15 October 2025: In Memory of Daphne – Media reform public consultations must lead to National Action Plan

September 15, 2025 • • disabled comments

In Memory of Daphne: Media reform public consultations must lead to National Action Plan

15 October 2025

On the eve of the anniversary of the murder of Maltese investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, press freedom and journalists’ groups are calling on the national authorities to set up a National Action Plan on Media Freedom and Journalist Safety.

Our groups reiterate our calls for all perpetrators of the murder to be brought to justice and we continue to monitor the progress of ongoing legal proceedings.

I. Overview:

Press freedom and journalist organizations welcome the call by the Maltese authorities for public consultations on media freedom and are, in this paper, submitting a set of recommendations for consideration.

The implementation of such recommendations would be an appropriate and meaningful way to continue to mark the life and legacy of Daphne Caruana Galizia, who was killed in a car bomb attack on 16 October 2017.

The move to open up public consultations follows an ongoing exchange on institutional and rule of law reforms in Malta, whose record has been the subject of international scrutiny since the journalist’s murder eight years ago.

Such reforms present a historic opportunity for press freedom in both Malta and Europe. Press freedom and journalists’ groups call for draft legislation related to reforms to be considered for consultation, including by national and international civil society, journalists’ organizations, media freedom experts, the Council of Europe, and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), prior to being enacted by parliament or published by legal notice.

Our organizations are tracking the reform proposal put forward by the Maltese authorities in response to the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA). Some recommendations below identify areas of concern that continue to require a more effective state response than outlined in the August 2025 legal notice.

This statement seeks to provide an overview of key international standards or texts that would provide a basis for shaping the planning and implementation of future legislative and non-legislative measures to protect journalists. It also provides a list of recommendations, in consideration of Malta’s press freedom context.

Such reforms should be brought together in a National Action Plan on Media Freedom and Journalist Safety. Such an initiative should seek to concretely address the complex set of challenges facing all Maltese journalists, and guarantee an ambitious vision for Malta’s compliance with its European Union, Council of Europe and OSCE obligations.

II. Relevant international standards and expert sources:

The following international standards and texts provide guidance on the questions raised in the consultation, including safeguarding an enabling environment for journalists to operate, preserving full and independent access to information, and aligning all measures with international standards on the protection of the reputation or rights of others.

United Nations

– Civil and Political Rights, including the Question of Freedom of Expression, the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Report of the Special Rapporteur, Ambeyi Ligabo, 30 December 2005 (E/CN.4/2006/55)

– General Comment No. 34, Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression, United Nations, Human Rights Committee, 11-29 July 2011 (CCPR/C/GC/34)

– General Assembly, Resolution 68/163, The Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity, 18 December 2013 (A/RES/68/163)

– General Assembly, Resolution 39/6, The Safety of Journalists, Human Rights Council
27 September 2018 (39th Session) (A/HRC/RES/39/6)

UNESCO, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation

– UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity (2012)

Council of Europe, Parliamentary Assembly

– Parliamentary Assembly, Recommendation 1506 (2001), Freedom of expression and information in the media in Europe, Council of Europe, 24 April 2001

– Parliamentary Assembly, Recommendation 1589 (2003), Freedom of expression in the
media in Europe, Council of Europe, 28 January 2003

– Parliamentary Assembly, Resolution 1535 (2007), Threats to the lives and freedom of expression of journalists, 25 January 2007

– Parliamentary Assembly, Resolution 2035 (2015), Protection of the safety of journalists and of media freedom in Europe, 29 January 2015

– Parliamentary Assembly, Recommendation 2062 (2015), Protection of the safety of journalists and of media freedom in Europe, Council of Europe, 29 January 2015

– Parliamentary Assembly, Resolution 2317 (2020), Threats to media freedom and journalists’ security in Europe, Council of Europe, 28 January 2020

Council of Europe, Committee of Ministers

– CM/Rec(2024)2 – Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to member States on countering the use of strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs), adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 5 April 2024

– CM/Rec(2022)16 – Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to member States on combating hate speech, adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 20 May 2022

– CM/Rec(2016)4 – Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to member States on the protection of journalism and safety of journalists and other media actors, adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 13 April 2016

European Court of Human Rights case-law on state interference or restriction on freedom of expression:

Stoll v. Switzerland, App No 69698/01, (ECtHR [GC] 10 December 2007)
Morice v. France, App. No. 29369/10, (ECtHR [GC] 23 April 2015)
Pentikäinen v. Finland, App No 11882/10, (ECtHR [GC] 20 October 2015)
Khadja Ismayilova v. Azerbaijan, App Nos 65286/13 and 57270/14, (ECtHR 10 January 2019)
Yılmaz and Kılıç v. Turkey, App No 68514/01, (ECtHR 17 July 2008)
Bahçeci and Turan v. Turkey, App. No. 33340/03, (ECtHR 16 June 2009) para 26.

Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, OSCE

Legal analysis on the draft law of Malta to implement various measures for the protection of the media and of journalists, October 2021

Legal analysis on the draft law of Malta to implement various measures for the protection of the media and of journalists, February 2022

European Commission

Commission Recommendation (EU) 2021/1534 of 16 September 2021 on ensuring the protection, safety and empowerment of journalists and other media professionals in the European Union

Commission Recommendation (EU) 2022/758 of 27 April 2022 on protecting journalists and human rights defenders who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings (“Strategic lawsuits against public participation”)

Commission Recommendation (EU) 2022/1634 of 16 September 2022 on internal safeguards for editorial independence and ownership transparency in the media sector

III. Recommendations

1. Establish a National Action Plan – In line with the Council of Europe’s “Journalists Matter” campaign, develop and adopt a National Action Plan on Media Freedom and Journalist Safety to provide a strategic framework to coordinate action across all state institutions. Such an action plan should integrate the recommendations listed below (to the fullest extent possible), and should follow further broad, public and transparent consultations, timeframes, clear and measurable benchmarks for progress, and effective and independent evaluation processes. It would have full political backing; would be led by a person or persons with experience and knowledge of the media (and the threats to the media); and would have the full trust of the journalist community and their representative organizations.

2. Set up an institutional response structure
– Establish an interministerial, cross-institutional structure for the protection of journalists and journalism, with a view to implementing the National Action Plan, setting up rapid response protocols and early warning mechanisms, regular communication and dialogue on press freedom concerns affecting Malta’s journalists, and building state accountability for protecting journalists. Such a structure should ensure effective engagement with civil society and media organizations, and have, as its purpose, the full implementation of the 2016 Committee of Ministers Recommendation on journalism safety and the European Commission’s 2021 Journalist Safety Recommendation. This requires that the current mechanism be transformed to meet international standards
including by taking into consideration the OSCE legal analysis of the draft law setting up this mechanism.

3. Undertake Constitutional reform
– Undertake Constitutional reform to enshrine journalism as one of the pillars of a democratic society, with an explicit requirement of the State to guarantee it and protect it.
– Recognize the right to access information held by the State and public administration and the obligation of public authorities to provide such information.
– Provide all relevant state officials with training and support to promote and protect the spirit of such constitutional reforms.

4. Foster an enabling environment for journalists
– High level officials should regularly communicate publicly, with a view to reaching a wide audience, that verbal attacks, threats, and hostility against the press should never in any way be tolerated; underscore the important role that journalists play in society and call for their full protection. Such statements could coincide with the celebration of international days, including World Press Freedom Day, as well as parliamentary debates, or public and official events.
– State officials and public figures should refrain from undermining or attacking the integrity of journalists and other media actors, or coercing or pressuring journalists.
– Provide journalists and other media actors who are victims of crime with quick access to preventive measures of protection, including court-issued protection orders and other personal protection measures taken by the police.
– Provide training for judges, prosecutors, lawyers, and police officers on relevant Council of Europe (and other relevant international) standards on freedom of expression and media freedom.

5. Support female journalists
– Monitor and prioritize measures to protect female journalists against all forms of psychological pressure, intimidation, harassment, or physical threats, including as a result of online harassment, in line with the European Commission’s 2021 Journalist Safety Recommendation and the OSCE’s 2023 Guidelines for monitoring online violence against female journalists.

6. End vexatious lawsuits, including SLAPPs
– Undertake further legislative reforms to address SLAPPs, in addition to the government’s recent transposition of the EU anti-SLAPP Directive, to extend judicial protection to domestic SLAPPs cases.
– Implement in full the European Commission’s Recommendation on SLAPPs as well as the Committee of Ministers Recommendation on SLAPPs; and, in doing so, extend Malta’s actions to both judicial reform and nonjudicial measures, such as victim support, judicial training, and public awareness.
– Reform the Media and Defamation Act to bring it in line with the recommendations included in the Legal Analysis of the OSCE Office of the Representative on Freedom of the Media of November 2017.

7. Strengthen access to information
– Take immediate steps to improve the swift delivery of information held by public authorities, and grant greater transparency with regards to the publication of official information in the public interest. Such improvements should be user friendly, efficient and embedded in a culture of accountability and openness.
– Disclose, in full, the legal advice received by the Government on the Freedom of Information Act, and undertake a full, transparent, and effective consultation for its reform.

8. Build accountability by implementing the public inquiry recommendations
Ensure the full implementation of all the recommendations from the Daphne Caruana Galizia public inquiry, including those recommendations that relate to economic wrongdoing and financial crime, in their intersection of addressing the work of Maltese investigative journalists regarding state accountability, including:
1. Amendments to criminal laws;
2. Administrative practices which regulate relationships between public administration and business people;
3. The fight against financial crime;
4. Public officials who interfere with or attempt to interfere with the police;
5. The introduction in the Criminal Code of the new criminal offence of “abuse of office” committed by a public official;
6. The introduction into the Criminal Code of the criminal offence of obstruction of justice;
7. The introduction of legal provisions in the Code of Ethics to counter inappropriate behavior by public officials.

9. Ensure self-regulation contributes to safeguarding international standards
– Ensure that any changes to the regulatory ecosystem for media in Malta do not risk being misused for increased state interference.
Self-regulation should be promoted and enabled by the authorities and all relevant stakeholders. Effective and independent systems of self-regulation must have the trust and confidence of the Maltese journalist community, and to the fullest extent possible, apply the European standards defined by the European Press Councils as part of the research and best practice developed by the European Union’s PressCouncils.eu project.

10. Safeguard source confidentiality
– Develop protocols for law enforcement to embed the legal protection of legitimate and journalistic sources, including as part of investigation or operations. Such protocols should ensure that if investigative or intelligence collecting work by the Malta Security Service and or the police involves or touches upon the relationship of journalists and sources or whistleblowers, that the identity of that source or whistleblower will not be disclosed.
– The Protection of the Whistleblower Act must be reformed to provide whistleblowers with avenues for safe reporting, independent from government.

