Marmara University students protested the city walls murder: Penalty issued by the Rectorate
A disciplinary investigation was launched against students who protested the city walls murder. The Rectorate reprimanded the students on charges of "disrupting campus order."
12punto
The brutal murder of İkbal Uzuner and Ayşenur Halil by Semih Çelik on the city walls in Fatih, Istanbul, on October 4, 2024, caused outrage across Turkey, leading to numerous protests nationwide. Marmara University students, wishing to express their reaction to these murders, held a press statement and protest at the Göztepe Campus on October 9, 2024.
However, the Marmara University Rectorate subjected the action in question to a disciplinary investigation on the grounds of an "unauthorized press statement" and "obstructing campus traffic."
REPRIMAND PENALTY FROM THE RECTORATE
Announcing the result of the investigation, Marmara University Rector Mustafa Kurt announced that a reprimand penalty had been issued to the students who participated in the protest.
The decision stated that during the protest, students laid a black cloth on the ground with the words "6284 saves lives" written on it, and also unfurled a banner featuring a sledgehammer figure with the words "the decision has been made" and a caricature of the President. The university administration claimed that the action caused campus entrances and exits to be blocked to traffic and disrupted the university's operations.
''SUSPENSION WAS GOING TO BE ISSUED, A REDUCTION WAS APPLIED''
The Rectorate ruled that the action taken was an act that "obstructs the freedom of learning and teaching and disrupts the functioning of the university" within the scope of Article 54/1/b-1 of the Higher Education Law No. 2547. Accordingly, it was stated that it was deemed appropriate to issue a suspension from the university ranging from one week to one month to the students.
However, it was noted that the penalty was reduced because the students had not previously received any disciplinary penalties, and the decision was applied as a "reprimand" penalty.