Büyüksipahi and Güger were on trial over a news story by BirGün reporter İsmail Arı that was republished by Cumhuriyet daily

CANSU PİŞKİN, ISTANBUL

The third hearing in the trial of Cumhuriyet newspaper’s Responsible Editor Mustafa Birol Güger and former Editor-in-Chief Mustafa Büyüksipahi on the charge of “insulting a public official” was held at the Istanbul 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance on 9 January 2024.

The case had been launched upon a complaint by former Industry and Technology Minister Mustafa Varank after Cumhuriyet re-published a news story by BirGün reporter İsmail Arı, titled “Deniz manzaralı araziyi Varank’ın ‘kuzeni’ kaptı!” (Varank’s “cousin” lands plot with sea view), originally published in November 2022 in BirGün daily.

P24 monitored the hearing, which was attended by Büyüksipahi, Güger and lawyers for the parties.

“Our trial is a burden on Turkish justice”

The defendants delivered their statements following identification. Speaking first, Büyüksipahi said: “We journalists report according to the apparent truth. İsmail Arı was the first to report on this in BirGün. We published the story and referenced the source. İsmail Arı was tried and acquitted over the same news story. That Mustafa Varank’s cousin won the tender is information that can be found in open sources. Anyone can find the tender information included in the news story from sources open to the public. Furthermore, there are no insulting expressions in the content of the news report.” Büyüksipahi requested his acquittal.

In his defense statement, Güger said: “We published the news story, referencing BirGün, under the rights to press freedom and freedom of expression safeguarded by the Constitution. That we should be on trial despite the author of the news story having been acquitted is a burden on Turkish justice.” Güger rejected the charges and requested his acquittal.

Stating that the elements of the alleged offense did not exist, the journalists’ lawyer Enes Hikmet Ermaner requested his clients’ acquittal: “The complaint filed by the complainant’s lawyer argues that the news story claimed the tender had been granted unduly. However, the news story does not include such a claim. Information on the tender covered in the news story has been published by public legal entities on the Electronic Public Procurement Platform (EKAP) system. Therefore, anyone wishing to do so may access the information on the tender. The content of the news story meets the principles of public interest, apparent truth, and timeliness.”

Varank’s lawyer requested to join the case. Arguing that the limits of freedom of expression had been exceeded, Varank’s lawyer requested sentencing for Büyüksipahi and Güger. The court accepted Varank’s lawyer’s request to join the case on grounds of possibility of having suffered harm from the imputed offense.

Prosecutor requests sentencing for the journalists

Presenting their final opinion on the case, the prosecutor requested that the court sentence Büyüksipahi and Güger as charged.

In their statements in response to the prosecutor’s final opinion, Büyüksipahi and Güger said they had no intention of insulting and repeated their request for acquittal.

The journalists’ lawyer Ermaner said: “To request sentencing for my clients when the author of the original news story has been acquitted is unprecedented. I request the acquittal of my clients, who had no intention to commit a crime.”

Varank’s lawyer said they agreed with the prosecutor’s opinion and requested sentencing for Büyüksipahi and Güger.

Rendering its judgment at the end of the hearing, the court ruled to acquit Büyüksipahi and Güger separately on the grounds that the act subject to the accusation was not defined as a crime in the law.