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 Ayşegül Doğan handed down 6-year prison sentence

Journalist Ayşegül Doğan handed down 6-year prison sentence

Doğan, the former program coordinator of shuttered İMC TV, sentenced to 6 years and 3 months in prison on charge of "membership of a terrorist organization"

 

ÖZKAN KÜÇÜK, DİYARBAKIR

 

The final hearing in the trial of journalist Ayşegül Doğan, former program coordinator of the shuttered İMC TV, on the charge of "establishing or managing an armed organization" was held on 7 December 2020 at the Diyarbakır 9th High Criminal Court. At the end of the hearing, Doğan was sentenced to 6 years and 3 months in prison on the charge of “membership of a terrorist organization.”

 

This was the eighth hearing, which was monitored by P24. Doğan did not attend. Her lawyers Ahmet Özmen, M. Emin Aktar and Emel Ataktürk Sevimli were present at the hearing.

 

The court panel did not accept Doğan's excuse letter due to the lack of a medical report and decided to proceed with the hearing, stating that they would not consider Doğan's absence against her.

 

Addressing the court for Doğan’s final defense statement, lawyer Ataktürk Sevimli stated that her client was not a member of the Democratic Society Congress (DTK) Permanent Assembly but that she was made a member in absentia and removed in absentia, and that in the wiretaps in another file, it was clear that Doğan had once said that he had been made a member without her knowledge and that she wanted to be removed.

 

Ataktürk Sevimli stated that contrary to what the prosecutor claimed, the evidence in the file proves that Doğan is not a member of the DTK, that she attended all of the DTK meetings she attended as a journalist.

 

Stating that all wiretaps in the file were unlawful and that all this evidence was not sufficient to prove the crime, Ataktürk Sevimli requested her client’s acquittal.

 

Evidence from before the date of alleged crime

 

Lawyer M. Emin Aktar said that the indictment against Doğan stated that the date of the crime was 23 May 2018, but that the dates of wiretapping presented as evidence were between 2010 and 2014, and that there was not a single evidence from the date of the alleged crime or later.

 

Aktar stated that no one can be punished for an act that was not specified as crime in the law at the time the alleged act took place.

 

Lawyer Ahmet Özmen also requested Doğan's acquittal, stating that all of the evidence against his client had been unlawfully collected and that they cannot prove her alleged membership in the organization.

 

Issuing their judgment after a brief recess, the court ruled in line with the prosecutor’s final opinion and sentenced Doğan to 6 years and 3 months in prison on the charge of "membership of a terrorist organization." The court ruled for the continuation of the judicial control measures against Doğan until her sentence is finalized.

 

Lawyer Mehmet Emin Aktar told Expression Interrupted following the hearing that this was not a trial for a criminal act: “Especially after 2016, the political authority began to ignore the Kurdish issue by making a transformation in the state policy. The state is now attempting to erase all the previous work done, the platforms created, the initiatives taken, the negotiations done for the resolution of the Kurdish issue. It's like they are trying to erase that history.”

 

Noting that judgments like the one in Doğan’s trial were also damaging to the legal system, Aktar said: “[The judgment is based on] unlawful evidence and an unlawful investigation process. [The case file relied on] evidence created by prosecutors and judges who were part of what the authorities now call the Fethullahist organization in accordance with their organizational interests. Those who illegally obtained this evidence have been convicted. While judges and prosecutors are expelled for illegal wiretapping, all these people are convicted based on evidence obtained as a result of these illegal wiretaps. And there is no crime in these wiretaps. The wiretaps concerning Ayşegül Doğan comprise a few phone calls and a few conversations about her and a conference she attended. Apart from these, there is no evidence against Doğan. I hope that this judgment will be overturned by the Supreme Court of Appeals and will not cause Ayşegül Doğan to be deprived of her freedom.”

Top