Reporter Is Sentenced For A Crime Hundreds Of Miles Away From Him

Malatya’s 3rd High Criminal Court sentenced Rüştü Demirkaya, Tunceli reporter of Dicle News Agency (DİHA), to prison for 6 years 3 months for “helping and harboring the organization of Kurdish Workers Party (PKK).”

Reporter’s lawyer Barış Yıldırım characterized the court decision, which was based only on informant statements, as “anti-juristic”. They are planning to appeal the decision.

Demirkaya was arrested in accordance with informant Engin Korcum’s testimony  in Tunceli province of Eastern Turkey in 2006 and was put in Malatya E Type Prison.

According to the testimony of the informant, Demirkaya had gone to the village of Sakak in the center of Tunceli in the autumn of 2005 and met with the PKK people, giving them a laptop computer and 10 empty CD’s.

Reporter Demirkaya and 12 people receive prison sentence for 6 years and 3 months

Helping the PKK by informing them about the operation of the military units into the rural region of Bali Stream in Tunceli is among the accusations laid on Demirkaya.

Stating that the accusations have no logical base, Yıldırım said that Demirkaya was in Alsancak İzmir at the time of the said crime, enrolled in Vizyon Private Tutoring, possibly for a university exam, not in Tunceli.

However, the court did not take into consideration the document sent by the police department of Buca district in İzmir province, dated December 11, 2006, which proved Demirkaya resided in Çamlıkule neighborhood between September 2005 and February 2006 and enrolled in Vizyon Private Turtoring.

In the case that lasted more than a year, the court accepted prosecutor’s opinion. It sentenced Demirkaya and the thirteen other people tried together with him to prison for 6 years and 3 months for “helping and harboring PKK” under article 314/2 of the Penal Code (TCK).

Informant Engin Korcum received life sentence. On the other hand, four people who were tried for the same case were released on the grounds that there was no concrete accusations against them.

It was proved Demirkaya was in Izmir at the time 

Yıldırım stated that although they presented to the court the proof showing that Demirkaya was in Izmir at the time of the crime Korcum described and showed the inconsistencies in Korcum’s statements, the decision for sentence was still based solely on informant Korcum’s testimony. (EÖ/EZÖ/TB)