Rabia Çetin
The first hearing in the trial of Orhan Turan, chair of the Turkish Industry and Business Association (TÜSİAD), and Ömer Aras, chair of TÜSİAD’s High Advisory Council, was held Tuesday at Istanbul’s 28th Criminal Court of First Instance. Both face charges of “attempting to influence a fair trial” and “spreading misleading information publicly” over remarks made in a public speech.
The court lifted the international travel bans imposed on both defendants and granted them exemption from attending future hearings. The next session was scheduled for 2 p.m. on September 23, 2025.
The charges stem from a speech made by Aras during a TÜSİAD general assembly meeting, which was later published on the association’s website. The prosecution alleges that statements in the speech could mislead the public and interfere with the judiciary.
Security was tight at the courthouse, where phones were not allowed inside the courtroom. Due to an attorney’s scheduling conflict, the hearing—originally set for 9:30 a.m.—was delayed until 1 p.m. The session was attended by TÜSİAD board members, representatives from the German Consulate General in Istanbul, and numerous journalists.
Aras: “This is about free expression, not misinformation”
Ömer Aras, the first to present his defense statement, rejected the accusations as baseless. “At age 70, I stand before a court for the first time,” said the veteran banker. “I have always respected the law and the rule of law.”
He argued that portions of his speech had been taken out of context, asserting, “The only valid defense for these allegations is freedom of expression.”
Aras maintained that his remarks—touching on the economy, public disasters like the Kartalkaya wildfire, the Feb. 6 earthquakes, and industrial accidents in Soma and Erzurum—were meant to underline the connection between economic policy and social events. He said he did not share new information, but merely voiced opinions on publicly known issues.
He also clarified that the speech was published online by TÜSİAD, not by his own decision. “I did not intend to incite panic,” Aras said. “I even expressed optimism. The speech contained none of the elements required to constitute the alleged crimes.”
Arguing that the travel ban impeded both his professional responsibilities and the broader Turkish economy, Aras requested the restriction be lifted and that he be acquitted.
Turan: “My speech was lawful and in line with TÜSİAD’s mission”
TÜSİAD chair Orhan Turan followed with his defense, expressing regret over being tried for his public remarks. “I’m 65 years old, and throughout my professional and civil society work, I have strived to serve my country,” he said.
Turan denied that his speech included any unlawful content, misinformation, or interference with judicial processes. He stated that his remarks focused on promoting economic well-being and the rule of law, and were aligned with TÜSİAD’s charter. “It is especially painful to be criminalized for sharing such policy recommendations,” he said.
Prosecution seeks prison terms; defense calls charges vague
Naim Karakaya, attorney for Aras, criticized the indictment for relying on vague accusations and misrepresenting statements by stripping them of context.
After a recess, the prosecutor submitted the final opinion, seeking prison sentences of between 1 year and 10 months to 5 years and 6 months for both Turan and Aras, citing “repeated attempts to influence a fair trial” and “public dissemination of misleading information.”
Defense lawyers requested additional time to respond and asked for the removal of international travel bans.
The court ruled in favor of both requests, lifting the travel bans and excusing the defendants from future in-person appearances. The trial was adjourned to September 23, 2025.
Background: Business group under scrutiny for critical speech
TÜSİAD, one of Turkey’s most prominent business associations, has historically advocated for rule of law, economic reform, and democratic governance. In recent years, it has drawn criticism from pro-government circles for comments perceived as politically sensitive or critical of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP). The trial of its senior figures marks an unusual legal escalation involving civil society and business leaders over public speech.
