Price paid freedom of the press

As a matter of fact, we should treat their questions as perfectly expected and reasonable given the fact that the country we come from is mostly known for news stories about 17,000 unresolved murders, inexplicably assassinated journalists, an army still trying to maintain its dominance over politics in this incomplete democracy. The news stories also speak of clandestine and illegal networks, which we today call Ergenekon but which have become largely exposed. They also focus on judicial institutions, which give the impression that they act under the influence of these illegal networks and undertake actions that are hard to reconcile with universally accepted laws and principles.

Despite all this, we heroically tried to defend our country, saying with some lingering naivety: "No, no… Problems concerning freedom of the press are generally occasional cases. With some courage, journalists may write whatever they want." But, unfortunately, when we face similar questions these days, we feel the need to paraphrase these sentences with some nuances and say instead, "Freedom of the press exists in Turkey only for those who risk paying the price for it."

Looking only at the fate of journalists who write news stories or commentaries about the Ergenekon investigation, one can easily understand what we are trying to imply. The fact that the number of lawsuits brought against journalists writing about Ergenekon has already exceeded 2,000 gives one the impression that the price is being paid by journalists instead of by Ergenekon defendants, who were involved in all sorts of nasty and illegal work. Indeed, judicial verdicts have yet to be handed down concerning defendants who were involved in the clandestine business of Ergenekon. But, there are people who made news or wrote commentaries about the despicable activities of this terrorist organization based on evidence and information openly stated in publicly available indictments.

In most of the lawsuits, journalists are indicted for considerably vague charges such as "breach of confidentiality of the investigation" or "exerting influence on a fair trial." However, the journalists in question tend to refer to information already in the public domain. According to statistics issued by the Ministry of Justice for April, 2,407 investigations were launched on this topic, and at the end of about 90 percent of these investigations, lawsuits were initiated. Of these investigations, the Şişli and Bakırköy prosecutor's offices launched 334 and 1,566 cases, respectively. A total of 507 investigations were initiated by the Kadıköy, Üsküdar, Fatih and Küçükçekmece prosecutor's offices. Individuals targeted by the investigations include 11 managing editors, 28 columnists, 167 reporters and 85 other journalists while the most investigated dailies are Taraf, Star and Zaman.

The most interesting among these lawsuits was one launched against Şamil Tayyar from Star as the gendarmerie made another scandalous move with respect to news stories about Ergenekon. Tayyar was tried for publishing a telephone conversation between Ergenekon defendants which was included in the indictment. He was sentenced to one year and three months in prison on charges of "breaching secrecy of communication and private life." He was later reprieved on condition of being on probation for five years, a decision largely viewed as a move to silence Tayyar. He also has many other lawsuits against him on similar charges. Since he continues to write about publicly accessible information in indictments of the Ergenekon trial, he is sure that some ill-intentioned court will send him to prison. And so he awaits the day when he will be jailed.

Today, I was planning to write about the heartrending impressions I got about Baghdad during Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's visit to Iraq. However, when I heard what had happened to my dear friend and fellow journalist Adem Yavuz Arslan, the Ankara representative of the Bugün newspaper and the person with whom I spent most of my time in Baghdad with, thought I should change my topic.

Arslan was detained by the gendarmerie in Bolu Friday night after going there with his family and upon the invitation of Felicity Party (SP) leader Numan Kurtulmuş. He was detained for nine hours before being released by the court on duty. It turned out that a lawsuit had been launched against him on charges of "breaching censors" in his column about retired Brig. Gen. Levent Ersöz, an Ergenekon defendant. However, neither Arslan nor his lawyers were notified about this lawsuit launched at the 2nd Penal Court of First Instance in Şişli on Feb. 5, 2009. The court then issued an arrest warrant for Arslan in absentia on July 21, 2009, and this warrant was sent to security officials.

Eventually, he was detained as a criminal at around four o'clock in the morning in his hotel as his wife and child looked on. Arslan was held for nine hours in the Gerede gendarmerie outpost before being questioned by a judge and subsequently released.

Although Arslan had accompanied Prime Minister Erdoğan or Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu many times during their visits abroad and although he has a fixed and well-known address as the Ankara representative of the Bugün newspaper, this in addition to him being the host of a live broadcast on TV five days a week and a column published three days a week, the gendarmerie, one concludes, failed to find him in order to notify him of the lawsuit against him. Yet, this small glitch in the functioning of our legal system is still acceptable, now that our gendarmerie eventually managed to find him after a three-month-long search! This is really something that we should thank God for as it has refreshed our confidence in the gendarmerie!

Now, isn't Arslan perfectly entitled to raise his voice in defense: "Only two days ago I was accompanying Prime Minister Erdoğan during his visit to Baghdad. While there was a search warrant against me, I accompanied the foreign minister and other ministers during their domestic visits and abroad many times. I spent the night in various hotels. The addresses of the newspaper and TV I work for and my home are known. It is unusual that they cannot find me. Had they called me to testify, I would immediately go. But they detained me as my wife and child looked on. They put me in jail and took my fingerprints as if I were a criminal. They took photos of me and I was sent to forensics for a medical checkup." He apparently regards all these as a sort of a material and psychological pressure.