The failure to apply the closure measure in a temporary manner violated the Constitution, the top court wrote

The Constitutional Court has published its judgment in writing concerning the application filed against the Istanbul 8th Criminal Judgeship of Peace decision rendered on 16 August 2016 to temporarily close Özgür Gündem newspaper. Ruling on the application on 30 June 2021, the top court held unanimously that the temporary closure decision violated freedom of expression and freedom of the press, safeguarded in Articles 26 and 28 of the Constitution.

In its reasoned judgment in writing, the Constitutional Court stressed that failure to apply the closure measure in a temporary manner violated the provision in the Constitution which strictly stipulates periodical publications can only be closed for a temporary period.

The Özgür Gündem application was filed on 26 September 2016, before the pro-Kurdish newspaper was permanently closed under a statutory decree issued on 29 October 2016 under the state of emergency the government declared following the failed coup attempt of 15 July 2016.

The top court wrote: “The newspaper was permanently closed on 29/10/2016, pursuant to Paragraph 5 of Statutory Decree No. 675 … therefore, the newspaper remained temporarily closed under Article 28 of the Constitution throughout the 2 months and 13 days that elapsed from the court’s temporary closure decision until the issuing of the statutory decree. This period … is longer than the one-month maximum period stipulated in the Law.”

Furthermore, according to the top court’s judgment, had the newspaper not been closed under a statutory decree, it could remain closed for an indefinite period, since the judgeship failed to specify the period for temporary closure in its decision:

“In the present case, the court of first instance ordered the closure of the newspaper, but it did not set a period for the implementation of the measure. The [judgeship’s] decision and other developments that occurred during the application of the measure show that the decision was not meant to close the newspaper temporarily. Despite the provision in paragraph 8 of Article 28 of the Constitution that periodicals can only be closed 'temporarily,' the failure to implement the measure temporarily contradicted the wording of the Constitution.”

The top court concluded that “the interference with the applicants' freedom of expression and press was not in accordance with the wording of the Constitution and was not prescribed by law.”

Click here for the full text of the judgment.