11. Guarantee independent public service media
– In line with Article 5 of the EMFA, undertake reform of the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) to develop stronger institutional safeguards which protect it from all forms of political pressure and influence and increase its editorial independence, thus building public trust.
– Include transparent and democratic procedures for the election of all management staff and members to its oversight boards, to reduce potential political interference. Heads of public service media should in particular be required to adhere to transparent and impartial criteria in their appointment procedures, with a view to preventing
undue political influence.
– Provide adequate, predictable and sustainable funding to the public broadcaster in order to create additional institutional barriers to prevent pressure from the government. Multiyear budgeting should be adopted to facilitate long-term strategic planning and enhance predictability.

12. Ensure full transparency over the allocation of state advertising to media and establish an independent body to oversee this system
– In line with Article 25 of the EMFA, establish a registry for oversight of state advertising, which must be transparent, functional, and provide up-to-date and easily accessible data for journalists and citizens.
– Ensure this body is independent and issues annual reports on the distribution of funds, identifying any instances of preferential treatment or political influence.
– Award state advertising in accordance with transparent, objective, proportionate, and nondiscriminatory criteria. This should apply to allocation of advertising via public tenders, directly or indirectly, and via advertising agencies.
– Government agencies and state-run or -controlled companies should provide full transparency on advertising expenditure, while all media should disclose the total amount they receive from public funds.

13. Increase transparency over media ownership
– In line with Article 6 of the EMFA, establish a national media ownership database which is public, transparent, up-to-date and easily accessible online. This centralized online registry should require data regarding the ownership structure, including both direct and nondirect ownership, as well as the identity of any beneficial owners.
– Document swiftly all acquisitions and mergers of media in the database. Noncompliance with requests for information on all aspects of ownership should be addressed through administrative measures or penalties.

14. Prevent a high degree of concentration of ownership in the media sector
– In line with Article 22 of the EMFA, establish a coordinated system for the assessment of all new market developments that could lead to concentrations and have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence.
– Adopt procedural rules to assess the impact of new acquisitions or mergers on media pluralism, as the Maltese media legislation does not contain specific thresholds or other limitations in order to prevent a high degree of horizontal and cross-media concentration of ownership in the media sector.
– Introduce measures that guarantee transparency and provide clear thresholds to prevent market concentration, including in the online environment.
– Designate an appropriate authority to monitor and measure media pluralism and to advise the competition authority in order to stop ownership changes that damage media pluralism and threaten editorial independence.
– Provide proper statistics on market shares and media revenues.
– Codify protections to journalists from political interference. Cooperate with the Institute of Maltese Journalists and other stakeholders to make sure protections are adequate.

Signed:

– Association of European Journalists (AEJ)
– Civil Liberties Union for Europe
– Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
– European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
– European Federation of Journalists
– Global Forum for Media Development
– IFEX
– Institute for Reporters’ Freedom and Safety (IRFS)
– International Press Institute (IPI)
– Media Diversity Institute
– Ossigeno per l’Informazione
– PEN International
– Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
– Society of Journalists (Warsaw)
– South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
– Spanish Federation of Journalists (FAPE)

4 July 2025 : Türkiye- Arrest warrant issued against journalist and poet Nedim Türfent condemned

July 5, 2025 • • disabled comments

Written By PEN International

04 July 2025 – PEN International joins international free expression, media freedom, human rights and journalists’ organisations in expressing deep concern over reports that an arrest warrant has been issued for the Kurdish writer, journalist and poet Nedim Türfent on the charge of “disseminating propaganda in favour of a terrorist organisation”.
Türfent is currently living in exile in Germany due to the ongoing persecution he has faced by the Turkish authorities. While the arrest warrant was issued on 7 May 2025 by the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office of Yüksekova district in Hakkari, Türfent was only made aware of it on 25 June. The existence of the warrant was made public by the Dicle Firat Journalists’ Association (DFG) on 27 June.

This is the latest in a litany of threats and judicial harassment aimed at Türfent in recent years. He spent six years and seven months in prison after he was detained in May 2016 in response to his reporting on special police forces’ ill-treatment of Kurdish workers. This came amidst a severe clampdown on public interest journalism, where Kurdish writers and journalists were explicitly targeted. According to PEN International, as a result of his reporting he “began receiving death threats from the police and was the target of an online harassment campaign.” The day after his arrest, he was formally charged with “membership of a terrorist organisation”. Out of the 20 witnesses called during the court hearings, 19 retracted their statements, saying they had been extracted under torture. Türfent spent almost two years in solitary confinement. After spending over 2,400 days behind bars, he was released on 29 November 2022. 

As reported by DFG, the basis of the warrant appears to be four news-related posts and retweets Türfent shared on his X account. The charge of “disseminating propaganda in favor of a terrorist organisation”, outlined in Article 7 of Türkiye’s Anti-Terror Law (Law no. 3713), has long been used to stifle critical speech or public interest reporting. In 2024, 82 accounts on X, including those used by Kurdish politicians, journalists, publishers and media houses, were blocked by Turkish courts on the basis of this charge, as well as other provisions commonly used to restrict free expression. Other journalists and civil society representatives, including Erol Önderoğlu (Reporters Without Borders representative in Türkiye and International Press Institute member), Şebnem Korur Fincancı (Chair of  Human Rights Foundation of Türkiye) and writer Ahmet Nesin have also been charged under this provision in 2016. While they were acquitted, this verdict was overturned in October 2020.

As Türfent is now based in Germany, the warrant may result in an extradition request. Türkiye has long requested the extradition of those in exile, many of whom were targeted for their criticism of the ruling party and President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan or for acts of public interest journalism. For instance, in 2017, a year after the failed coup, it was reported that Türkiye had requested the extradition of 81 people from Germany. While German courts have previously rejected a number of requests on human rights grounds and in reference to the European Court of Human Rights, we are deeply concerned by the possibility of Türfent being forcibly returned to Türkiye. This fear is enhanced by the fact that his visa expires at the end of August 2025.

We, the undersigned, condemn the issuance of this arrest warrant targeting Türfent for acts of protected speech and for his work as a journalist. Speaking to Index on Censorship in 2023 about his persecution, Türfent said: “My journalism was then declared a ‘crime’.”
This cannot happen again, and we call for the warrant to be retracted without delay. We will continue to monitor the situation.

Signed by

Index on Censorship
ARTICLE 19
Articolo 21
Association of European Journalists (AEJ)
Association of Lawyers for Freedom (ÖHD)
Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
Croatian PEN Centre
Danish PEN
Deutsche Journalistinnen und Journalisten Union (dju) in ver.di
Dicle Firat Journalists’ Association (DFG)
DİSK Basın-İş
English PEN
European Center for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
Gefangenes Wort 
Giuristi Democratici Association – Italy  
Human Rights Association (İHD)
IFEX
International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
International Press Institute (IPI) 
International Society for Human Rights (ISHR)
Internationale Gesellschaft für Menschenrechte (IGFM)
Journalists’ Union of Turkey (TGS)
Kurdish PEN
Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA)
P24 Platform for Independent Journalism 
PEN America
PEN Català
PEN Esperanto
PEN International 
PEN Melbourne
PEN Netherlands
PEN Norway
PEN Sweden
PEN Sydney
Progressive Lawyers’ Association (ÇHD), Turkey
Research and Development Center for Democracy (CRED)
San Miguel PEN
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
Stimmen der Solidarität – Mahnwache Köln e.V.
Vietnamese Abroad PEN Centre
Wahrheitskämpfers e. V.

************************

Türkiye : Mandat d’arrêt contre le journaliste et poète Nedim Türfent
condamné

04 juillet 2025 – PEN International se joint aux organisations internationales de défense de la liberté d’expression, de la liberté des médias, des droits de l’homme et des journalistes pour exprimer sa profonde inquiétude face aux informations selon lesquelles un mandat d’arrêt a été émis à l’encontre de l’écrivain, journaliste et poète
kurde Nedim Türfent, accusé de “diffusion de propagande en faveur d’une organisation terroriste”. Nedim Türfent vit actuellement en exil en Allemagne en raison des persécutions dont il fait l’objet de la part des autorités turques. Le mandat d’arrêt a été délivré le 7 mai 2025 par le bureau du procureur général du district de Yüksekova à Hakkari, mais Türfent n’en a eu connaissance que le 25 juin. L’existence du mandat a
été rendue publique par le bureau des journalistes de Dicle Firat. Association des journalistes de Dicle Firat (DFG) le 27 juin.

Il s’agit de la dernière d’une série de menaces et de harcèlement judiciaire à l’encontre de Türfent au cours des dernières années. Il a passé six ans et sept mois en prison après avoir été arrêté en mai 2016 à la suite de son reportage sur les mauvais traitements infligés par les forces spéciales de la police aux travailleurs kurdes. Cela s’est produit dans le cadre d’une répression sévère du journalisme d’intérêt public, où les écrivains et les journalistes kurdes ont été explicitement ciblés. Selon PEN Internationalil a commencé à recevoir des menaces de mort de la part de la police et a été la cible d’une campagne de harcèlement en ligne. Le lendemain de son arrestation, il a été officiellement accusé d'”appartenance à une organisation terroriste”. Sur les 20 témoins cités lors des audiences du tribunal, 19 sont revenus sur leurs déclarations, affirmant qu’elles leur avaient été arrachées sous la torture. Türfent a passé près de deux ans à l’isolement. Après avoir passé plus de 2 400 jours derrière les barreaux, il a été libéré le 29 novembre 2022. 

Comme le rapporte le DFG, le mandat semble se fonder sur quatre messages et retweets liés à l’actualité que Türfent a partagés sur son compte X. L’accusation de “diffusion de propagande en faveur d’une organisation terroriste”, énoncée à l’article 7 de la loi antiterroriste de la Turquie (loi n° 3713), a longtemps été utilisée pour étouffer les discours critiques ou les reportages d’intérêt public. En 2024, 82 comptes sur X, y compris ceux utilisés par des politiciens kurdes, des journalistes, des éditeurs et des maisons de presse, ont été bloqués par les tribunaux turcs sur la base de cette accusation, ainsi que d’autres dispositions couramment utilisées pour restreindre la liberté d’expression. D’autres journalistes et représentants de la société civile, dont Erol Önderoğlu (représentant de Reporters sans frontières en Turquie et membre de l’Institut international de la presse), Şebnem Korur Fincancı (président de la Fondation des droits de l’homme de Turquie) et l’écrivain Ahmet Nesin ont également été inculpés sur la base de cette disposition en 2016. Ils ont été acquittés, mais ce verdict a été annulé en octobre 2020.

