Journalist Ahmet Altan Receives 11 Months of Prison

Istanbul 10th Assize Court found journalist Ahmet Altan of insulting PM Erdoğan in his article “State Complicity and Morality” - a Taraf newspaper article dated January 4, 2012. The prominent journalist received 11 months and 20 days of prison, which was later on commuted to to a fine of 2,800 euros. He was initially charged with up to 2 years and 8 months of prison sentence. 

“In Erbil Tuşalp case, ECHR pointed out to the relation between the government and press freedom,” Veysel Ok, Altan’s attorney, told bianet. 

“There are few principles in that verdict,” Ok continued. “ECHR verdicts ruled that harsh comments are not regarded as insult and political authorities must have high levels of tolerance.”  

“This current verdict contradicts European Convention on Human Rights. The content of the article is on Uludere Massacre and journalist Altan remind PM of his responsibility.” 

“We have also requested the court on who gave the ultimate order leading to Uludere incident. But the court shied away from asking this question to army authorities. If the court asked that question, we would have made a significant progress.”

“That article contains no insults. The court had the wrong idea that Altan accused PM of being the killer of 35 people. The article doesn’t directly call PM a killer. On the other hand, calling PM a killer is still within the limits of expression freedom.

“During his rule, no efforts are being made to enlighten an incident that led to the death of 35 people. Any criticism on this issue, albeit harsh, is within the limits of expression freedom. However, the court didn’t see it like that and considered PM as an ordinary person.”

“If you call anyone on the street a killer, this might be considered as insult. But criticism against PM must be tolerated on a higher degree due to his position. 

“I talked to Altan after the verdict was announced. He said he was not expecting a different outcome given the current situation of Turkey’s judicial system. It is bad for the sake of expression freedom. If politicians remain free of criticism, public transparency get endangered. 

“We will appeal this verdict. If the outcome doesn’t change, we will take it to ECHR.” (EKN/BM)