member of any criminal or terrorist organization—past or present,” she said. Akgül listed the only organizations she is a member of as the Journalists’ Union of Turkey (TGS), the DİSK Press Workers’ Union, the Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA), and the Folklore Institution Association.
HDK, or Halkların Demokratik Kongresi, is a political initiative in Turkey that brings together individuals and organizations from a wide range of leftist, feminist, ecological, and minority rights backgrounds. While not officially banned or designated as a terrorist group by Turkish authorities, its ties to pro-Kurdish movements have made it a target of state scrutiny, especially under Turkey’s expansive anti-terror laws.
Akgül emphasized that the indictment was carelessly prepared, stating that parts of it were copied and pasted from unrelated cases. “The general assessment section was lifted from other cases that were separated from the February 18 operation,” she said. “There is no specific allegation about me in that section. The prosecutor tries to link HDK to terrorism but cannot provide a single piece of concrete evidence.”
She also criticized the use of old wiretap recordings in the case file, which she said were obtained by the now-disbanded Fethullahist network within the judiciary and police, known for conducting illegal surveillance operations before their fallout with the Turkish government. “These tapes should have been destroyed years ago. Their inclusion in this file constitutes a clear violation of privacy,” said Akgül. “None of the recordings contain anything criminal—only conversations where I exercised my right to assembly or performed my journalistic duties.”
Akgül also challenged open-source materials used in the indictment, including a list on HDK’s website naming her as a general assembly participant, which she said was merely an informational text, not evidence of membership. She questioned the logic behind the claims: “Would an illegal organization openly list its members online?” she asked. She further clarified that some materials cited in the case actually belong to another person—Elif Akgül Ateş, Secretary General of the Education and Science Workers' Union (Eğitim-Sen)—and not her. “This could have been verified with a simple Google search, but the prosecutor didn’t even bother.”
Akgül recalled that after her detention, she was held in police custody for four days and then imprisoned for three months. “During those three months, the prosecution did not gather any evidence. The case file consists of URLs, half of which are not mine, unlawful wiretaps, and copy-pasted information about HDK,” she said.
She also requested the lifting of her travel ban, stating: “I have left the country and returned three times. If I intended to flee, I wouldn’t have come back. I have no intention of abandoning my country. I will continue my work and demand the restoration of my right to travel and an acquittal.”
Following Akgül’s defense, the court heard from co-defendant Mehmet Saltoğlu, a member of HDK. The prosecutor requested the continuation of Akgül’s travel ban, citing it as a “proportionate measure,” and asked the court to forward the case file to prepare the final opinion on the merits.
Veysel Ok, co-director of MLSA and part of Akgül’s defense team, argued that the indictment lacked legal basis. “There is no concrete evidence linking my client to any organizational activity. Wiretaps that were destroyed years ago cannot form the basis of a criminal trial,” Ok said.
He added that the prosecution’s argument relies on equating HDK with the Democratic Society Congress (DTK), a different platform centered in the southeastern city of Diyarbakır. “The prosecutor provides no justification for this equation. The DTK and HDK have different headquarters, leadership, and structures. HDK is a civil society platform with a publicly open headquarters just two kilometers from this courthouse. It is not an organization, and one cannot be a ‘member’ of it,” he said.
Ok cited numerous acquittals in previous HDK-related trials and pointed to a Constitutional Court ruling that determined a finalized court decision is required to establish terrorist membership at the time of alleged activity. “Even if DTK equals HDK, no crime exists,” he said.
Referring to a 2025 police report, Ok added: “The report itself states that no statements or identifications link Elif Akgül to organizational activities. Even the law enforcement agency working under the prosecutor found no evidence.”
He underscored the lack of evidence after a 14-year investigation that examined 11,000 phone calls, 8,000 text messages, and thousands of emails. Only seven conversations and two messages made it into the indictment. “Attending two meetings cannot be seen as sustained, varied, or intense activity. None of the criteria for organizational membership are present.”
Ok reiterated that the wiretaps were unlawful: “All recordings were destroyed in 2014. There is no opportunity to listen to or debate them in court. Their use violates the Code of Criminal Procedure. Surveillance can only be carried out with strong suspicion and concrete evidence. In this case, the surveillance itself is the first and only so-called ‘evidence.’ Additionally, the law limits wiretapping to six months, yet my client was monitored for 24 months.”
He also noted that the judges, prosecutors, and police officers involved in the surveillance had since been convicted of illegal wiretapping and membership in a criminal organization. “These recordings are, in and of themselves, evidence of wrongdoing,” he said.
Ok concluded by stating the content of the recordings merely showed journalistic activity: “All of these conversations are journalistic in nature—interactions with sources and editors. The Press Law protects a journalist’s right to shield sources. Yet the indictment infringes upon this right.” He cited several phone calls, including one with fellow journalist Canan Rojin Akın, and another about a hunger strike in Istanbul’s Kadıköy district, all of which he said were part of legitimate reporting.
Ok emphasized that the indictment mistakenly attributed news reports written by Elif Akgül Ateş to Elif Akgül, demonstrating a lack of care in preparation. “The prosecution didn’t even check judicial records. This level of negligence voids the legal validity of the indictment,” he said.
He ended his defense by demanding acquittal: “There is no evidence. The wiretaps were destroyed. The remaining materials are unlawful. My client’s actions are strictly journalistic. Any verdict other than acquittal would be unlawful.”
Batıkan Erkoç of the MLSA Legal Unit also addressed the court, noting that forensic analysis of Akgül’s confiscated digital materials found no criminal content. “We request the return of these materials,” he said. Erkoç also submitted a Constitutional Court decision that found travel bans on journalists to be rights violations, urging the court to lift the judicial control order.
Attorney Tora Pekin echoed the request for lifting judicial control measures.
The court ruled to return Akgül’s digital materials but upheld the travel ban, postponing the next hearing to Dec. 4 at 10:05 a.m.