Comme Türfent est désormais basé en Allemagne, le mandat pourrait donner lieu à une demande d’extradition. La Türkiye demande depuis longtemps l’extradition des personnes en exil, dont beaucoup ont été ciblées pour leurs critiques du parti au pouvoir et du président Recep Tayyip Erdoğan ou pour des actes de journalisme d’intérêt public. Par exemple, en 2017, un an après le coup d’État manqué, il a été rapporté que la Turquie avait demandé l’extradition de 81 personnes depuis l’Allemagne. Alors que les tribunaux allemands ont précédemment rejeté un certain nombre de demandes pour des raisons liées aux droits de l’homme et en référence à la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme, nous sommes profondément préoccupés par la possibilité que Türfent soit renvoyé de force en Türkiye. Cette crainte est renforcée par le fait que son visa expire à la fin du mois d’août 2025.

Nous, soussignés, condamnons l’émission de ce mandat d’arrêt visant Türfent pour des actes d’expression protégés et pour son travail de journaliste. S’adressant à Index on Censorship en 2023, Türfent a déclaré à propos de sa persécution : Mon travail de journaliste a alors été qualifié de “crime”. Cela ne peut plus se reproduire et nous demandons que le mandat d’arrêt soit rétracté sans délai. Nous continuerons à suivre l’évolution de la situation.

Signé par

Index de la censure
ARTICLE 19
Article 21
Association des journalistes européens (AEJ)
Association des avocats pour la liberté (ÖHD)
Comité pour la protection des journalistes (CPJ)
Centre PEN de Croatie
PEN danois
Deutsche Journalistinnen und Journalisten Union (dju) in ver.di
Association des journalistes de Dicle Firat (DFG)
DİSK Basın-İş
PEN anglais
Centre européen pour la liberté de la presse et des médias (ECPMF)
Fédération européenne des journalistes (FEJ)
Le goût de l’eau 
Association Giuristi Democratici – Italie
Association des droits de l’homme (İHD)
IFEX
Fédération internationale des journalistes (FIJ)
Institut international de la presse (IPI)
Société internationale des droits de l’homme (SIDH)
Internationale Gesellschaft für Menschenrechte (IGFM)
Union des journalistes de Turquie (TGS)
PEN kurde
Association d’études sur les médias et le droit (MLSA)
P24 Plate-forme pour le journalisme indépendant 
PEN America
PEN Català
PEN Espéranto
PEN International 
PEN Melbourne
PEN Pays-Bas
PEN Norvège
PEN Suède
PEN Sydney
Association des juristes progressistes (ÇHD), Turquie
Centre de recherche et de développement pour la démocratie (CRED)
San Miguel PEN
Organisation des médias de l’Europe du Sud-Est (SEEMO)
Stimmen der Solidarität – Mahnwache Köln e.V.
Centre PEN des Vietnamiens de l’étranger
Wahrheitskämpfers e. V.

************************

Turquía: Condena de la orden de detención dictada contra el periodista y poeta Nedim Türfent

4 de julio de 2025 – PEN International se une a las organizaciones internacionales de defensa de la libertad de expresión, la libertad de los medios de comunicación, los derechos humanos y los periodistas para expresar su profunda preocupación por las informaciones según las cuales se ha dictado una orden de detención contra el escritor, periodista y poeta kurdo Nedim Türfent, acusado de “difundir propaganda a favor de
una organización terrorista”. Türfent vive actualmente exiliado en Alemania debido a la persecución que sufre por parte de las autoridades turcas. Aunque la orden de detención fue emitida el 7 de mayo de 2025 por la Fiscalía General del distrito de Yüksekova, en Hakkari, Türfent no tuvo conocimiento de ella hasta el 25 de junio. La existencia de la orden fue hecha pública por la Asociación de Periodistas Dicle Firat
(DFG) el 27 de junio.

Se trata de la última de una letanía de amenazas y acoso judicial dirigidas contra Türfent en los últimos años. Pasó seis años y siete meses en prisión tras ser detenido en mayo de 2016 en respuesta a su reportaje sobre los malos tratos infligidos por las fuerzas especiales de policía a trabajadores kurdos. Esto se produjo en medio de una severa represión del periodismo de interés público, en la que escritores y periodistas kurdos fueron blanco explícito. Según PEN Internacionalcomo consecuencia de sus reportajes “empezó a recibir amenazas de muerte de la policía y fue objeto de una campaña de acoso en Internet”. Al día siguiente de su detención, fue acusado formalmente de “pertenencia a organización terrorista”. De los 20 testigos citados durante las vistas judiciales, 19 se retractaron de sus declaraciones, alegando que habían sido obtenidas bajo tortura. Türfent pasó casi dos años en régimen de aislamiento. Tras pasar más de 2.400 días entre rejas, fue puesto en libertad el 29 de noviembre de 2022. 

Según informa DFG, la base de la orden parecen ser cuatro publicaciones y retweets relacionados con noticias que Türfent compartió en su cuenta X. El cargo de “difusión de propaganda a favor de una organización terrorista”, recogido en el artículo 7 de la Ley Antiterrorista de Turquía (Ley nº 3713), se utiliza desde hace tiempo para reprimir el discurso crítico o la información de interés público. En 2024 se bloquearon 82 cuentas en X, incluidas las de políticos, periodistas, editores y medios de comunicación kurdos. bloqueadas por los tribunales turcos basándose en esta acusación, así como en otras disposiciones utilizadas habitualmente para restringir la libertad de expresión. Otros periodistas y representantes de la sociedad civil, entre ellos Erol Önderoğlu (representante de Reporteros Sin Fronteras en Türkiye y miembro del Instituto Internacional de Prensa), Şebnem Korur Fincancı (presidente de la Fundación de Derechos Humanos de Türkiye) y el escritor Ahmet Nesin también han sido acusados en virtud de esta disposición en 2016. Aunque fueron absueltos, este veredicto fue anulado en octubre de 2020.

Como Türfent reside ahora en Alemania, la orden puede dar lugar a una solicitud de extradición. Türkiye lleva mucho tiempo solicitando la extradición de personas en el exilio, muchas de las cuales fueron perseguidas por sus críticas al partido gobernante y al presidente Recep Tayyip Erdoğan o por actos de periodismo de interés público. Por ejemplo, en 2017, un año después del golpe de Estado fallido, se informó que Türkiye había solicitado a Alemania la extradición de 81 personas.

Aunque los tribunales alemanes han rechazado anteriormente varias solicitudes por motivos de derechos humanos y en referencia al Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos, nos preocupa profundamente la posibilidad de que Türfent sea devuelto por la fuerza a Türkiye. Este temor se ve acrecentado por el hecho de que su visado expira a finales de agosto de 2025.

Nosotros, los abajo firmantes, condenamos la emisión de esta orden de detención contra Türfent por actos de expresión protegidos y por su trabajo como periodista. En declaraciones a Índice de Censura en 2023 sobre su persecución, Türfent dijo: “Mi labor periodística fue declarada entonces ‘delito'”. Esto no puede volver a ocurrir, y pedimos que se revoque la orden sin demora. Seguiremos vigilando la situación.

Firmado por

Índice de la Censura
ARTÍCULO 19
Artículo 21
Asociación de Periodistas Europeos (AEJ)
Asociación de Abogados por la Libertad (ÖHD)
Comité para la Protección de los Periodistas (CPJ)
Centro PEN Croata
PEN danés
Unión Alemana de Periodistas (dju) en ver.di
Asociación de Periodistas Dicle Firat (DFG)
DİSK Basın-İş
PEN inglés
Centro Europeo para la Libertad de Prensa y de los Medios de
Comunicación (ECPMF)
Federación Europea de Periodistas (FEP)
Le goût de l’eau 
Asociación Giuristi Democratici – Italia  
Asociación de Derechos Humanos (İHD)
IFEX
Federación Internacional de Periodistas (FIP)
Instituto Internacional de Prensa (IPI) 
Sociedad Internacional de Derechos Humanos (SIDH)
Sociedad Internacional de Derechos Humanos (IGFM)
Sindicato de Periodistas de Turquía (TGS)
PEN kurdo
Asociación de Estudios de Derecho y Medios de Comunicación (MLSA)
P24 Plataforma de Periodismo Independiente 
PEN América
PEN Català
PEN Espéranto
PEN Internacional 
PEN Melbourne
PEN Países Bajos
PEN Noruega
PEN Suecia
PEN Sydney
Asociación de Abogados Progresistas (ÇHD), Turquía
Centro de Investigación y Desarrollo para la Democracia (CRED)
PEN San Miguel
Organización de Medios de Comunicación de Europa Sudoriental (SEEMO)
Stimmen der Solidarität – Mahnwache Köln e.V.
Centro PEN de Vietnamitas en el Extranjero
Wahrheitskämpfers e. V.

************************

تركيا: صدور مذكرة توقيف بحق الصحفي والشاعر نديم ترفنت، وإدانة الصحفي والشاعر نديم ترفنت

04 يوليو/تموز 2025 – تنضم منظمة القلم الدولية إلى المنظمات الدولية المعنية بحرية التعبير وحرية الإعلام وحقوق الإنسان والصحفيين في الإعراب عن قلقها العميق إزاء التقارير التي تفيد بصدور مذكرة اعتقال بحق الكاتب والصحفي والشاعر الكردي نديم ترفنت بتهمة “نشر دعاية لصالح منظمة إرهابية”. يعيش تورفنت حاليًا في المنفى في ألمانيا بسبب الاضطهاد المستمر الذي يتعرض له من قبل السلطات التركية. في حين أن مذكرة الاعتقال صدرت في 7 مايو 2025 من قبل مكتب المدعي العام في منطقة يوكسيكوفا في هكاري، لم يتم إعلام تورفنت بها إلا في 25 يونيو. وقد تم الإعلان عن وجود المذكرة من قبل جمعية الصحفيين في دجلة فرات (DFG) في 27 يونيو.

وهذا هو الأحدث في سلسلة من التهديدات والمضايقات القضائية التي تستهدف تورفنت في السنوات الأخيرة. فقد أمضى ست سنوات وسبعة أشهر في السجن بعد اعتقاله في مايو 2016 رداً على تقاريره عن سوء معاملة قوات الشرطة الخاصة للعمال الأكراد. وجاء ذلك في خضم حملة شديدة على صحافة المصلحة العامة، حيث تم استهداف الكتاب والصحفيين الأكراد بشكل صريح. وبحسب منظمة القلم الدولية”بدأ يتلقى تهديدات بالقتل من الشرطة نتيجةً لتقاريره الصحفية، وكان هدفًا لحملة مضايقات على الإنترنت.” وفي اليوم التالي لاعتقاله، وجهت إليه رسمياً تهمة “الانتماء إلى منظمة إرهابية”. ومن بين الشهود العشرين الذين تم استدعاؤهم خلال جلسات المحكمة، تراجع 19 شاهدًا عن أقوالهم قائلين إنهم انتزعت منهم تحت التعذيب. قضى تورفنت ما يقرب من عامين في الحبس الانفرادي. وبعد أن أمضى أكثر من 2,400 يوم خلف القضبان، أُطلق سراحه في 29 نوفمبر 2022. 

