Find news published in the date range below
and and
and and
and and
Clear
Euro
Arrow
53,9477
Dollar
Arrow
44,7286
Sterling
Arrow
63,0795
Gold
Arrow
6245,8354
BIST 100
Arrow
10.729

‘Kurdistan’ t-shirt case: Constitutional Court rules it is ‘not terrorist organization propaganda’

A lawsuit was filed against a person named Abdurrahim Kılıç in the Dargeçit district of Mardin due to a t-shirt with the word "Kurdistan" on it.

Don't leave your news choices to an algorithm - decide for yourself what you read. Add 12punto to your preferred sources!
‘Kurdistan’ t-shirt case: Constitutional Court rules it is ‘not terrorist organization propaganda’

 A lawsuit was filed against a person named Abdurrahim Kılıç in the Dargeçit district of Mardin due to a t-shirt with the word "Kurdistan" on it.

According to a report by DW, the Midyat High Criminal Court sentenced Abdurrahim Kılıç to a judicial fine of 7,300 TL in 2016 for the crime of making propaganda for a terrorist organization.

The reasoning for the decision stated that "wearing a white t-shirt with red and green stripes on the right side of the chest, a 21-rayed Mesopotamian Sun emblem between these stripes, and the word 'Kurdistan' written on the front of the chest constitutes the crime of terrorist organization propaganda."

This decision was upheld by the Court of Cassation in 2021.

Evaluating the individual application on June 12, the Constitutional Court (AYM) ruled that Kılıç's freedom of expression had been violated. While the court ordered a retrial, it also ruled that 10,000 TL in non-pecuniary damages be paid to Kılıç.

The Constitutional Court, stating that the local court had imposed this sentence without providing any other justification, made the following assessment:

"The decision does not explain what the emblem and symbols in question mean, whether they have any connection to a terrorist organization, or whether they have the potential to lead to violence. Furthermore, it was not examined in any way how wearing the aforementioned t-shirt encouraged violence, legitimized or praised methods of violence and threats, nor was any assessment made regarding whether it caused a certain level of danger or directly or indirectly encouraged the use of violence, armed resistance, or rebellion, taking into account the concrete circumstances."

The ruling further stated that it was not possible to accept that the court of first instance had demonstrated with relevant and sufficient justification that the applicant's conviction corresponded to a pressing social need.


News Source: 12punto

Kurdistan jersey