Journalist assault trial: Prosecutor demands identification of instigators

In the trial concerning the assault on journalist and author Yavuz Selim Demirağ, who was attacked by a large group and beaten with clubs until he was nearly dead after attending a television program on May 10, 2019, the prosecutor submitted an opinion requesting an increase in the 9-year prison sentences previously given to the 6 defendants who organized the attack, in compliance with the appellate court's reversal decision. The prosecutor also requested that a criminal complaint be filed with the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor's Office to identify the perpetrator or perpetrators who incited the defendants. Journalist Demirağ stated, "The defendants should be given the harshest possible sentence to eliminate the perception of impunity in society and to set an example for Turkey."

Following a trial of approximately 2 years at the Ankara 36th High Criminal Court, the 6 defendants who attacked Demirağ were sentenced to 9 years in prison each for "intentional injury and threat"; however, in a unanimous decision last December, the 1st Criminal Chamber of the Ankara Regional Court of Justice ruled that the defendants' sentences should be increased beyond the lower limit.

At today's second session of the retrial, held at the 8th High Criminal Court due to the closure of the Ankara 36th High Criminal Court, only two of the defendants, Necmettin İnan and Emrah Yavuz, and their lawyers were present. The prosecutor stated that their final opinion was ready, but before presenting it, they wished to ask Yavuz Selim Demirağ a question, asking: "Did the attackers stop and leave because of the shouting of people in the vicinity, or because someone said 'Go' (Hadi)?"

When Demirağ stated that the incident lasted 36 seconds, that he was lying on the ground, and that he heard someone say "Go," the prosecutor then asked, "Could they have continued if they wanted to?" Demirağ replied:

"They stopped because they thought I was dead. I have undergone three surgeries to date. I will have another surgery in the coming days. As a former soldier, I knew how to protect my head, which is how I survived."

'ALTHOUGH IT IS THOUGHT THERE WAS AN INTENT TO KILL...'

After the prosecutor asked once more, "So there was no intervention from those around," they announced their final opinion.

The prosecutor stated that, considering the defendants acted within the commands given to them with a sense of group belonging, fled in the same vehicle, and the planned nature of the event, "although it is thought that there was an intent to kill"; given that they ended the attack of their own volition and that the group of 6-7 people could have easily continued their actions against the lone Demirağ, the principle of "the defendant benefits from doubt" applies, meaning the crime was qualified injury. The prosecutor further noted that the crimes of insult and threat against Demirağ were committed, and in addition to these, the freedom to express and disseminate thoughts and the freedom of the press were obstructed, and requested that the defendants be sentenced to between 5 and 16 years in prison for all these crimes.

The prosecutor also requested that a criminal complaint be filed with the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor's Office regarding the perpetrator or perpetrators who incited the defendants.

WHO ARE THE INSTIGATORS?

Following the opinion, the defense lawyers requested time to prepare their defense, stating that the term "group belonging" used in the opinion was vague, and that it should be clarified which groups and which instigators were being referred to, and for which article Yavuz Selim Demirağ was targeted.

The prosecutor merely replied, "He was targeted for all the articles he wrote as a journalist. The group refers to the defendants."

When asked for his statement regarding the opinion, Yavuz Selim Demirağ said, "Aside from my material and moral losses, I want a decision that will set an example for Turkey by punishing the defendants as severely as possible to eliminate the perception of impunity that shakes both society and the law."

Demirağ's lawyer, Cemal Özdoğan, emphasized that the nature of the crime was not injury but attempted intentional murder, and that the court has the authority to reclassify the crime, noting the following:

"Being followed to his home, conducting reconnaissance beforehand to see if he lived there, striking the critical head area with iron bars and clubs during the attack, leaving him under the assumption that he was dead when he became motionless, and failing to notify the police or health institutions all reveal that the act was an attempted intentional murder. There is no voluntary abandonment of the act in this picture. They left him thinking he was dead. The head trauma report provided by the Council of Forensic Medicine also confirms this. He did not survive by chance."

The hearing was adjourned to January 12 for the defendants to present their defense against the final opinion.

Müyesser YILDIZ

September 30, 2026

News Source: 12punto