Providing information to the press regarding judicial incidents

As a result of technological developments, news reports are easily shared with the public. Reporting information about suspects and defendants can rapidly spread the belief that these individuals are guilty.

The widespread availability of communication channels leads to the dissemination of information and documents related to investigations, which creates a presumption of guilt. This negatively affects the status, honor, and dignity of the person under suspicion of a crime within society. Freedom of the press is protected as a fundamental freedom under Article 28 of the Constitution.

The presumption of innocence, as a fundamental right regarding crimes and punishments, is protected in the fourth paragraph of Article 38 with the statement: "No one shall be considered guilty until their guilt is proven by a court ruling." It is important to draw boundaries when public freedom and rights, which encroach upon each other's domains, come into conflict. It is crucial to examine and understand the following issues regarding the reporting of judicial news through the press.

This is especially important for the legal security of journalists.

These issues are:

A - Providing information to the press regarding judicial incidents.

B - The reporting of judicial news through the press.

C - Measures of legality.

EXPLANATIONS

A - Providing information to the press regarding judicial incidents: There is no regulation in the Criminal Procedure Code regarding who is authorized to make statements to the public concerning investigations. Regarding this matter, Criminal Procedure Law states: "There is a public interest in the public knowing the behavior and lifestyle of well-known individuals. In this way, society will recognize those with a political personality and will act accordingly in the future. In the case, while the behavior of the plaintiffs was reflected to the public, it was also criticized, and there is an intellectual connection between the subject and the expression.

In the news report, no accusatory, demeaning, or misleading statements were included, and the press remained within the limits of the 'right to inform'.

In this case, it cannot be said that there is an illegality or an attack on personal rights" (Eren, p. 774; Kartal, “Press-Publication”, p. 122; In the same direction: Court of Cassation General Assembly of Civil Chambers, Date 15.05.2002, E. 4- 413, K. 409, Kazancı Bilişim-Case Law Bank). Yarsuvat, p. 470. Court of Cassation 4th Civil Chamber, Date 14.02.2012, E. 2011/19952, K. 2012/3379

"While reporting the news of the death of the deceased, who was the daughter and sister of the plaintiffs, by falling from a balcony, including footage of the same person swimming naked approximately 2 years before the date of death in the news report constitutes an attack on the honor and personal rights of the plaintiffs, therefore, non-pecuniary damages in accordance with equity should be awarded."

(Kazancı Bilişim-Case Law Bank); Kılıçoğlu, p. 285-289.

In our country, in criminal investigations shaped by the orders and instructions of the Public Prosecutor, law enforcement agencies generally provide information to the public regarding the investigation. This is because law enforcement is the authority that first learns of the crime. The rate at which other authorities learn of the crime is lower compared to law enforcement.

The Prosecutor's Office learns that a crime has been committed when the investigation file is submitted to it after law enforcement has completed its research and prepared a summary report.

Although the criminal investigation is carried out by specialized units of law enforcement, the person authorized to draw conclusions from the investigation is the Public Prosecutor.

As the person who holds the title of legal professional and can best consider the principle of proportionality, it is unlawful for law enforcement to provide information to judicial authorities without the instruction of the Public Prosecutor.

In sensational cases where the public expects to be informed, the police and prosecution authorities take on a dangerous position. Investigation authorities can provide information to the public regarding a criminal investigation, provided that attention is paid to the characterizations regarding guilt.

However, the statement made must also be limited to a certain content. For example, it is possible to state that a suspect has been detained or has made a confession. There is no harm in informing the press that suspects have been caught, detained, or arrested, but the press must act proportionately when filming these individuals.

They should not be allowed to be filmed in a way that involves manhandling or humiliation.

Because providing such information and images to the public will strengthen the perception of these individuals' guilt.

In the circular of the High Council of Judges and Prosecutors dated 18.10.2011, numbered 33, titled "Confidentiality of Investigation and Informing the Press," it was pointed out that individuals in custody should not be announced to the public as guilty, should not be brought before the press, should not be allowed to be interviewed by the press, should not be filmed, should not be exposed, and that the publication of investigation documents in press organs should be prevented.

According to the circular, it is stated that in the stage before the crime is committed, statements regarding security and public order belong to civil administrators and law enforcement chiefs.

From the moment the crime is committed, because the incident gains a judicial nature, in order to ensure that the public is informed correctly, statements regarding investigations belong to the Public Prosecutor appointed as the press spokesperson by the High Council of Judges and Prosecutors, provided that the Chief Public Prosecutor is informed.

Investigation authorities fulfill their obligation to inform by conveying information to media representatives. The authority to assess the extent of confidentiality during the investigation stage belongs to the Public Prosecutor. For this reason, the circular emphasizes that before a press statement, if necessary, the relevant Public Prosecutor or judge should be consulted to show the necessary attention and care to avoid potential inaccuracies.

Since the provision of information to the press regarding judicial incidents and, in parallel, the reporting of these events by the press directly concerns the presumption of innocence, the authorized person and their powers must be legally determined in this regard. In this respect, a clear legal regulation should be enacted stating that the authority to provide information belongs to the prosecutor as a rule, and that law enforcement chiefs may also provide information upon the prosecutor's instruction as an exception.

Likewise, this matter needs to be secured beyond an instructional act such as a circular.

In order for the press to fulfill its duty of informing in the required manner, information must be provided to the press within a certain framework regarding judicial incidents. For this reason, the Public Prosecutor will assess the confidentiality themselves and, by weighing the public's right to be informed about the committed crime against the suspect's right not to be stigmatized, will provide information to the press in a proportionate manner.

As emphasized in the ECHR's Allenet de Ribemont v. France decision, the second paragraph of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights does not prevent authorities from informing the public about an ongoing criminal investigation.

However, when it comes to respecting the presumption of innocence, information must be provided with full discretion and caution. (Allenet de Ribemont/France, 10.02.1995, App. No. 15175/89, par. 38). Ünver/Hakeri, p. 268 (Dokuz Eylül University Faculty of Law Journal Volume: 15, Special Issue, 2013, p.1653-1694 (Year of Publication: 2014) - "REPORTING JUDICIAL NEWS THROUGH THE PRESS AND THE PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE, Res. Asst. Dilara YÜZER")

In our country, law enforcement agencies generally provide judicial news to the press. This duty is performed by law enforcement within the scope of the orders and instructions of the Public Prosecutor and within the framework of the measures and principles set by this authority. The whole issue here is the Public Prosecutor's diligent application of the presumption of innocence circular.