Freedom of religion
Prosecutor Ahmet Demirhüyük presented his deliberations and argued that "Within the framework of freedom of religion and conscience, our constitution and our laws protect the right of people to live and spread whichever religion they want."
Third-party plaintiffs
Kemal Kerincsiz, a nationalist lawyer of the Great Lawyers' Union, and ten other lawyers had joined the case as third-party plaintiffs. Kerincsiz and the Union are infamous in Turkey for filing suits against journalists and writers and for trying to prevent an academic conference on the "Armenian Issue" in September 2005.
Because there had been threats and attempts at attacks on the defendants, there were tight security measures in place before the hearing.
The prosecutor said in his statement: "Since Selcuk and Ottoman times, minorities have been able to freely practice their religions. Up to today, there has not been a law or application designating this as a crime...there has been no definite, concrete and convincing proof for convicting anyone of a crime."
The defendants' lawyers Haydar Polat and Gürsel Meric agreed with the prosecution's deliberation, while the third-party plaintiffs protested that their witnesses had not been heard.
Case adjourned
Court president Neset Eren listened to the deliberations of both sides and then adjourned the hearing until 12 September.
The two defendants, accused of "insulting Turkishness, Islam and the Prophet Mohammed", had stated previously that spreading one's religion was not a crime and that it was impossible for them as Turks to insult Turkishness. (EÖ/AG)
