Sapan ordered to pay an administrative fine worth 135 days over his article “Kayyumlar, kayyumcuklar” (Trustees, little trustees) which he wrote when the Diyarbakır Metropolitan Municipality was under trustee administration

ARDIL BATMAZ, DİYARBAKIR

Tigris News Agency Publications Coordinator Naci Sapan has been ordered to pay an administrative fine worth 135 days for the crime of “insulting a public official” over his column titled “Kayyumlar, kayyumcuklar” (“Trustees, little trustees”) about claims of corruption and irregularities in the sale of land with development permits. Sapan had written the column when the Diyarbakır Metropolitan Municipality was under trustee administration.

In the column, Sapan claimed that then governor of Diyarbakır and trustee for the metropolitan municipality Ali İhsan Su and other members of the commission were engaged in corruption through the sale of land with development permits owned by the Diyarbakır Metropolitan Municipality and Yenişehir Municipality.

Sapan had written as follows in the column: “The age of public administrators is over, it is now the age of little trustees, who take what is left for themselves and spend frivolously. Guided by ‘local collaborators’ these little administrators ‘grow rich’ of whatever there is, whether it is goods, property, land, or real estate. Their appearance is criminal. They are phony. Their identity is dubious. They are robbers. They are pillagers. The tender is the cover, everyone knows about the transactions that take place behind closed doors. Strangely enough, they never lack for local collaborators. They are experts at both their jobs and in theft.”

The Diyarbakır Chief Prosecutor’s Office had filed an indictment against Sapan for the crime of “insulting a public official.” Accepting the indictment, the Diyarbakır 5th Criminal Court of First Instance decided to proceed with the trial using the simple trial procedure. The court ruled that Naci Sapan had committed the crime of “insulting a public official” and ordered Sapan to pay an administrative fine worth 135 days. The court then converted the fine to a judicial fine of TL 2,700 and ruled to defer the sentence.

Sapan: “I underlined expectations of accountability”

Journalist Naci Sapan, who objected to his sentencing by the Diyarbakır 5th Criminal Court of First Instance said, “By using the expressions ‘trustee and ‘little trustee in the article, I voiced some of my criticisms of the public administration and underlined expectations of accountability in the public sector. In my criticism, I voiced my concerns over the administration of publicly owned resources and did not impute any tangible acts or qualities to any person. The article in general reflects my societal concerns over the public order and administration, and the criticism is limited to the responsibilities of those undertaking public duties. The article does not contain any expression which denigrates or insults any real person.”

Sapan emphasized the freedom of the press and expression and said, “European Court of Human Rights and Constitutional Court jurisprudence hold that such criticism is protected for the sake of public transparency and accountability and are considered to fall within the scope of freedom of expression. Therefore, my criticism should be evaluated as part of the right to criticize, which should be protected under the freedom of expression and the freedom of the press. I also think that when assessing criticism of public officials, courts should interpret the limits to the freedom of expression to be broader, rather than narrower. Criticism of politicians should be tolerated and even severe criticism of people undertaking public duties should be considered to fall within the limits of the freedom of expression, as stated in the Lingens v. Austria judgment of the European Court of Human Rights.”

“My criticism constitutes a general questioning of the public administration”

Sapan said, “I think this sort of criticism is consistent with the principle of publicly stated criticism of public officials’ administration in democracies” and added that he had kept his criticism general to inform the public and had not made any tangible accusations or individual attacks. Sapan stated that such general expressions function as a natural check in a democratic system and went on, “The expressions I used are completely legal. Such expressions fall under the scope of public criticism and should be evaluated in the framework to right to voice opinions granted by the freedom of expression. The expressions I used in my column, and which are quoted in the court’s ruling do not constitute a severe accusation or a direct insult against public officials. These expressions convey a criticism of the administration. My criticism through the use of phrases ‘trustee’ and ‘little trustees’ constitutes a general questioning of the public administration, and provides a critical perspective on a system of government and public accountability without directly targeting individuals.”