Expression Interrupted

Journalists and academics bear the brunt of the massive crackdown on freedom of expression in Turkey. Scores of them are currently subject to criminal investigations or behind bars. This website is dedicated to tracking the legal process against them.

Journalist Ahmet Sever acquitted in retrial

Journalist Ahmet Sever acquitted in retrial

Court rescinds its previous verdict and rules in line with Constitutional Court judgment

CANSU PİŞKİN, İSTANBUL

The fourth hearing in the retrial of journalist Ahmet Sever on the charge of “insult” over a complaint filed by former Minister for Industry and Technology Mustafa Varank was held at the İstanbul 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance on 22 November 2024.

Lawyers for the parties were present at the hearing, which P24 monitored.

The prosecutor repeated their final opinion presented at the previous hearing and requested sentencing for Sever. Co-plaintiff Varank’s lawyer Melih Tüfenkçi said they agreed with the prosecutor’s opinion and requested sentencing for Sever.

Sever’s lawyer Oya Aydın Göktaş requested the court to acquit her client, in line with the judgment of the Constitutional Court.

The court ruled to rescind the previous verdict and abolish all its consequences as per the Constitutional Court violation ruling of 29 March 2023 and acquitted Sever on the grounds that elements of the impugned crime did not form.

Background of the case

Ahmet Sever, who published a book recounting his time as press advisor for former President Abdullah Gül had told a journalist in an interview that the social media group known as “Ak Trolls” was at the time directed by Varank, who was an advisor to Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. A case on the charge of “insult” was filed against Sever upon Varank’s complaint, which concluded with Sever being ordered to pay an administrative fine of TL 10,620 and the court deferring the sentence. Afterwards, Sever filed an individual application with the Constitutional Court, which ruled collectively on a number of similar applications. The Constitutional Court said that as the interventions arising from the practice of the deferment of the sentence does not meet the criterion of legality, they led to a “violation of the right to freedom of expression.” The retrial began on 23 February 2024 upon the Constitutional Court judgment.

Top