A decision of non-prosecution has been issued for journalist Oktay Candemir in the investigation launched on charge of “spreading false information” over his social media post about İhsan Emre Aydın, the district governor and trustee of İpekyolu

NİMET ÖLMEZ, VAN

An investigation was launched against journalist Oktay Candemir on the charge of “spreading false information” over his posts on his X account about İhsan Emre Aydın, the district governor and trustee of İpekyolu Municipality in Van province. In his social media post dated 2 March 2023, Candemir had written that Aydın, who is both a district governor and a trustee, received salaries from multiple places.

Candemir: "He receives a salary of TL 150,000 in total"

Candemir had written as follows in his post: “İhsan Emre Aydın, whose salary as district governor is TL 40,000, receives a salary of TL 60,000 from the municipality as İpekyolu trustee. Aydın also receives TL 40,000 as the president of two companies affiliated with the municipality and TL 10,000 as attendance fee from the parliament. Thus, he receives a salary of TL 150,000 in total.” Following the post, Van Public Prosecutor's Office launched an investigation against three X users who commented under the post and journalist Candemir for “spreading false information.”

Decision not to prosecute on the grounds that “the elements of the crime did not form”

The prosecutor's office decided “no prosecution” for Candemir and three users who commented under the post. The prosecutor's office used the following statements in its decision of non-prosecution:

“The charge pressed against the suspect Oktay is defined in Article 217/A of the Turkish Penal Code as 'anyone who publicly spreads untrue information about the internal and external security, public order and public health of the country, with the sole intention of creating anxiety, fear or panic among the public, in a way that is conducive to disrupting public peace, shall be punished with imprisonment from one year to three year.’ Considering that there is no evidence that the post subject in question was made with the motive of creating fear and panic, and that the post was not of a nature to disrupt public peace, it was understood that the legal elements of the impugned crime did not form, and for the reasons explained above, it was decided not to prosecute the suspects.”