Bar Association President Kaboğlu on trial! The legal world gathers in Silivri

The trial of Istanbul Bar Association President İbrahim Kaboğlu and 10 Board members, who face up to 12 years in prison each on charges of "making propaganda for a terrorist organization through the press" and "publicly spreading misleading information through the press," has begun. Starting his defense by saying, "Mr. President, esteemed court; I will not be making a defense, I will be making a statement," İbrahim Kaboğlu stated, "The Istanbul Bar Association has fulfilled its positive obligation to defend the rule of law and protect human rights with its demand for an effective investigation."

The hearing, held by the Istanbul 26th High Criminal Court in the courtroom opposite the Marmara Closed Penal Execution Institution in Silivri, was attended by 9 defendants who are not in custody, including Istanbul Bar Association President İbrahim Kaboğlu, as well as defendant Fırat Epözdemir, who is detained in connection with another case. Numerous defense attorneys were also present at the hearing. CHP Diyarbakır Deputy Sezgin Tanrıkulu and DİSK General President Arzu Çerkezoğlu observed the hearing from the gallery.

The Istanbul Bar Association President and the bar management entered the courtroom to applause. Istanbul Bar Association Board Member attorney Fırat Epözdemir, who is detained under a separate file, was brought from prison to attend the hearing. Those in the courtroom applauded for a long time as Epözdemir entered the hall.

Among the individuals on trial in the case, in addition to Istanbul Bar Association President Prof. Dr. İbrahim Özden Kaboğlu, are Vice President Rukiye Leyla Süren, General Secretary Hürrem Sönmez, Treasurer Ahmet Ergin, and board members Metin İriz, Mehmedali Barış Beşli, Yelda Koçak Urfa, Fırat Epözdemir, Ezgi Şahin Yalvarıcı, Ekim Bilen Selimoğlu, and Bengisu Kadı Çavdar.

KABOĞLU: I WILL NOT MAKE A DEFENSE, I WILL MAKE A STATEMENT

Istanbul Bar Association President İbrahim Kaboğlu began his defense by saying, "Mr. President, esteemed court; I will not be making a defense, I will be making a statement," and continued as follows:

"Since the case was opened due to a Bar Association activity, determining the legal status and function of the Bar Association and bar associations is the primary issue. Thirdly, I will explain the procedural inconsistencies. Fourthly, I will draw attention to the inconsistencies regarding the merits. Finally, I will make an appeal to the panel of judges. The Attorneyship Law imposes on bar associations a dual duty and multi-faceted obligation to defend the rule of law and protect human rights, as well as duties, powers, and responsibilities not foreseen for any other public or private institution or organization. There is no other organization—neither public nor private—that is as functional and decisive for these four pillars as bar associations, which are public institutions with legal personality. For this reason, bar associations can also be described as actors of democracy through law.

Although the right to a fair trial is recognized in the article titled 'Freedom to seek rights' (Art. 36) at the constitutional level, this article and the subsequent articles 37 and 38 are regulated under the main heading of 'Provisions regarding the protection of rights,' and the 'guarantee of a lawful judge' (Art. 37) and 'principles regarding crimes and punishments' (Art. 38) constitute the institutional framework and material infrastructure of the right to a fair trial. Article 40, titled 'Protection of fundamental rights and freedoms' as a guarantee of the right to an effective remedy, can also be evaluated in the context of the right to a fair trial. These provisions are inherent to the characteristics of the Republic of Turkey stated in Article 2. It is the authority and duty of all courts to interpret Article 36, which provides for the right to a fair trial, in the context of Articles 2 and 13, and in light of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. In this regard, Article 138 sets the general framework: Judges give their judgments according to their conscientious conviction in accordance with the Constitution, the law, and the law. Thus, all judges are direct addressees of the Constitution and have the authority to interpret what 'law' is. The Bar Association, which is obliged to protect human rights, is a privileged component of the prosecution-defense-judgment trio in voicing the right to remedy, which is the first condition of a fair trial. The Istanbul Bar Association has fulfilled its positive obligation to defend the rule of law and protect human rights with its demand for an effective investigation."