وكما ذكرت وكالة الأنباء الألمانية (DFG)، يبدو أن أساس المذكرة هو أربع منشورات متعلقة بالأخبار وإعادة التغريدات التي نشرها تورفنت على حسابه على موقع X. لطالما استُخدمت تهمة “نشر دعاية لصالح منظمة إرهابية”، المنصوص عليها في المادة 7 من قانون مكافحة الإرهاب في تركيا (القانون رقم 3713)، لخنق الخطاب النقدي أو التقارير التي تهم المصلحة العامة. في عام 2024، تم حظر 82 حسابًا على موقع X، بما في ذلك الحسابات التي يستخدمها سياسيون وصحفيون وناشرون ودور إعلام كردية تم حظرها من قبل المحاكم التركية على أساس هذه التهمة، بالإضافة إلى أحكام أخرى تُستخدم عادةً لتقييد حرية التعبير. كما تم حظر حسابات صحفيين وممثلين عن المجتمع المدنيومن بينهم إيرول أونديروغلو (ممثل منظمة مراسلون بلا حدود في تركيا وعضو المعهد الدولي للصحافة)، وشبنم كورور فنجانجي (رئيس مؤسسة حقوق الإنسان في تركيا) والكاتب أحمد نسين تم اتهامهم بموجب هذا الحكم في عام 2016. وفي حين تمت تبرئتهما، إلا أن هذا الحكم ألغي هذا الحكم في أكتوبر 2020.

وبما أن تورفنت مقيم الآن في ألمانيا، فقد تؤدي مذكرة التوقيف إلى طلب تسليمه. ولطالما طلبت تركيا تسليم الأشخاص الموجودين في المنفى، حيث تم استهداف العديد منهم بسبب انتقادهم للحزب الحاكم والرئيس رجب طيب أردوغان أو بسبب أعمالهم الصحفية ذات المصلحة العامة. على سبيل المثال، في عام 2017، أي بعد عام من الانقلاب الفاشل، تم الإبلاغ عن تقارير أن تركيا طلبت تسليم 81 شخصًا من ألمانيا. وفي حين أن المحاكم الألمانية رفضت في السابق عددًا من الطلبات لأسباب تتعلق بحقوق الإنسان وبالرجوع إلى المحكمة الأوروبية لحقوق الإنسان، إلا أننا نشعر بقلق عميق من إمكانية إعادة تورفنت قسراً إلى تركيا. ومما يعزز هذا الخوف أن تأشيرته تنتهي صلاحيتها في نهاية أغسطس/آب 2025.

نحن الموقعين أدناه، ندين إصدار مذكرة الاعتقال هذه التي تستهدف تورفنت بسبب أفعاله التي تحميها القوانين الدولية وعمله كصحفي. وفي حديثنا إلى لمؤشر الرقابة في عام 2023 حول اضطهاده، قال تورفنت “أُعلن بعد ذلك أن عملي الصحفي “جريمة”. هذا لا يمكن أن يحدث مرة أخرى، ونحن ندعو إلى سحب مذكرة الاعتقال دون تأخير. سنواصل مراقبة الوضع.

توقيع

توقيع

فهرس الرقابة

المادة 19

أرتيكولو 21

رابطة الصحفيين الأوروبيين (AEJ)

رابطة المحامين من أجل الحرية (ÖHD)

لجنة حماية الصحفيين

مركز القلم الكرواتي

القلم الدنماركي

اتحاد الصحفيين والصحفيين الألمان (dju) في فيريدي

جمعية صحفيي دجلة فرات دجلة (DFG)

DİSK Basın-İş

القلم الإنجليزي

المركز الأوروبي لحرية الصحافة والإعلام (ECPMF)

الاتحاد الأوروبي للصحفيين (EFJ)

نقيع الجيفانجين 

جمعية جيورستي ديمقراطي – إيطاليا  

جمعية حقوق الإنسان (İHD)

آيفكس

الاتحاد الدولي للصحفيين (IFJ)

المعهد الدولي للصحافة 

الجمعية الدولية لحقوق الإنسان (ISHR)

المنظمة الدولية لحقوق الإنسان (IGFM)

اتحاد الصحفيين في تركيا (TGS)

القلم الكردي

جمعية دراسات الإعلام والقانون (MLSA)

منصة P24 للصحافة المستقلة 

بن أمريكا

PEN Català

بن الاسبرانتو

منظمة القلم الدولية 

بين ملبورن

PEN هولندا

نادي القلم النرويجي

القلم السويد

قلم سيدني

جمعية المحامين التقدميين (ÇHD)، تركيا

مركز البحث والتطوير من أجل الديمقراطية (CRED)

سان ميغيل سان ميغيل بن

منظمة جنوب شرق أوروبا الإعلامية (SEEMO)

Stimmen der Solidarität – Mahnwache Köln e.V.

مركز القلم الفيتناميون في الخارج

Wahrheitskämpfers e. V.

2 July 2025: Journalists detained under the Artvin investigation must be released immediately!

July 2, 2025 • • disabled comments

Journalists Dicle Baştürk, Yavuz Akengin, Eylem Emel Yılmaz, and Sendika.Org contributor Ozan Cırık, who were detained during house raids in Istanbul on 13 June, were put under arrest pending trial by the on-duty court on the night of 16 June on charges of “membership of a terrorist organization.” Moreover, as part of the same investigation, journalist Metin Yoksu was also arrested on 26 June after voluntarily
appearing before the prosecutor in Batman to give his testimony.
The investigation file cites the journalists’ provision of technical services to news websites, the copyright fees they received for their reporting, and their professional communications as grounds for prosecution. These journalists are being punished simply for doing their jobs and for receiving payment for their work. Under national and international regulations that safeguard press freedom, it is unacceptable to criminalize journalistic activity.
Producing news, sharing news, and receiving payment for such work is not a crime. Journalism is not a crime. As press freedom organizations and civil society groups signing below, we consider these arrests yet another example of how vague criminal
charges are increasingly misused to silence the press. It is unacceptable to accuse journalists of “membership in a terrorist organization” solely for producing and publishing news.
At a time when journalism is already under siege from job insecurity, pressure, and censorship—when journalists are targeted with detention based on the outlets they work with, the organizations they are affiliated with, or their official employment records—these arrests are a direct assault on the public’s right to information.
We demand the immediate release of the detained journalists and call on the authorities to put an end to attempts to silence the press.

Signatories:
Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA)
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
Media Communication and Postal Employees Union (HABER-SEN)
Trade Union of Journalists, Publishing House and Printing House Workers
(DİSK Basın-İş)
P24 Platform for Independent Journalism
Netgazeti, Georgia
Batumelebi, Georgia
The Georgian Charter of Journalistic Ethics
Independent Association of Georgian Journalists (IAGJ)
Journalism Resource Center (JRC)
Community Radio “Marneuli”
Journalists’ Union of Turkey (TGS)
International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
Journalists and Media Workers Union (Russia)
International Press Institute (IPI)
ARTICLE 19
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)

Artvin soruşturmasında tutuklu gazeteciler derhal serbest bırakılmalıdır!

13 Haziran’da İstanbul’da yapılan ev baskınlarında gözaltına alınan gazeteciler Dicle Baştürk, Yavuz Akengin, Eylem Emel Yılmaz ve Sendika.Org emekçisi Ozan Cırık, 16 Haziran gecesi çıkarıldıkları nöbetçi mahkeme tarafından ‘örgüt üyeliği’ iddiasıyla tutuklandı. Aynı soruşturma kapsamında ayrıca gazeteci Metin Yoksu Batman’da savcılığa giderek ifade verdikten sonra 26 Haziran’da tutuklandı.
Soruşturma dosyasında gazetecilerin haber sitelerine sağladıkları teknik hizmetler, haberleri için aldıkları telif ödemeleri ve mesleki iletişimleri suçlama konusu yapıldı. Gazeteciler, yaptıkları haberler ve bu haberler karşılığında aldıkları ödemeler nedeniyle cezalandırılmak isteniyor.
Basın özgürlüğünü koruyan ulusal ve uluslararası düzenlemeler kapsamında gazetecilik faaliyetlerinin suç unsuru olarak gösterilmesi kabul edilemez. Haber yapmak, haber paylaşmak ve bunun karşılığında telif ücreti almak suç değildir. Gazetecilik suç değildir.
Ayrıca gazeteci Eylem Yılmaz’ın cezaevi kapasite doluluğu gerekçesiyle yerde yattığı ortaya çıkmıştır. Haksız yere yargılanmasının yanı sıra psikolojik ve fiziksel sağlık sorunlarına yol açacak şekilde cezalandırılmaktadır. Bu koşullar uluslararası insan hakları sözleşmelerine de aykırıdır.
Aşağıda imzası bulunan basın meslek örgütleri ve sivil toplum kuruluşları olarak, bu tutuklamaların, muğlak suçlamaların basını susturmak amacıyla giderek nasıl daha fazla istismar edilmesinin en son örneği olduğunu düşünüyoruz. Gazetecilerin yalnızca haber üretiminden ve paylaşımından dolayı ‘örgüt üyeliği’ ile suçlanması kabul edilemez.
Gazeteciliğin ifade özgürlüğü başta olmak üzere güvencesizlik, baskı ve sansürle kuşatıldığı bu günlerde gazetecilerin gelir elde ettikleri mecralar, çalıştıkları kurumlar ve SGK kayıtları temelinde tutuklama uygulamasıyla baskı altına alınmaya, sindirilmeye çalışılması halkın haber alma hakkının da engellenmesidir.
Tutuklu gazetecilerin derhal serbest bırakılmasını ve basını susturmaya yönelik girişimlerden vazgeçilmesini talep ediyoruz.

