.jpg)
Click to read the article in Turkish / Kurdish
The İstanbul 23rd Heavy Criminal Court has handed down its justified ruling in the Özgür Gündem main trial, where Kemal Sancılı, the grant holder of the newspaper closed by a Statutory decree, İnan Kızılkaya, its Managing Editor, Zana Kaya, its Editor-in-Chief, and Eren Keskin, its Editor-in-Chief on Watch, were sentenced to 21 years in prison in total.
The justified ruling has defended "a national human rights understanding", making such remarks as "The centuries-old state tradition of the Turkish state and its outlook on its citizens have always been constituted based on the principle of 'Let the human live so that the state will live."
CLICK - Four sentenced to prison in Özgür Gündem case
In its justified ruling, the board of the heavy penal court has indicated that "when the news reported by Özgür Gündem are examined, it is clearly seen that it targeted the struggle waged by the Turkish Armed Forces against the PKK/PYD, published vilifying news arguing that the Turkish Armed Forces acted beyond the law and harmed civilians on purpose, enabled the campaigns launched in favor of the terrorist organization and terrorist organization head to be heard by the partisan mass, portrayed the demands of the partisan mass as the general opinion of the locals, covered the death news of organization members as 'execution', insulted the martyred security forces, published all sorts of groundless news that would create a public opinion against Turkey, legitimized the bloody acts committed by the terrorist organization, tried to help the organization's base survive by openly getting in touch with the organization members in the rural areas and portraying their heinous attacks as legitimate, published the instructions that the organization wanted to convey to its own mass, claimed that the citizens with Kurdish origin are tortured through so-called annihilation/denial policies and publicly provoked the public to grudge and mutiny."
The justified ruling has further said that "for this reason, it has been concluded that the founding aim of Özgür Gündem was not to make publications, but it assumed the identity of the press bulletin of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) / People's Protection Units (YPG)."
The ruling has noted that "a differentiation needs to be made between making critical publications, even harshly critical ones, and having the characteristics of the official news channel of the organization."
Saying that "the media outlets of the latter type have nothing to do with the democratic life", the ruling has said, "In essence, there is no difference between the terrorist organizations which try to eliminate the democratic life and the media outlets acting as their spokespersons."
"As a result of this, just as terrorist organizations are not structures that can be safeguarded in democracy, the media outlets of the organization cannot be safeguarded, either," the justified ruling has added.
Referring to the defense statements of the defendants as well as to the publication policy of Özgür Gündem, the ruling has argued that "they hid behind the guise of human rights and human rights advocacy by ignoring the bloody face of the organization and its activities."
Defining human rights, democracy, rights and freedoms as "an indispensable part of human life and a humane life," the ruling has said that "it is not an acceptable attitude and behavior to try to eliminate the unitary structure of the state through these concepts and by hiding behind them."
"The centuries-old state tradition of the Turkish state and its outlook on its citizens have always been constituted based on the principle of 'Let the human live so that the state will live. In an environment where public security and state structure are destroyed or undermined, it will already not be possible for the values that the defendants allegedly defend to survive.
"It is self-evident that in an environment where chaos, violence and terrorist acts prevail, it is impossible to talk about the concept of human rights," the justified ruling of the court has added further.
Saying that "the concept of human rights has always been a veil behind which the organization and the ones who try to legitimize it hide", the ruling has said that "it was not seen even for once that those who try to whitewash the terrorist organization through this concept condemned the bloody terrorist organization and its acts or defended the right to life of security forces and citizens deprived of their right to life, their most basic human right."
At this point, the ruling has referred to a "real and national human rights understanding and concept" and said that such understanding "safeguards human dignity and honor as much as universal values, ensures that the Turkish state will always exist and will not make Turkish citizens concerned about their own safety and that of the state, as defined by the Constitution."
According to the ruling, such an understanding and concept needs to be discussed and safeguarded. (HA/SD)
