The case against Arapkirli was launched after Cem Küçük, a writer for the pro-government Türkiye newspaper, targeted him

CANSU PİŞKİN, ISTANBUL

The third hearing in the trial of BirGün newspaper columnist Zafer Arapkirli on the charge of “insulting the president” over his social media post was held at the Istanbul 60th Criminal Court of First Instance on 3 March 2026.

Arapkirli and his lawyers were present at the hearing, which was monitored by P24.

Repeating their final opinion on the case they presented at the hearing on 13 January 2026, the prosecutor argued that the posts in question “exceeded the limits of the right to criticism and freedom of expression and were of a nature that damaged the honor, dignity, and reputation of the president,” demanding that Arapkirli be punished for the crime of “publicly insulting the president.”

Arapkirli, presenting his defense against the prosecutor’s opinion, denied the charges. Arapkirli concluded his defense as follows: "There are no insulting sentences in the post in question. I clearly state that all the allegations in the indictment—that I wrote this on a certain day, that I meant that, that I implied a person, or that I insulted someone—do not reflect the truth. An attempt has been made to create a non-existent crime based on the slander of a dishonorable informant. We, journalists like myself, are constantly being punished with the stick of justice because we criticize all of this and try to tell the public the truth. These unjust lawsuits are being filed because we criticize a poorly run administration, because we are on the side of good in the conflict between good and evil. I reiterate that there is no crime here and demand my acquittal."

Kemal Aytaç, one of Arapkirli's lawyers, stated in his statement, "The prosecutor has taken Cem Küçük as a source and argued that the client ‘insulted the president’. The client wrote ‘You are a very bad screenwriter, you always have been’ in the post that is the subject of the lawsuit. Where is the insult here, where is the president? The prosecutor gave their opinion based on what Cem Küçük imagined. The issue here is not to punish Arapkirli. What will happen? He is one of 85 million people. The issue here is trust in justice. The punishment you will give will further undermine trust in the judiciary. Faith in justice will be shaken. The opening of this investigation, the preparation of this indictment, and this opinion are invalid. Such a case should never have been opened.”

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's lawyer stated that they agreed with the opinion and requested that Arapkirli be punished.

When asked for his final statement, Arapkirli requested acquittal.

The court decided to acquit Arapkirli on the grounds that the elements of the crime were not present.

Background of the case

On 23 October 2024, Arapkirli posted on his X account, “YOU ARE A VERY BAD SCREENWRITER... You always have been.” On 25 October 2024, pro-government Türkiye newspaper writer Cem Küçük targeted Arapkirli's post on the X platform. In his post targeting Arapkirli, Küçük stated, “If you ask him, he will say he did not mean the president. He wants to say that Erdoğan ordered the TUSAŞ attack, but he's too cowardly to say it outright. Our security forces and judiciary must take the necessary action against this person.” Following Küçük's post, the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office launched an investigation into Arapkirli.

After completing the investigation, the prosecutor's office drafted an indictment against Arapkirli on charges of “insulting the president.” In his defense at the first hearing of the case on 25 November 2025, Arapkirli stated, "There is a trial here based on a report and complaint. But there is no crime. We can only speak of a political trial and, as in every political trial, an attempt to silence and intimidate. There is an attempt to score points by treating the report, or rather the slander, of a regime supporter, a small regime-fed informant, as an ‘assist.’ As I said at the outset, this is not a trial for a ‘crime of insult,’ it is a ‘political’ trial. It is an attempt to silence and intimidate an opposition journalist, an independent journalist. I reject the alleged crime.”