Intelligence agency trucks trial prosecutor: A journalist cannot be deceived

The prosecutor is seeking imprisonment of from 7.5 to 15 years each for Cumhuriyet newspaper’s former Editor-in-Chief Can Dündar and Cumhuriyet newspaper’s Ankara representative Erdem Gül on the count of “aiding an organisation without being a terrorist organisation member.”  Noting that Dündar and Gül are journalists, he commented, “It beggars belief that the defendants could not be aware that this operation was staged by FETO/PDY.”
 
 
The trial continued to be heard over images of the intelligence agency trucks that were stopped on the grounds that they were carrying arms in Adana and Hatay in January 2014 against CHP Member of Parliament Enis Berberoğlu, Cumhuriyet newspaper’s former Editor-in-Chief Can Dündar and Cumhuriyet newspaper’s Ankara representative Erdem Gül on the count of “knowingly and willingly aiding an organisation without being a terrorist organisation member” and against Aydınlık newspaper’s Editor-in-Chief Mustafa İlker Yücel and former intelligence supervisor Orhan Ceyhun Bozkurt on the count of “revealing information that required to remain confidential with regard to the state’s security and political benefits.” The hearing at Istanbul Serious Crime Court No 14 that was held in camera on the grounds that there were documents relating to state security was attended by CHP MP Enis Berberoğlu along with the non-detained defendants Erdem Gül, Mustafa İlker Yücel and Orhan Ceyhun Bozkurt. The hearing was attended by Berberoğlu’s wife Oya Berberoğlu and daughter Dilara Berberoğlu and Can Dündar's wife Dilek Dündar as spectators.
 
AYDINLIK TRIAL SEVERED
 
The court bench announced that Berberoğlu's application for recusal at the previous session had been dismissed by the superior court. The court bench then proceeded to announce its interim decision and ordered the severance of the trial against Aydınlık newspaper from the pending case file on the grounds that there was absolutely no connection between them. The hearing was adjourned until 24 January.
 
PROSECUTOR ANNOUNCES HIS RECOMMENDATION - SENTENCES SOUGHT FOR AIDING AN ORGANISATION
 
The prosecutor’s recommendation that had not been made known at the hearing was made available to journalists. According to the recommendation that did not even pass into the record of the hearing and of which the parties had no knowledge, a journalist cannot be deceived.
 
In the meantime, the hearing prosecutor Mehmet Yeşilkaya submitted his recommendation in writing to the court. The prosecutor alleged in his recommendation that Can Dündar, Erdem Gül and Kadri Enis Berberoğlu committed the offence of knowingly and willingly aiding a terrorist organisation without being part of the terrorist organisation’s structure in unity and togetherness of purpose and action with the FETO terrorist organisation. In the recommendation, prison terms of from seven and a half to fifteen years were sought for Can Dündar, Erdem Gül and Kadri Enis Berberoğlu.
 
The prosecutor included the following remarks in his recommendation concerning the news report with the headline, “Here are the arms Erdoğan says do not exist” dated 29 May 2014 for which Can Dündar and Erdem Gül stand charged: “Press freedom is under constitutional guarantee and this is clearly apparent in Article 27 of the Constitution and Article 3 of the Press Law, however, according to Article 3 of the Press Law, this freedom is not unrestricted and stipulation has been laid down that press freedom may be restricted solely for reasons befitting a democratic society for the purpose of preserving the good name and rights of others, the health and morality of society, national security, public order, public security and territorial integrity, preventing the disclosure of state secrets or the commission of crimes, or securing the authority and impartiality of the judicial power, indeed, a publication ban had previously been placed on the incident in question, the news report published by Can Dündar and Erdem Gül did not fall within the scope of journalistic activity and press freedom, along with this, both the members of the judiciary and law enforcement functionaries involved in the investigation process into the events of 1 January 2014 and 19 January 2014 and also subsequent detainees noted that this situation had received abundant coverage in press and publishing outlets and the operation had been a FETO/PDY activity, despite this, it beggars belief that the defendants who are engaged in the profession of journalism could not be aware of these reports and that the operation was staged by FETO/PDY.”
 
The concluding section of the recommendation reads: “Implicating the State and Government of the Republic of Turkey in international terrorism, making it partially or fully unable to function, creating a public perception internationally and creating the image that Turkey is a country that supports terrorism amount to the activities of the FETO/PDY terrorist organisation, which acted with the intended purpose, by publishing the reports in question prior to the 7 June 2015 general elections, of dealing a crushing blow to the government and making it incapable of functioning and lose the elections; hence, as it has been ascertained that Can Dündar, Erdem Gül and Kadri Enis Berberoğlu committed the offence of knowingly and willingly aiding a terrorist organisation without being part of the terrorist organisation’s structure in unity and togetherness of purpose and action in revealing information having the nature of state secrets with regard to the state’s security or domestic or external political benefits in line with FETO/PDY’s final aims and strategy and despite the absence of any public benefit, that they be convicted.”
 
BERBEROĞLU'S LAWYER MAKES A STATEMENT AFTER THE HEARING
 
Following the hearing, Berberoğlu's lawyer Murat Ergün said in the statement he made, “Let us see what happens on appeal and then we will assess the process. They are acting as if they have not paid much attention to the Aydınlık indictment. Our defence is also being ignored and the sentence sought is as in the first indictment. There needs to be a conviction for the underlying offence for there to be aiding of an organisation and that is still waiting. It is interesting for a recommendation to be submitted without a ruling. The prosecutor sought the sentencing of Enis Berberoğlu alone for espionage. Given the appeal ruling, such a thing is not possible. Initially, there must be a sentence for the act of passing on. Without ruling that there was a passing on, how can you rule on aiding? It resembles demanding payment for a meal you did not eat at a restaurant. The prosecutor is minded to see an advance sentence handed down and there is no place for that in the law. The situation will become clearer following the appeal court.”
 
CHP MP Mahmut Tanal also commented, “This trial is a political, not a legal, trial. Innocent people are being sentenced and this is the murder of the law.”
 
HISTORY OF THE TRIAL
 
With Dündar ve Gül's trial on the count of “knowingly and willingly aiding the FETO/PDY armed terrorist organisation without being a member” continuing, joinder was made to this trial of the trial brought against CHP MP and journalist Enis Berberoğlu on the counts of “political or military espionage” and “knowingly and willingly aiding an organisation without being within the hierarchic structure internal to the organisation” in which his imprisonment from twenty to thirty years is sought. At the hearing held on 14 June 2017, Berberoğlu was sentenced to 25 years’ imprisonment on the count of “revealing information that required to remain confidential for the purpose of political and military espionage” and was placed in detention. It was decided, however, for Can Dündar, Erdem Gül and Enis Berberoğlu to continue to be tried in a separate case file on the count of “knowingly and willingly aiding an armed terrorist organisation without being a member.”
 
TRIAL ALSO FILED AGAINST AYDINLIK NEWSPAPER
 
The trial filed on the count of “revealing information that required to remain confidential with regard to the state’s security and political benefits” over the publishing in Aydınlık newspaper on 21 January 2014 of images of the stopping of the intelligence agency trucks against Aydınlık newspaper’s Editor-in-Chief Mustafa İlker Yücel and former intelligence supervisor Orhan Ceyhun Bozkurt in which their imprisonment from between five and ten years is sought had been joined to the case in which Dündar, Gül and Berberoğlu are being tried on the count of “knowingly and willingly aiding an armed terrorist organisation without being a member.”