The court, which ordered the release of Arı, also accepted the request to gather evidence deemed to be missing. The trial has been adjourned until 9 October

DENİZ NAZLIM, ANKARA

The first hearing in the case against BirGün newspaper reporter İsmail Arı, brought on charges of “spreading false information” and “violating the confidentiality of an investigation,” was held at the Ankara 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance on 5 June 2026.

Prior to the hearing, it was decided that the hearing would be held in the courtroom of the Ankara 15th High Criminal Court due to the inadequacy of the original venue. Arı attended the hearing in person and was greeted with applause in the courtroom. Seven gendarmerie officers were stationed beside Arı as he took his place in the dock. The hearing, which was covered by P24, was observed by Arı’s family, Ankara Bar Association President Mustafa Köroğlu, representatives of press organizations, journalists and a large number of people.

Following the identification process, the lawyers’ statements were heard. Lawyer Kerem Altıparmak argued that Article 217/A of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK) was unconstitutional and that rulings on human rights violations had been issued in similar cases, requesting that the case be referred to the Constitutional Court (AYM). The court rejected the request.

Arı then took the floor and requested that a judicial videoconferencing system (SEGBİS) be established. “I do not want my defense to be disconnected from its context, so please open the SEGBIS link. I have been held in prison for 75 days based on a few sentences taken from my YouTube videos,” said Arı; his request was also rejected.

Proceeding with his defense, Arı stated: “I have come here not only to defend myself, but also to defend journalism. I hold a press card issued by the Presidency’s Communications Directorate. I have been in prison for 75 days on a charge for which there is no detention order. I have been sleeping on the floor for 75 days, in a cell far exceeding its capacity. Despite the Constitution stating that the press is free, I am in prison whilst the Constitution and the law are being trampled underfoot.”

In his defense, Arı listed the legal irregularities during the detention and arrest process, explaining that the detention order was issued 65 days after his YouTube broadcast on 16 January; the order was issued to be served at his residence in Ankara, yet he was in Tokat at the time on a holiday visit. Emphasizing that law enforcement officers were also sent to the addresses of his wife’s relatives, Arı requested an examination of the police LOG records, alleging that base station records had been accessed without a court order. “The four police officers who came to the house where I was taken into custody seized my mobile phone without a court order. Upon my warning that ‘if there is no seizure order, what you are doing is theft and abuse of power,’ my phone was handed over to my relatives in the courtyard of the Turhal District Police Headquarters,” said Arı, adding that he was subjected to a strip search whilst being transported from Tokat to Ankara. “They told me to pull down my trousers and bend over and stand up three or four times,” Arı said, adding that he refused to comply with this treatment, and requested the court to file a criminal complaint against the officers involved.

While Arı was continuing his defense, the judge’s practice of repeating the statements verbatim and recording them in the minutes caused a dispute. This method disrupted the flow of the defense and led to significant time wastage in court. Following the lawyers’ objection, the court adjourned for 30 minutes to reconsider the SEGBİS decision and ruled in favor of establishing a SEGBİS connection.

After the SEGBİS recording began, Arı continued his defense, explaining that he had been held in police custody until midday. Arı stated, “Only the statement regarding my broadcast dated 16 January was taken. Just as we were about to sign the documents, the prosecutor sent another news report and video, and our previous statements were deleted. It seems the file for my arrest was being prepared whilst I was in custody. Even before I appeared in court, the police were organizing which door I would be taken out through right in front of my eyes. An arrest warrant had already been issued against me before I even appeared in court.”

Emphasizing that he stands by his reports, Arı also commented on the Yunus Emre Foundation story, which is the subject of the “violation of confidentiality” charge: “I was the one who exposed the Yunus Emre Foundation heist. Ten days after my report was published, the General Directorate of Foundations filed a criminal complaint. There were already two ongoing cases regarding the Yunus Emre Foundation embezzlement. It is impossible for the offence of violation of confidentiality to have occurred. Let me tell you something that will surprise you: you were the one hearing the Yunus Emre Foundation case. I was in the courtroom; now I am in the dock, and you are in the same place. We are going through something like a Levent Kırca sketch.” He concluded his defense with the words: “Journalism is not a crime; I demand my immediate release and acquittal.”

Following Arı, lawyer Kerem Altıparmak took the floor. Altıparmak said, “Under Article 18 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), Ismail Arı and journalism are being put on trial to intimidate other journalists. It is as if an investigation fell from the sky. Either the police were conducting virtual patrols, or the prosecutor saw Ismail Arı on X on a public holiday.” Altıparmak, noting that neither the judge nor the prosecutor had examined the content, said, “Do these foundations not exist? Is there no one from the President’s family on their boards? Have they not benefited from tax exemptions? Are there any lawyers representing the President or the foundations making these claims? For 75 days, no one has said or explained what is contrary to the truth.”

Lawyer Ali Deniz Ceylan, meanwhile, drew attention to the Red Crescent reports Arı had produced prior to the 6 February earthquake: “He had written that the Red Crescent was being corporatized and had published a book on the subject. A case had been brought against him at the time, and he had been sentenced. Had matters concerning the Red Crescent been perceived as a form of oversight, we would not have experienced many of the events that followed the 6 February earthquake. There is a public interest in İsmail’s reports. What İsmail has gone through is not normal.” Ceylan requested Arı’s acquittal.

Mustafa Köroğlu, President of the Ankara Bar Association, also spoke at the hearing. Köroğlu said, “One cannot be arrested simply for questioning public authority or for producing critical reporting. İsmail Arı must be acquitted; we are here for you to make the right decision.”

In its closing statement, the prosecution requested that Arı’s detention be continued, citing the fact that evidence had not yet been gathered at this stage and the existence of strong suspicion of a crime.

The court ruled that the statements regarding the criminal complaints raised in Arı’s defense should be forwarded to the relevant public prosecutor’s office; that the existence of the foundations mentioned in the case file should be verified with the General Directorate of Foundations; and that Arı’s video and social media posts should be obtained from primary sources and sent to an expert for audio and video analysis. Subsequently, the court, having assessed the fact that the defendant’s defense had been heard, the duration of his detention, and the absence of any possibility of evidence being tampered with, ruled for Arı’s release. The trial was adjourned until 9 October 2026.

Background of the case

Arı was detained in Tokat on the night of 21 March 2026, whilst there for a holiday visit, as part of an investigation conducted by the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office. Arı, who was imprisoned pending trial on 23 March, has been held at Sincan Prison since that date.

In the indictment filed by the Press Crimes Investigation Bureau of the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office, Arı was charged with “publicly spreading false information” and “violating the confidentiality of an investigation.” The prosecution cited Arı’s statements made during a program on BirGün TV on 16 January 2026 and his social media posts as grounds for the charges. The indictment alleged that Arı’s statements during the program—regarding the transfer of public funds to foundations and the allocation of certain dormitory buildings for the use of foundations—were of a misleading nature to the public. The social media posts subject to the charges included claims of irregularities in the appointment of judges and prosecutors, as well as posts relating to the Yunus Emre Foundation.