İmzacılar:
Medya ve Hukuk Çalışmaları Derneği (MLSA)
Avrupa Basın ve Medya Özgürlüğü Merkezi (ECPMF)
Haber-Sen (Basın Yayın İletişim ve Posta Emekçileri Sendikası)
DİSK Basın-İş
Türkiye Gazeteciler Sendikası (TGS)
P24 Bağımsız Gazetecilik Derneği
Netgazeti, Gürcistan
Batumelebi, Gürcistan
Community Radio “Marneuli”, Gürcistan
Gürcistan Gazetecilik Etik Tüzüğü
Gürcistan Bağımsız Gazeteciler Derneği (IAGJ)
Gazetecilik Kaynak Merkezi (JRC)
Uluslararası Basın Enstitüsü (IPI)
ARTICLE 19
Avrupa Gazeteciler Federasyonu (EFJ)
Uluslararası Gazeteciler Federasyonu (IFJ)
Gazeteciler ve Medya Çalışanları Sendikası (Rusya)
Güney Doğu Avrupa Medya Örgütü (SEEMO)

25 June 2025: Turkey – Press freedom and journalist organisations call for the release of journalist Fatih Altaylı

June 25, 2025 • • disabled comments

IPI, SEEMO and the undersigned press freedom, freedom of expression and journalists’ organizations today strongly condemn the arrest of Turkish journalist Fatih Altaylı over his political commentary during a YouTube live broadcast and call for his immediate release.

Fatih Altaylı, a prominent journalist and columnist, was taken into custody and arrested on June 21, 2025, hours after a segment of his YouTube broadcast went viral on social media. In the video, Altaylı offered critical political commentary in response to a poll suggesting that 70 percent of the Turkish public would oppose a proposal to allow
the Turkish President to remain in power indefinitely.

Following this, some social media accounts began spreading edited clips from his broadcast that mischaracterized his comments as threatening speech. Shortly afterward, Oktay Saral, a senior advisor to the Turkish President, publicly targeted Altaylı on social media, writing that he was “in hot water already”. Within ten hours, Altaylı had been detained.

Under Turkish law, if a person is under investigation for a crime that carries a maximum prison sentence of two years or less, they typically cannot be held in pretrial detention. Initially, Altaylı was held on suspicion of making a criminal threat—an offense that is applicable to threats against any individual, and falls into this category. Prosecutors later reinterpreted the case and invoked a provision that increases penalties for offenses in which the president is the victim. This provision, which mandates a minimum five-year sentence, allowed authorities to place Altaylı in pretrial detention. However, legal experts argue that this provision applies only to direct physical acts—not verbal statements made through the press—and warn that its use in this case exceeds its intended legal scope.

The Istanbul 10th Criminal Court of Peace approved the prosecutor’s request to jail Altaylı pending trial, citing the “severity of the offense” and a purported “risk of flight”.

Following his arrest, Turkey’s Radio and Television Supreme Council (RTÜK) issued a warning on June 23 announcing that Altaylı’s YouTube channel must apply for an internet broadcasting license within 72 hours, submit the required documents, and pay a three-month licensing fee in advance, or be closed down.

The undersigned organisations regard this arrest as a clear abuse of criminal law to silence critical political commentary. The decision to interpret Altaylı’s remarks as incitement to assassination is a dangerous expansion of criminal liability, one that threatens to further erode freedom of expression in Türkiye.

We jointly call for the immediate release of Fatih Altaylı and urge Turkish authorities to cease exploiting vague legal provisions to persecute journalists. A free press must include the right to freedom of expression and critique political leaders without fear of reprisal.

Signed by:

International Press Institute (IPI)
ARTICLE 19 Europe
Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
Foreign Media Association (FMA Turkey)
Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA)
Progressive Journalists Association (PJA)
Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)

in Turkish:

IPI, SEEMO ve aşağıda imzası bulunan basın özgürlüğü, ifade hürriyeti ve basın meslek kuruluşları olarak gazeteci Fatih Altaylı’nın YouTube’daki canlı yayınında yaptığı siyasi yorumları nedeniyle tutuklanmasını şiddetle kınıyor, derhal serbest bırakılmasını talep ediyoruz.

Gazeteci ve köşe yazarı Fatih Altaylı, sosyal medyada çokça paylaşılan YouTube yayınından birkaç saat sonra 21 Haziran’da önce gözaltına alındı, sonra da tutuklandı. Söz konusu videoda Altaylı, Türkiye halkının yüzde 70’inin devlet başkanlarının süresiz görevde kalmasına karşı olduğunu gösteren bir anketi değerlendiriyordu.

Yayının ardından bazı sosyal medya hesapları, Altaylı’nın sözlerini bağlamından koparıp tehdit içerikliymiş gibi yansıtan video kesitlerini yaymaya başladı. Kısa süre içinde Cumhurbaşkanı Başdanışmanı Oktay Saral da sosyal medya hesabından videoyu paylaşıp, “Altaylıııı! Suyun ısınmaya başladı” ifadelerini kullandı. Saral’ın paylaşımından yaklaşık 10 saat sonra Altaylı gözaltına alındı.

Türkiye’deki yasalar, azami cezası iki yıl olan suçlarla ilgili soruşturmalarda şüphelilerin tutuklu yargılanamayacağını belirtiyor. Altaylı da ilk olarak bu kapsamda değerlendirilmesi gereken tehdit suçu şüphesiyle gözaltına alınmıştı. Ancak savcılık daha sonra dosyayı yeniden değerlendirerek mağdurun Cumhurbaşkanı olması durumunda cezayı artıran maddeyi devreye soktu. En az beş yıl hapis cezası talep
edilebilmesinin önünü açan bu madde uyarınca Altaylı’nın tutuklu yargılanmasının yolu açıldı. Ancak hukukçular, bu maddenin sadece fiziki müdahaleler için geçerli olduğunu, basın yoluyla yapılan sözlü açıklamalara uygulanamayacağını belirterek yasanın kapsamının aşıldığını ifade ediyor.

İstanbul 10. Sulh Ceza Hakimliği, savcılığın tutuklama talebini “suçun vasıf ve mahiyeti” ve “kaçma ihtimalinin yüksek olduğu” gerekçesiyle kabul etti.

Altaylı’nın tutuklanmasının ardından 23 Haziran’da Radyo ve Televizyon Üst Kurulu (RTÜK) ise gazetecinin YouTube kanalı için 72 saat içinde internet yayın lisansına başvuruda bulunması, gerekli belgeleri sunması ve üç aylık lisans ücretini peşin ödemesi gerektiğini, aksi takdirde kanalın kapatılacağını duyurdu.

Aşağıda imzası bulunan kuruluşlar olarak bu tutuklamayı, cezai yasaların açıkça suistimal edilmesi sonucu siyasi eleştirinin bastırılması olarak değerlendiriyoruz. Altaylı’nın sözlerinin suikast suçu kapsamında yorumlanması cezai sorumluluğu tehlikeli biçimde genişletmekte ve Türkiye’de ifade özgürlüğünü daha da zayıflatmaktadır.

Fatih Altaylı’nın derhal serbest bırakılmasını ve yetkililerin gazetecileri cezalandırmak için muğlak yasal düzenlemelere başvurmaktan vazgeçmesini talep ediyoruz. Özgür basın, misilleme korkusu yaşamadan siyasi liderleri eleştirme ve fikirlerini ifade edebilme hakkına sahip olmalıdır.

İmzacılar:

Uluslararası Basın Enstitüsü (IPI)
ARTICLE 19 Europe
Avrupa Basın ve Medya Özgürlüğü Merkezi (ECPMF)
Avrupa Gazeteciler Federasyonu (EFJ)
Çağdaş Gazeteciler Derneği (ÇGD)
Gazetecileri Koruma Komitesi (CPJ)
Güney Doğu Avrupa Medya Örgütü (SEEMO)
Medya ve Hukuk Çalışmaları Derneği (MLSA)
Sınır Tanımayan Gazeteciler (RSF)
Yabancı Medya Derneği (FMA)

World Press Freedom Day 2025- by Eva Maria Grabmair, SEEMO Contributor

May 1, 2025 • • disabled comments

Artificial Influencer

Getting carried away is not uncommon, particularly regarding topics of intense discussion, even contention. For some time this has happened with computer programs, too. Artificial Intelligence brings with it the potential of a technological progress and speed in fields such as medicine, industry and also in journalism, as never before.

Undoubtedly, artificial Intelligence wields tremendous influence. And there lies one of its pitfalls: Algorithms can easily get out of control and create fake content by piecing together and distorting existing data and information.

Influencing has, to some degree, always been a part of the distribution of information, both in traditional and new media as well as in many everyday situations (media-related or not). Influencing can happen by design or as a „side-effect“ of someone’s natural enthusiasm, etc. all of which is usually not problematic as long as it is not carried too far. What is essential, is that the distributed information / opinion / commentary can be traced back to its source.

Like all other media content, electronic media content does not generate itself; it originates based on some occurence or event happening somewhere. And it is crucial to remind onself that the original research and reporting is done by humans.

Just as there are guidelines for standards of good practice in traditional media, a number of highly useful handbooks to help verify the authenticity of electronic / social media content, establish who holds the copyright and research how to prevent phenomena like deep-fake, etc. have been published. Nontheless, the topic needs continuous urgent attention in dialogue between media experts, AI-experts, law- and political experts.

As soon as artificial intelligence is allowed to produce and distribute content by itself without human supervision, it gets considerably more difficult to control, to find out who – in effect – is responsible for what is published and to take those persons to account if neccessary.

Undue influence by algorithm will not suffice as an explanation in the event of damage.

Moreover, a set of Standards of Good Practice does not restrict the legitimate und beneficial use of Artificial Intelligence; rather, it provides a means of protection from artificial intelligence getting out of human control. Journalists and media consumers alike ought to bear this in mind when confronted with AI.

27 March 2025: ARTICLE 19, SEEMO and partner human rights and journalist organisations are alarmed

March 29, 2025 • • disabled comments

ARTICLE 19, SEEMO and partner human rights and journalist organisations are alarmed

ARTICLE 19, SEEMO and partner human rights and journalist organisations are alarmed by the recent escalation in the government’s crackdown on freedom of expression and freedom of peaceful assembly following the detention of Istanbul’s mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu. Tens of thousands continue to participate in overwhelmingly peaceful mass protests across Türkiye, marking the largest demonstrations in over a decade. The protests, which initially began in major cities, have spread throughout the country, and the police have responded with unlawful and indiscriminate force to disperse the crowds. Journalists also face significant restrictions, including arrests and physical assaults, and social media platforms have been pressured to suppress information about unfolding events.

The government must immediately cease its attacks against peaceful protesters, stop targeting journalists and news channels, and halt its crackdown on online speech. We also urge social media companies to take immediate steps to restore access to blocked accounts containing protected speech while implementing necessary measures to ensure
continued accessibility of their platforms.

