MURAT BELGE STILL ON TRIAL
Erol Onderoglu
BÝA, Turkey
April 12 2006
Citing statue of limitation an Istanbul court dropped charges against
four leading Turkish columnists tried for publicly criticizing court
decision to halt an Istanbul conference on Armenian issue. But the
case continues columnist Murat Belge.
BÝA (Istanbul) – An Istanbul court Tuesday dismissed a controversial
case against four prominent Turkish columnists who were charged with
attempting to influence the outcome of a trial though their writings by
criticising a court order halting a September 2005 Istanbul conference
on Ottoman Armenians.
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.”
–Boundary_(ID_51ABh99Dsz65NpMAKSPMTw)–