Tele 1 TV's Editor-in-Chief Merdan Yanardağ was on trial on account of his article series titled “Fascism and Islamist Fascism,” published in BirGün daily in 2022

CANSU PİŞKİN, ISTANBUL

The third hearing in the trial of Tele1 TV Editor-in-Chief Merdan Yanardağ on the charge of “insulting the president” was held at the Istanbul 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance on 14 November 2023. The charge against Yanardağ stemmed from his article series headlined “Fascism and Islamist Fascism,” published in BirGün newspaper in 2022.

P24 monitored the hearing, attended by Yanardağ and the lawyers representing the parties.

The prosecutor repeated their final opinion, originally submitted at the hearing on 18 July 2023, and requested sentencing for Yanardağ for systematically “insulting the president.”

President Erdoğan’s lawyer said they agreed with the prosecutor's final opinion and requested sentencing for Yanardağ.

“I see the indictment and the opinion as a sign of the politicization of the judiciary”

Making his defense statement in response to the prosecutor's final opinion, Yanardağ said that elements of the impugned offense did not exist and requested to be acquitted: “The articles subject to the accusation are journalistic research. That they were published as a series does not make it a repeated crime. Bringing such a charge would mean that no academic study can be published in Turkey. The prosecutor is trying to make the AKP government untouchable, to sanctify it with notions that it cannot be criticized or questioned. I see this indictment and the prosecutor's final opinion as a sign of the politicization of the judiciary. Despite it being clear that the contents of the article in question constitute analysis and criticism, the prosecutor requesting sentencing for me just goes to prove the arguments in my article.”

Yanardağ’s lawyer Bilgütay Hakkı Durna said that the case should be dismissed because it was not filed within the statute of limitations prescribed in the Press Law.

Durna added: “The articles subject to the trial, when considered as a whole, contain political and sociological analyses and can therefore be taken up as an academic study. The opinion of the prosecutor does not discuss whether elements of the crime have formed, beyond providing abstract reasoning concerning the crime of insult.”

Durna reminded the court of the European Court of Human Rights' Vedat Şorli v. Turkey judgment and requested Yanardağ’s acquittal after pointing out higher court rulings that due to being a political figure, the president should be open to political criticism.

Rendering its judgment at the end of the hearing, the court acquitted Yanardağ on the grounds that the elements of the impugned crime did not exist.