Crackdown on mass protest

Türkiye is now facing one of its gravest socio-political upheavals in decades. Tens of thousands of people have taken to the streets following the detention of Istanbul Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu on 19 March, based on investigations of ‘corruption’ and ‘aiding terrorism’, in a raid involving detention orders for more than 100 others. İmamoğlu was
remanded in pre-trial detention on 23 March, the same day he was nominated by members of his party as the main opposition candidate in a symbolic primary for the 2028 presidential election. He was removed from his post alongside district mayors of Şişli and Beylikdüzü, who also face charges.

According to the Minister of Interior, as of 26 March, 1879 people were detained during the protests. The protests were met with unwarranted and unlawful use of police force, with people beaten with batons and kicked when they were on the ground. Law enforcement officials indiscriminately used pepper spray, tear gas, plastic bullets and water cannons against protesters, causing numerous injuries. The Minister also reported on 27 March that 150 police officers were injured during the protests. He did not, however, report how many protesters were injured.

The repression also affects forms of protest beyond demonstrations. On 26 March, members of the board of Eğitim-Sen, a teachers’ union, were put under house arrest pending trial for ‘inciting crime’ following their decision to stop work on 25 March in solidarity with university students – who have been at the forefront of the protests– while the
union’s representative at Istanbul University was detained.

Blanket bans on protests have been in place in Istanbul since 19 March, and in İzmir and Ankara since 21 March. The Governor of Istanbul also issued a decision stating that ‘Individuals, groups and vehicles likely to participate in illegal activities – individually or collectively – will not be allowed to enter or exit the city’. It is unclear how this is enforced.

We remind Turkish authorities that they have obligations under international human rights law to respect and ensure everyone’s right to freedom of peaceful assembly. Any restrictions to this right must be narrowly drawn and meet the three-part test. Specifically, they must be prescribed by law, pursue a legitimate aim, and be necessary and
proportionate to that aim. Blanket bans on protests are disproportionate and unjustifiable. Additionally, we strongly condemn the use of force against peaceful protesters. The use of force by law enforcement officials must be strictly necessary and proportionate –only the minimum force necessary may be used, and those who use force must always
be accountable. We call on the authorities to ensure that any allegations of unlawful use of force and other human rights violations by law enforcement officials, including gender-based violence, torture and other ill-treatment inflicted on protesters, are subject to an effective, impartial and timely investigation.

Threats and violence against journalists and media outlets

The crackdown on mass protests has been accompanied by intensified attacks and pressure on independent media and journalists. At least 11 local journalists were detained in Istanbul and Izmir due to their reporting of the protests, with seven of them remanded in detention on 25 March for allegedly violating the Law on Meetings and Demonstrations, and released after appeal on 27 March, pending trial. At least 10 local journalists were physically assaulted by the police while covering the protests on the ground in Istanbul, and one journalist was reportedly
assaulted by protesters.

The international media have also been caught up in the crackdown. The BBC reported on 27 March that its correspondent Mark Lowen, who was in Istanbul to cover the protests, was detained at his hotel and later deported on the grounds that he was a ‘threat to public order’.

Reporting on the events is also restricted by Türkiye’s Radio and Television Supreme Council (RTÜK). RTÜK’s chair Ebubekir Şahin has urged broadcast media, their anchors and commentators to ensure their reporting ‘remain free from political bias’, warning that failure to do so would result in maximum penalties, including the revocation of their licenses. On 21 and 27 March, RTÜK followed through by issuing administrative fines and temporary broadcast suspensions of up to 10 days to TV channels Halk TV, SCZ TV, Tele 1, and Now TV.

We call on Türkiye, and specifically RTÜK, to immediately stop these media freedom violations and create an environment that allows the media to provide the public with necessary information and to report on events free from state pressure. Intimidating journalists to disseminate only government-approved content undermines the core principles of independent journalism. We also reiterate that journalists and other observers must be protected and able to freely report on public interest issues, including monitoring the actions of law enforcement officials, and must not face reprisals or other harassment.

Online censorship

Social media is one of the last channels through which people in Türkiye have access to independent voices, and where activists and journalists can share their opinions relatively freely. Amid mass protests, the authorities have swiftly imposed heavy restrictions on social media and messaging apps, including ordering social media platforms to block protest-related content.

Major social media platforms and messaging apps were subjected to bandwidth throttling starting at 7 a.m. local time on 19 March, when the detentions of the mayor and others took place. The restrictions appeared to be limited to Istanbul and lasted for 42 hours, until 21 March. No clarification was provided regarding the reasons for these restrictions or why they were lifted. Under the Electronic Communications Law (Law no. 5809), such restrictions can be implemented by the Information Technologies Authority (BTK) on orders by the Presidency where there is peril in delay and threats to national security or public order. These administrative restrictions are temporary and are reviewed by the judiciary in 24 hours at the latest.

The BTK issued hundreds of blocking orders for the social media accounts of journalists, media organisations, civil society organisations and human rights defenders based on Article 8/A of the Law no. 5651, non-compliance with which can result in severe sanctions against social media companies.

Although it appears that many of the accounts on X are currently blocked, X issued a statement according to which it objected to ‘multiple court orders […] to block over 700 accounts’, including those of news organisations, journalists, and political figures. On 26 March, X announced that they filed an individual application before the Constitutional Court challenging an order by the BTK to block 126 accounts.

Authorities must refrain from using legal and extra-legal means to exert pressure on social media platforms to censor online content in violation of their international human rights obligations, particularly content involving political discourse, which enjoys the highest level of protection. Türkiye must allow free and unfettered access to the internet, and rescind all unlawful orders to block social media accounts of those exercising their right to free expression to criticise the authorities.

We renew our call to social media platforms to resist political pressure and refrain from restricting access to protected expression. Rather than simply accepting such blocking orders, we urge platforms to take all steps possible to limit their scope and duration, including by challenging their legality in court. Platforms should also be transparent towards affected users and the broader public about government requests for censorship and measures taken in response; and take all possible steps to maintain platform access in the event of shutdowns or throttling.

Signatories:

ARTICLE 19
Articolo 21
Amnesty International
Civil Rights Defenders
Danish PEN
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
Human Rights Watch
IFEX
International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
International Press Institute (IPI)
Norwegian Helsinki Committee (NHC)
PEN America
PEN International
PEN Norway
PEN Sweden
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
World Organization Against Torture (OMCT)

5 February 2025: Call for action as press freedom violations surge in Turkey in 2025

February 5, 2025 • • disabled comments

5 February 2025: Call for action as press freedom violations surge in Turkey in 2025

TURKISH TRANSLATION BELOW / Metnin Türkçe çevirisini aşağıda görebilirsiniz.

The International Press Institute (IPI), together with undersigned press freedom, freedom of expression, human rights, and journalists’ organizations, and media outlets, expresses serious concern over the recent escalation of press freedom violations in Turkey, marking a troubling start to the new year. The frequent use of arbitrary arrests, detentions, judicial control measures, and convictions poses an existential threat to independent media, democratic discourse, and fundamental human rights in the country.

Turkey must ensure that its practices align with international standards for the protection of freedom of expression and press freedom, as well as with the protections enshrined in its own constitution, in order to safeguard the foundations of democracy and human rights.

In January 2025 alone, at least nine journalists were arrested, six were sentenced to prison, five were detained, 23 faced investigations and one encountered police obstruction. Here is a timeline of a concerning acceleration of press freedom violations over the last month (the following is not an exhaustive list):

On January 2, authorities launched an investigation against journalist Aslıhan Gençay for her reporting on corruption in Hatay. They blocked access to her article and charged her with multiple offenses, including violations of the disinformation law—an apparent attempt to suppress investigative journalism.
On January 7, the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office launched an investigation against 21 journalists who covered the Kobani trial’s final hearing. The journalists face potential fines for alleged unauthorized photography—a move that effectively criminalizes routine court reporting.

On January 17, a coordinated crackdown led to the detention of six journalists – Reyhan Hacıoğlu, Necla Demir, Rahime Karvar, Vedat Örüç, Velat Ekin and Ahmet Güneş – across multiple cities. They were denied basic legal rights, including access to legal representation, and were subsequently arrested on January 20 without their statements being recorded. The authorities’ only justification appears to be their legitimate journalistic activities. (Note: Ahmet Güneş was released on February 4.)

On January 21, Rudaw TV correspondent Rawin Sterk Yıldız faced police interference while documenting a detention in Istanbul’s Beyoğlu district. Despite clearly identifying himself as a journalist, he was prevented from documenting the public incident.
On January 23, a troubling verdict resulted in five journalists – Yakup Çetin, Ahmet Memiş, Cemal Azmi Kalyoncu, Ünal Tanık, Yetkin Yıldız, Gökçe Fırat Çulhaoğlu – receiving harsh sentences—ranging from 25 months to over six years in prison—in a terrorism-related case, despite the absence of credible evidence.
On January 24, the arrest of journalist Eylem Babayiğit once again demonstrated the arbitrary use of “membership of an organization” charges.
On January 28, the detention of journalists Barış Pehlivan, Seda Selek, and Serhan Asker following their broadcast of a recorded phone conversation with an expert witness raises concerns about limitations on the coverage of matters of public interest. The court released Seda Selek and Serhan Asker under judicial control measures.
On January 28, the launch of an investigation into T24 columnist Şirin Payzın for alleged “terror propaganda” over social media posts indicates a concerning expansion of surveillance and criminalization of online expression.
On January 28, the conviction of journalist Safiye Alagaş, former news editor for the pro-Kurdish JINNEWS, resulted in a six years and three months prison sentence. Alagaş has already spent a year in pretrial detention and is currently free while awaiting appeal.
On January 29, Halk TV editor-in-chief Suat Toktaş, program coordinator Kürşad Oğuz, and journalist Barış Pehlivan were detained for broadcasting a recorded phone conversation with an expert witness. While Pehlivan and Oğuz were released under judicial control measures, Toktaş was arrested—authorities cited flight risk and potential evidence tampering, demonstrating a concerning use of arbitrary detention criteria. Halk TV, one of Turkey’s largest private TV channels, is recognized for its critical programming.

Broadcast regulator’s decisions threaten press freedom

Turkey’s broadcast regulator RTÜK has demonstrated a concerning pattern of targeting critical media outlets. Just before the journalists’ detention over broadcasting a recorded phone conversation, the RTÜK Chair warned of potential consequences for media outlets and journalists regarding the same broadcast—effectively signaling the impending crackdown. In his statement, he criticized Halk TV for recording and broadcasting a phone conversation with an expert witness without permission and allegedly attempting to influence ongoing legal proceedings.

This incident reflects a broader pattern of regulatory pressure on critical media. In 2024, RTÜK imposed 24 broadcast bans resulting in fines totaling 81.5 million Turkish lira (approximately €2.2 million or $2.3 million), with the majority targeting media critical of the government.

