MEDIA MONITORING DATABASE
Objection against the acquittal of Ramazan Akoğul
RELATED PERSON OR INSTITUTION
Ramazan Akoğul
CITY
Diyarbakır
YEAR OF INTERFERENCE
2018
LAST UPDATED
02/02/2023
TYPE OF STATEMENT
Political
MEDIUM
Internet
News Agency
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
Criminal Courts
Decision of acquittal
THE LEGAL GROUNDS FOR INTERFERENCE
Turkish Penal Code
Art. 314/2

The prosecutor of the 4th High Criminal Court of Diyarbakır appealed to the Regional Court of Justice of Antep against the acquittal of DİHA reporter Ramazan Akoğul, who was covering the protest on the Dicle-Hani highway for the murder of Mehdin Taşkın in the military fire in Lice district of Diyarbakır in 2014. The prosecutor showed the evidence for “membership in a terrorist organisation” that Akoğul had not interfered with while recording the protests. The prosecutor also demanded that Akoğul be punished for “membership in a terrorist organisation without being part of its hierarchical structure”(6 July 2018).

Overturning the ruling of acquittal in 2018 upon the appeal of the prosecutor, the 18th Penal Chamber of the Gaziantep Regional Court of Justice sent the case file to the first instance court for a retrial. The court requested that the chief prosecutor’s office review its decision of non-prosecution by indicating that the ruling of acquittal was cited as a ground for a decision of non-prosecution in the other investigation, but the ruling of acquittal was overturned in the appellate review due to this investigation file.

At the hearing held on December 22, 2022, the court ruled that the reply to the writ should be awaited considering that the writ addressed to the Diyarbakır Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office had not yet been replied. The next hearing will be held on February 2, 2023 (December 22).

At the hearing held on February 2, 2023, the court ruled for the acquittal of Akoğul on the grounds that the legal elements of the offense charged had not been constituted (February 2).