Decision from the Board for the Protection of Minors from Obscene Publications regarding LeMan cartoon: Contrary to public morality

The Board for the Protection of Minors from Obscene Publications has prepared a report as part of the lawsuit filed against cartoonist Zehra Ömeroğlu for her cartoon titled “Sex in the Pandemic” in LeMan.

The board argued that the cartoon “offends the public's sense of decency and shame and is contrary to general morality.”

The cartoon titled "Sex in the Pandemic," drawn by Zehra Ömeroğlu and published in LeMan Magazine in 2020, was found to be “contrary to general morality” by the Board for the Protection of Minors from Obscene Publications.

UP TO THREE YEARS IN PRISON REQUESTED

According to the report by Canan Coşkun from MLSA, an indictment was prepared by the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office against cartoonist Zehra Ömeroğlu due to her cartoon titled “Sex in the Pandemic” in the humor magazine LeMan.

Ömeroğlu, who faces charges of “obscenity” due to the cartoon published in LeMan magazine on November 25, 2020, is facing a request for up to three years in prison and a judicial fine of up to 5,000 days.

During the trial process, the prosecutor also requested in their final opinion that Ömeroğlu be punished.

BOARD DEFENDED 'GENERAL MORALITY'

As part of the case heard at the Istanbul 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance, the court requested a report in October 2022 from the Ministry of Family and Social Services' General Directorate of Child Services, specifically the Board for the Protection of Minors from Obscene Publications, regarding whether the cartoon was obscene.

The expected report was added to the case file in recent days.

In the report prepared by the expert panel consisting of Ayşe Yıldırım Kara, Serpil Penez Şahin, Gülser Ustaoğlu, Tuncay Cevheroğlu, and Hüseyin Kaya, the crime of “obscenity” was defined, and it was stated that the legal interest intended to be protected by the provisions related to this crime is “general morality,” which is also expressed as the society's sense of decency and shame.

Arguing that “in obscenity, there is a state of violation and contradiction to general morality and health in the public interest,” it was claimed that criminal measures and sanctions are necessary for public order and benefit.

The panel argued that Ömeroğlu's cartoon contains the elements of the crime of “obscenity” regulated in Article 226 of the Turkish Penal Code, claiming that it “offends the public's sense of decency and shame, and is contrary to general morality in a way that incites and exploits sexual desires,” and unanimously found the cartoon to be obscene.

'GENERAL MORALITY, WHOSE MORALITY?'

Cartoonist Zehra Ömeroğlu, who is on trial, said the following about the report:

“The report that reached the court is flawed and arbitrary. It is flawed because the things said to be in the image are not in the cartoon. There is no pornographic element in the lines. It is arbitrary because it is not clear what it defines obscenity based on.

I cannot believe that five people who prepared the report sat down seriously and decided whether this cartoon was obscene.

The report mentions “general morality.” Whose morality is general morality? In a place where so much immorality is lived out in the open, is this cartoon the one that corrupts general morality? Is general morality so fragile and shaky that it can be corrupted by a cartoon?”

News Source: 12punto