Following a complaint of the General Staff, “Sabah” journalist Umur Talu had been investigated for an article in which he had expressed the dissatisfaction of sergeants within the army.
Prosecution: "Part of the journalistic profession"
Now Istanbul Press Prosecutor Nurten Altinok has decided to drop proceedings against the journalist. In the decision, it said:
“[The author] had stated that as part of the journalistic profession and as a humane necessity, he had wanted to describe the situation of a group within the Armed Forces and to improve it.”
Investigation based on General Staff complaint
The General Staff’s complaint was based on an article by Talu published on 12 June 2007 and entitled, "Are these impossible?"
Under Article 95/4 of the Military Penal Code, a sentence ranging from six months to three years was being demanded. The legal article also envisages an increment in the sentence because a published text was concerned.
Talu had been accused of "acting in an insulting and derisive manner aimed at undermining relations between junior and senior officers and destroying the trust in superiors or commanders". Talu had given a statement to the Press Prosecutor Ismail Onaran in Istanbul on 7 August.
Talu called for better treatment of soldiers
Talu’s article, which expressed common complaints of lower ranking soldiers, included a call for "human treatment when alive for noncommissioned officers and the totally excluded sergeants by the high-ranking officers who attend their funerals", as well as "their admission to army leisure centres".
ECHR cases cited
Altinok supported the decision to drop proceedings with several cases from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), such as the “Austrian Democratic Soldiers’ Union and Gubi 1994”, saying that “the freedom of expression is one of the basic tenets of a democratic society; it is one of the basic preconditions for social and individual development.”
Further, the decision read, “A text expressing complaints and suggesting reforms must be permitted in the framework of the discussion of opinions in a society which is served by a democratic state, and must also be accepted by the society’s army.”
"No crime committed"
The report concluded that “According to ECHR and Supreme Court of Appeals criteria, the text was within the freedom of expression and the alleged crime was not committed.”
Talu described known problems
The decision supported Talu’s attempt at informing about the complaints of lower-ranking soldiers, for instance calling for facilities such as steel vests and mine clearance in order to prevent deaths of soldiers. This was, according to the decision, information which could also be obtained from websites of retired sergeants, and associations and websites of noncommissioned officers.
The complaints that lower-ranking gendarmerie members had about wages, secure employment, lodgings and social centres of the gendarmerie, were, according to the report, also criticisms which had been expressed in the suggested Change of Gendarmerie Law which had been presented to parliament. (EÖ/AG)