The systematic use of regulatory powers to penalize critical media outlets raises serious concerns about the independence of broadcast regulation and its impact on media pluralism in Turkey.

In a recent example, following the devastating hotel fire in Bolu that erupted in the early morning hours of January 20, 2025, claiming 78 lives, the RTÜK Chair directed media outlets to report solely on information from official sources. Shortly after this directive, the Bolu 2nd Criminal Court of Peace imposed a broadcasting ban on coverage of the disaster at the request of the Bolu Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office.

Judicial control measures: a new tool for censorship

While there appears to be a decrease in the number of journalists in prison, this masks a troubling shift toward using judicial control measures—such as travel bans, regular check-ins at police stations, and house arrest—as alternative means of restricting press freedom. This trend represents an equally antidemocratic practice aimed at controlling journalists’ freedom of movement and expression. The systematic implementation of these measures, combined with increasing online censorship, appears to be replacing traditional detention as a method of silencing independent journalism.

Recent cases exemplify this pattern. While journalists are released under judicial control measures shortly after being detained, the arbitrary imposition of travel bans, house arrests and other restrictions continues to impede their ability to perform their professional duties effectively. These measures, originally intended as exceptional remedies to ensure judicial proceedings, are increasingly being weaponized to create a chilling effect on press freedom.

In light of these egregious violations of press freedom in Turkey, we urge the Turkish authorities to uphold the principles of justice, release the journalists subjected to arbitrary arrests and detentions, and safeguard the vital role of journalism in fostering debate on matters of public interest and democracy.

This statement was produced by IPI as part of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and candidate countries, funded by the European Commission.

Signed:

International Press Institute (IPI)
Association of European Journalists (International)
Association of European Journalists in Belgium (AEJ Belgium)
Association of European Journalists in Bulgaria (AEJ Bulgaria)
Association of Journalists (GC)
Bulgarian Helsinki Committee
Catalan PEN
Center for Media, Information and Social Research of Georgia (CMIS)
Coalition For Women In Journalism (CFWIJ)
Danish PEN
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
Freedom House
Foreign Media Association (FMA Turkey)
Georgian Charter of Journalistic Ethics
IFEX
Index on Censorship
International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
Irish PEN/PEN na hEireann
Kurdish PEN
Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA)
Media and Migration Association (MMA)
Media Development Foundation (MDF)
Netgazeti / Batumelebi
Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
OC Media
P24 Platform for Independent Journalism
Armãn PEN
PEN America
PEN Centre of Bosnia & Herzegovina
PEN Esperanto
PEN International
PEN Melbourne
PEN Norway
PEN Québec
PEN Sweden
PEN Türkiye
Progressive Journalists Association (PJA)
San Miguel PEN
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
Vietnamese Abroad PEN Centre
Yapay Gündem

Uluslararası Basın Enstitüsü (IPI) ve aşağıda imzası bulunan basın özgürlüğü, ifade hürriyeti, insan hakları, basın meslek ve haber kuruluşları, Türkiye’de gazetecilere yönelik hak ihlallerinin son dönemde ciddi ölçüde artmasından endişe duyuyor. Keyfi tutuklamalar, gözaltılar, adli kontrol tedbirleri ve hapis cezaları, ülkedeki bağımsız medya, demokratik söylem ve temel insan hakları için varoluşsal bir tehdit oluşturuyor.

Türkiye, demokrasi ve insan haklarının yanı sıra, ifade ve basın özgürlüğünün korunmasına ilişkin uluslararası standartlara ve kendi anayasasında yer alan koruyucu hükümlere uygun hareket etmelidir.

2025 yılının Ocak ayında en az dokuz gazeteci tutuklandı, altı gazeteciye hapis cezası verildi, beş gazeteci gözaltına alındı, 23 gazeteci hakkında soruşturma başlatıldı ve bir gazeteci polis müdahalesiyle karşılaştı. İşte son bir ayda kaydedilen basın özgürlüğü ihlallerindeki endişe verici artışın kronolojisi (aşağıdaki liste temsili bir liste olup geçtiğimiz ayın tüm basın özgürlüğü ihlallerini yansıtmamaktadır):

2 Ocak’ta yetkililer, gazeteci Aslıhan Gençay hakkında Hatay’daki yolsuzluklarla ilgili haberlerinden dolayı soruşturma başlattı. Haberine erişim engeli getirilerek, dezenformasyon yasası da dahil olmak üzere birçok suçlama yöneltildi—bu durum araştırmacı gazeteciliği bastırma girişimi olarak görülüyor.
7 Ocak’ta Ankara Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığı, Kobani davasının son duruşmasını takip eden 21 gazeteci hakkında soruşturma başlattı. Gazeteciler, izinsiz fotoğraf çektiği iddiasıyla para cezasıyla karşı karşıya—bu durum rutin dava haberlerinin suç unsuru haline getirilmesi anlamına geliyor.
17 Ocak’ta evlerine yapılan polis baskınıyla gözaltına alınan altı gazeteci – Reyhan Hacıoğlu, Necla Demir, Rahime Karvar, Vedat Örüç, Velat Ekin ve Ahmet Güneş – avukatlarına erişim de dahil olmak üzere temel yasal haklarından mahrum bırakıldılar ve 20 Ocak’ta ifadeleri alınmadan tutuklandılar. Yetkililerin tutuklama gerekçesi ise gazetecilerin meşru gazetecilik faaliyetleri oldu. (Ahmet Güneş 4 Şubat’ta tahliye edildi.)
21 Ocak’ta Rudaw TV muhabiri Rawin Sterk Yıldız, İstanbul Beyoğlu’nda bir gözaltı işlemini belgelerken gazeteci olduğunu açıkça belirtmesine rağmen polis müdahalesiyle karşılaştı.
23 Ocak’ta beş gazeteci – Yakup Çetin, Ahmet Memiş, Cemal Azmi Kalyoncu, Ünal Tanık, Yetkin Yıldız, Gökçe Fırat Çulhaoğlu – terörle ilgili yeniden yargılandıkları davada, somut deliller olmamasına rağmen, 2 yıldan 6 yıla kadar ağır hapis cezalarına çarptırıldı.
24 Ocak’ta gazeteci Eylem Babayiğit’in mesleki faaliyetlerinden dolayı tutuklanması, “örgüt üyeliği” suçlamasının keyfi kullanımını bir kez daha gözler önüne serdi.
28 Ocak’ta bir bilirkişi ile yapılan telefon görüşmesinin kaydını yayınladıkları gerekçesiyle gazeteciler Barış Pehlivan, Seda Selek ve Serhan Asker’in gözaltına alınması, kamuyu ilgilendiren haberlere getirilen kısıtlamalar konusunda endişe yarattı. Mahkeme, Seda Selek ve Serhan Asker’i adli kontrol şartıyla serbest bıraktı.
28 Ocak’ta T24 yazarı Şirin Payzın hakkında sosyal medya paylaşımları nedeniyle “terör propagandası” iddiasıyla soruşturma başlatılması, çevrimiçi paylaşımların suç unsuru sayılmasının endişe verici bir şekilde arttığını gösteriyor.
28 Ocak’ta JINNEWS’in eski haber müdürü gazeteci Safiye Alagaş terör suçlamalarıyla yargılandığı davada 6 yıl 3 ay hapis cezasına çarptırıldı. Alagaş daha önce bir yıl tutuklu yargılanmıştı, şu anda temyiz sürecini tutuksuz bekliyor.
29 Ocak’ta Halk TV Genel Yayın Yönetmeni Suat Toktaş, Program Koordinatörü Kürşad Oğuz ve gazeteci Barış Pehlivan, bir bilirkişi ile yapılan telefon görüşmesinin kaydını yayınladıkları gerekçesiyle gözaltına alındı. Pehlivan ve Oğuz adli kontrol şartıyla serbest bırakılırken Toktaş kaçma şüphesi ve delilleri karartma ihtimali gerekçe gösterilerek 30 Ocak’ta tutuklandı. Bu durum, keyfi tutuklama kriterlerinin endişe verici kullanımını gözler önüne serdi.

RTÜK’ün kararları basın özgürlüğünü tehdit ediyor

Türkiye’nin yayın düzenleyicisi RTÜK, eleştirel medya kuruluşlarını hedef alan endişe verici bir tutum sergilemeye devam ediyor. Gazetecilerin kayıtlı bir telefon görüşmesini yayınlamaları nedeniyle gözaltına alınmalarından hemen önce, RTÜK Başkanı konuyla ilgili medya kuruluşları ve gazeteciler için olası sonuçlar konusunda uyarıda bulundu – bu da yaklaşan gözaltı ve tutuklamaların sinyalini verdi. Açıklamasında, Halk TV’yi bir bilirkişi ile yapılan telefon görüşmesini izinsiz kaydetmek, yayınlamak ve devam eden yasal süreçleri etkilemeye çalışmakla eleştirdi.

Bu olay, eleştirel medya üzerindeki baskının devamını yansıtıyor. 2024’te RTÜK, çoğunluğu hükümeti eleştiren medyayı hedef alan, toplam 81,5 milyon Türk lirası para cezasıyla sonuçlanan 24 yayın yasağı uyguladı.

RTÜK’ün düzenleyici yetkilerini eleştirel medya kuruluşlarını cezalandırmak için sistematik şekilde kullanması, bağımsız yayıncılık ve Türkiye’deki medya çoğulculuğu noktasında ciddi endişeler uyandırıyor.

Yakın zamanda bir örnek olarak, 20 Ocak 2025’te Bolu’da meydana gelen ve 78 kişinin hayatını kaybettiği otel yangını sonrasında, RTÜK Başkanı medya kuruluşlarına yalnızca resmi kaynaklardan gelen bilgileri aktarmaları talimatını verdi. Bu talimatın hemen ardından, Bolu 2. Sulh Ceza Hakimliği, Bolu Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığı’nın talebi üzerine felaketle ilgili haberler hakkında yayın yasağı getirdi.

Adli kontrol tedbirleri: Yeni bir sansür aracı

Cezaevindeki gazeteci sayısında bir düşüş görülse de, bu durum endişe verici bir gerçeği maskeliyor: Yurt dışı yasakları, düzenli imza verme zorunluluğu ve ev hapsi gibi adli kontrol tedbirleri basın özgürlüğünü kısıtlamanın alternatif araçları olarak kullanılıyor. Bu eğilim, gazetecilerin hareket ve ifade özgürlüğünü kontrol etmeyi amaçlayan eşit derecede antidemokratik bir uygulamayı temsil ediyor. Bu tedbirlerin sistematik olarak uygulanması ve artan çevrimiçi sansür, bağımsız gazeteciliği susturma yöntemi olarak geleneksel tutuklamanın yerini alıyor gibi görünüyor.