FROM THE INDICTMENT

The indictment prepared by the Bakırköy Chief Public Prosecutor's Office recalls that an investigation was launched after a statement was made on the Istanbul Bar Association's social media account regarding Nazım Daştan and Cihan Bilgin, members of the terrorist organization who were under investigation for "being a member of the PKK/KCK/YPG/YDG-H armed terrorist organization" and "making propaganda for a terrorist organization," and who were neutralized in clashes with security forces in Syria while being tried in a public case.

The indictment notes that permission for the investigation was requested from the Ministry of Justice General Directorate of Criminal Affairs regarding the defendants, and that permission was granted for the investigation into Kaboğlu and the board members.

The indictment evaluates that with the statement they made, the defendants characterized the terrorist organization members Daştan and Bilgin as journalists and evaluated the activities directed at the aforementioned terrorist organization members, who were neutralized by security forces within the scope of counter-terrorism, as war crimes, and that the press release subject to the investigation carried the purpose of consciously legitimizing and spreading the separatist activity, which is the ultimate goal of the organization.

The indictment states that referring to the killed terrorist organization members as "journalists targeted in the conflict zone" is of a nature that encourages membership in the organization, and includes the statements: "In this respect, propaganda for the terrorist organization was made by legitimizing the methods of the terrorist organization involving force, violence, or threats, or in a way that encourages resorting to these methods, and in this way, the defendants committed the crime of 'making propaganda for a terrorist organization through the press' with which they are charged."

Regarding the post made by the bar association on its official social media account, the indictment evaluates that: "By misleading the public with false information regarding the country's internal and external security and public order, claiming that war crimes were committed by the state's institutions and bodies against terrorist organization members Nazım Daştan and Cihan Bilgin—who are members of a terrorist organization but were portrayed as journalists—in relation to the fight against terrorism, which concerns the general public and is closely followed by the public, they attempted to create a perception and negatively affect the trust felt in the state's institutions and bodies."

The indictment, which notes that the defendants acted with the intent to create anxiety, fear, or panic among the public, states that the element of publicity for the charged crime was realized in the face of the post made by the defendants on a social media account that is open to everyone and can be seen by many people, and that the defendants committed the crime of "publicly spreading misleading information" with which they are charged.

The indictment, which was sent to the Istanbul High Criminal Court with the request that a decision be made to open the final investigation in accordance with the relevant article of the Attorneyship Law No. 1136, demands that the defendants be sentenced to 3 to 12 years in prison for the crimes of "making propaganda for a terrorist organization through the press" and "publicly spreading misleading information through the press."

The indictment also requests the application of "deprivation of certain rights" regulated in Article 53 of the Turkish Penal Code for the defendants.

INVESTIGATION

An ex officio investigation had been launched against Istanbul Bar Association President İbrahim Kaboğlu and board members on the allegation that "fugitive defendants who are members of the PKK terrorist organization were praised" in a statement published on social media.

İbrahim Kaboğlu and the board members gave their statements to the prosecutor's office on January 7, and permission was requested from the Ministry of Justice for the prosecution of Kaboğlu and the Board members.

In addition, within the scope of the investigation, a lawsuit was filed in the Istanbul Civil Court of First Instance with a petition requesting the termination of the duties of Kaboğlu and board members Rukiye Leyla Süren, Hürrem Sönmez, Ahmet Ergin, Metin İriz, Mehmedali Barış Beşli, Yelda Koçak Urfa, Fırat Epözdemir, Ezgi Şahin Yalvarıcı, Ekrem Bilen Selimoğlu, and Bengisu Kadı Çavdar, and the election of a new bar president and board members, in accordance with the Attorneyship Law No. 1136.

The Istanbul 2nd Civil Court of First Instance had ruled for the termination of the duties of Kaboğlu and the Board members and for an election to be held.