Reasoned Decision: 'Freedom of Expression Exists for Thoughts That Disturb State'

Click to read the article in Turkish

The reasoned decision of the case of Hayrettin Pişkin, who was acquitted of the charge of "terrorist propaganda" by the Bursa Regional Court of Justice 2nd Penal Chamber (court of appeal), has been announced.

The court of appeal underpinned in its decision that Pişkin's social media post does not contain propaganda, but criticism. The reasoned decision also said that the post on social media "did not include a call or an invitation for violence."

The court of appeal overturned the 2 years and 6 months prison term given to Pişkin upon the Anti-Terror Law Article 7/2 by the Çanakkale 2nd Heavy Penal Court on March 14 and ruled for the acquittal of Pişkin.

"It is of vital importance for democracy"

The reasoned decision said that the press is a primary tool for spreading thoughts.

"The freedom of expressing and spreading a thought directly affects a significant part of the other rights and freedoms included in the Constitution. The press, which is the primary tool to spread thoughts in the forms of a newspaper, a magazine or a book, is a form of using the freedom of expressing and spreading a thought.

"Expressing thoughts through all means, getting people subscribed to the thought that was expressed, realizing a thought and convincing people to realize a thought, including thoughts that oppose the thoughts of the majority, are among the necessities of a pluralistic democratic order.

"In this respect, the freedom of expressing and spreading a thought is of vital importance for the functioning of the democracy."

"It is not only for favorable news and thoughts"

The reasoned decision referred to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and stated the conditions for the offense of propaganda.

"The freedom of expressing and spreading a thought and the freedom of the press, which are among the main foundations of a democratic society, are applied only for thoughts and news that are regarded as favorable, unworthy of interest or unimportant, but also for thoughts that are against one part of the society, found stunning by them and disturbing them.

"For the offense 'propagandizing for a terrorist organization' to occur, it has been made obligatory to express a thought that 'justifies, praises or encourages the terrorist organization's methods that include force, violence and threat,' to make the limitations on the freedom of thought to be compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights."

"Struggle against terrorism is also a regime of law"

"The struggle against terrorism is also a regime of law. It is not an area that the obligations arising from international law can be neglected.

"Even if there is a direct or indirect call for violence, the expression should be analyzed in terms of clear and imminent danger, such as analyzing the defendant's political identity, the place and time where the expression is spoken.

Based on these statements, the court said it concluded that the article that was shared by Pişkin includes the expression of an opinion and gave verdict of acquittal."

"The ruling can set a precedent for the Academics for Peace"

Pişkin's attorney, İnci İncesağır, told bianet that the ruling will balance and limit the tendency to give sentences in the lawsuits related to the charge of terrorist propaganda.

"Every article that criticizes the government's applications would be penalized upon this charge. This verdict can curb this tendency," she added.

İncesağır said that the verdict can also set a precedent for the Academics for Peace. (AS/VK)