MEDIA MONITORING DATABASE
A lawsuit against Pelin Ünker due to “Paradise Papers” filed by Çalık Media Group
RELATED PERSON OR INSTITUTION
Pelin Ünker
CITY
İstanbul
YEAR OF INTERFERENCE
2018
LAST UPDATED
22/12/2020
TYPE OF STATEMENT
Political
MEDIUM
Print Media
Newspaper
THE TITLE OF WHOSE RIGHT IS INTERFERED
Journalist
RIGHTS GUARANTEED UNDER THE RIGHT OF FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
Right to Impart Information and Ideas
TYPE OF INTERFERENCE
Judicial Interference
Civil Courts
Other
THE LEGAL GROUNDS FOR INTERFERENCE
Turkish Civil Code
Art. 25

Çalık Group filed a lawsuit, requesting 10 thousand TL for compensation against Cumhuriyet newspaper official Orhan Erinç and journalist Pelin Ünker, due to the article series called Paradise Papers which covered off-shore accounts in Malta. Istanbul 21st Civil Court of First Instance will held the next hearing on October 1.

The court decided to renew the correspondence to investigate the socioeconomic status of the parties. In addition, a copy of the file indicating the decision of dismissal in the 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance of İstanbul was requested. The next hearing will be held on January 30, 2020 (1 October).

At the last hearing held on January 30, ruling to write a memo to Istanbul’s 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance to inquire about whether their verdict has become final, the court adjourned the trial until 28 April 2020.

The hearing scheduled to be held on April 28 was postponed to September 10, 2020.

At the hearing held on September 10, the court decided to request the acquittal decision of the court of appeal against Pelin Ünker from the 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance in Istanbul and it decided to investigate the socio-economic situation of Orhan Erinç. The next hearing will be held on December 22, 2020 (September 10).

At the hearing held on December 22, Tuğba Karakaya, one of the attorneys of the plaintiff, repeated her previous statements and requested that the lawsuit be accepted while Abbas Yalçın, the attorney of Pelin Ünker and Orhan Erinç, requested the dismissal of the case. Handing down its judgment, the court has ruled that the suit for damages shall be rejected (December 22).