Son vakalar da bu durumu örnekliyor. Gazeteciler gözaltına alındıktan kısa süre sonra adli kontrol şartıyla serbest bırakılırken, keyfi olarak uygulanan yurt dışı yasakları, ev hapsi ve diğer kısıtlamalar, mesleki görevlerini etkili bir şekilde yerine getirmelerini engellemeye devam ediyor. Aslen yargı süreçlerini güvence altına almak için istisnai tedbirler olarak tasarlanan bu önlemler, basın özgürlüğü üzerinde caydırıcı bir etki yaratmak için kullanılıyor.

Basın özgürlüğüne yönelik bu ağır ihlaller karşısında, Türkiye’deki yetkilileri adalet ilkelerine bağlı kalmaya, keyfi gözaltı ve tutuklamaya maruz kalan gazetecileri serbest bırakmaya ve haberciliğin kamuyu ilgilendiren tartışmalar ve demokrasideki hayati rolünü korumaya çağırıyoruz.

Bu açıklama, Avrupa Komisyonu tarafından finanse edilen ve AB Üye Devletleri ile aday ülkelerdeki basın ve medya özgürlüğü ihlâllerini belgeleyen Avrupa çapında bir mekanizma olan Medya Özgürlüğü Acil Müdahale (MFRR) kapsamında Uluslararası Basın Enstitüsü (IPI) tarafından hazırlanmıştır.

İmzalayanlar

Uluslararası Basın Enstitüsü (IPI)
Avrupa Basın ve Medya Özgürlüğü Merkezi (ECPMF)
Avrupa Gazeteciler Birliği (AEJ)
Avrupa Gazeteciler Birliği – Belçika (AEJ Belçika)
Avrupa Gazeteciler Birliği – Bulgaristan (AEJ Bulgaristan)
Avrupa Gazeteciler Federasyonu (EFJ)
Bulgaristan Helsinki Komitesi
Çağdaş Gazeteciler Derneği (ÇGD)
Danimarka PEN
Freedom House
Gazeteciler Cemiyeti (GC)
Gazetecilikte Kadın Koalisyonu (CFWIJ)
Güney Doğu Avrupa Medya Örgütü (SEEMO)
Gürcistan Gazetecilik Etiği Bildirgesi (Georgian Charter of Journalistic Ethics)
Gürcistan Medya, Enformasyon ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Merkezi (CMIS)
IFEX
İrlanda PEN/PEN na hEireann
Katalan PEN
Kürt PEN
Medya Geliştirme Vakfı (MDF, Gürcistan)
Medya ve Göç Derneği (MGD)
Medya ve Hukuk Çalışmaları Derneği (MLSA)
Netgazeti / Batumelebi (Gürcistan)
OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
OC Media
Armãn PEN
PEN Amerika
PEN Bosna Hersek
PEN Esperanto
PEN İsveç
PEN Melbourne
PEN Norveç
PEN Québec
PEN Türkiye
Punto24 Bağımsız Gazetecilik Derneği (P24)
San Miguel PEN
Sansür Endeksi (Index on Censorship)
Uluslararası Gazeteciler Federasyonu (IFJ)
Uluslararası PEN
Vietnamese Abroad PEN Centre
Yabancı Medya Derneği (FMA Turkey)
Yapay Gündem

27.01.2025 – Azerbaijan’s Escalating Crackdown on Journalists: New Charges and Arrests

January 27, 2025 • • disabled comments

Azerbaijan has intensified its crackdown on independent media, targeting journalists from Toplum TV (@Toplumtv1) (https://toplummedia.tv/) and other outlets with new charges and arrests. On 17 January 2025 journalist Farid Ismayilov (Fərid İsmayılov) working for Toplum TV was detained by the police and placed in pretrial custody until 6 April 2025. Authorities justified the detention by accusing him of violating previous police supervision conditions, though Ismayilov and his legal team denied these allegations. On 24 January 2025 the Baku Court of Appeals considered an appeal, but did not release the journalist.

This follows a broader pattern of repression, with Azerbaijani authorities filing six additional charges against Toplum TV journalists, including allegations of illegal entrepreneurship, money laundering, tax evasion, and organizing crimes in collaboration with others. Previously, the charges carried a maximum penalty of eight years, the new charges increase the potential sentence to 12 years. The accusations are widely viewed as retaliation for Western donor funding and independent reporting, with Toplum TV staff denying any wrongdoing.

The situation escalated on 6 March 2024, when police raided Toplum TV’s offices and arrested nine journalists and activists affiliated with the outlet and its partner organization, the Institute for Democratic Initiatives (@idiazerbaijan) (https://idi-aze.org/). A case under Article 206.3.2 of the Criminal Law has been started against Ismailov. While some were later released under travel bans, several remain under legal scrutiny. Similarly, journalists from other independent outlets, such as Meydan TV (https://www.meydan.tv/en/) and Abzas Media (https://abzas.org/az/), face comparable charges. During this action allegedly according to the officials money was seized.

Azerbaijan has also targeted individual journalists. On 11 January 2025 authorities at Baku (Bakı), Azerbaijan, International Airport blocked journalist Khanim Mustafayeva (@khanimyashar) (Xanım Mustafayeva) from leaving the country, citing a travel ban without explanation. Days later, on 16 January 2025 Voice of America (https://www.voanews.com/) reporter Ulviyya Ali (Ülviyyə Əli) (@UlviyyaAli) was interrogated and informed of a similar ban, tied to allegations against Meydan TV.

Additional a trial started against Sevinj Vagif gizi Abbasova (Sevinj Vagifgizi), born 1989, and her colleagues. Sevinj reported also about allegedly violence at the Baku Investigation Detention Center. In January this year Ershad Ibrahimov from dunyaninsesi.az was sentenced to 8 years in prison

The Azerbaijani government has yet to respond to international criticism, and the judiciary has largely supported investigative authorities, further suppressing freedom of the press. Despite the repression, the journalists and their supporters continue to push back, advocating for transparency, justice, and accountability.

The South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO) condemns the ongoing crackdown on independent journalists and media outlets in Azerbaijan. These actions represent a severe attack on press freedom and aim to silence critical voices. SEEMO is particularly concerned about Ismayilov’s health, given his medical history, and calls for his immediate release along with all other unjustly detained journalists. SEEMO will closely monitor this situation and continue advocating for the protection of independent media in Azerbaijan.

South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO) is a regional non-governmental, non profit network of editors, media executives and leading journalists in Southeast, South, East and Central Europe. SEEMO members are in Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Georgia, Greece, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Moldova (with the territory of Transdnestria), Montenegro, North Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Türkiye / Turkey, Ukraine and Uzbekistan. Austria, Italy, Vatican and San Marino have a special status in SEEMO. SEEMO has over 3000 individual members, and additional media as corporate members.

#fyp #mediafreedom #seemo #freespeech #southeasteuropemediaorganisation #ngo #journalist #azerbaijan #toplumtv #FaridIsmayilov #meydantv #abzasmedia #KhanimMustafayeva #UlviyyaAli #journalistattack #journalistinjail #SEEMO #pressfreedom #mediafreedom #freemedia

24.01.2025 – A Growing Threat to Press Freedom: Dismissals and Censorship of Journalists in Serbia

January 24, 2025 • • disabled comments

Recent events in Serbia have raised serious concerns about the state of press freedom and the treatment of journalists. Two cases in particular those of Vojislava Crnjanski Spasojević, a journalist at one Serbian newspaper, and Milan Srdić, a correspondent for one Serbian television, highlight troubling patterns of censorship and professional retaliation against members of the media.

In Serbia, a wave of student protests erupted after the tragic collapse of a canopy in Novi Sad, Serbia, on 1 November 2024, which claimed 15 lives and injured two others. The demonstrations, led by students and supported by various societal groups like part of the teachers, actors, and lawyers, have expanded nationwide. The movement demands accountability, systemic reforms, and justice, criticizing a culture of nepotism, corruption, and lack of opportunities. Operating through direct democracy and innovative tactics, such as brief traffic blockades, the students emphasize solidarity and persistence. The protests symbolize a generational demand for a functional legal state, democracy, and a brighter future, rejecting complacency and systemic decay.

Vojislava Crnjanski Spasojević, a journalist with over 30 years of experience, was abruptly terminated from her position. According to Spasojević, the dismissal occurred a day after she posted a photo of herself attending a protest outside Serbia’s Constitutional Court in Belgrade, Serbia on her private Instagram account. This came just days after she publicly criticized publishing the private information of two students in the public.

Spasojević has reported very often on misuse of personal data, which made her deeply disturbed by the publication of the students’ passport details. She spoke out against the incident on her social media, an act she believes contributed to her sudden dismissal.

Spasojević also alleges that her dismissal was orchestrated without consulting her editors or the editorial board, raising questions about the motivations behind the decision. She suspects that her participation in the protest and her critique of unethical practices were the true reasons for her removal.

On other side, according to the media company, the official reason provided for her termination was the “cessation of the need for her position” due to “technological, economic, and organizational changes.”

On another case, Milan Srdić, born 1977, a TV correspondent in Novi Sad, Serbia, has also reported instances of professional interference and censorship. After delivering a live report following a tragic event in the city, Srdić claims he was prevented by his company from further reporting. Even when he was later allowed to file a story, significant portions of his work were altered or omitted.

Srdić noted that in one particular instance, a key interview with an opposition figure was heavily edited to diminish its impact. Despite his attempts to maintain journalistic balance by including perspectives from both the government and the opposition, his efforts were undermined. Additionally, he revealed that most of the materials collected by his team were only published on this television’s website, while minimal content were on TV. As Srdić published on his Facebook profile, after the tragedy on 1 November until 17 January instead of reporters from Novi Sad, the reports on the TV channel from Novi Sad were produced by journalists from Belgrade, or there were none, and some editors simply stopped talking to him.

Both cases highlight the challenges faced by Serbian journalists, who are increasingly vulnerable to dismissal, censorship, self-censorship, and other forms of professional retribution.

The implications of these actions extend far beyond the individuals involved, threatening the broader principles of transparency, accountability, and democracy. When journalists are silenced, it sends a chilling message to the entire profession and undermines public trust in the media.

As these cases unfold, they serve as stark reminders of the critical importance of protecting journalistic integrity and the right to report freely, even in the face of systemic pressures and retaliation.

The South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO) will closely monitor the developments in Serbia and continue to advocate for the rights of journalists in Serbia.

#fyp #mediafreedom #seemo #freespeech #southeasteuropemediaorganisation #ngo #journalist #serbia #belgrade #novisad #vojislavacrnjanskispasojevic #milansrdic #journalistattack #napadnanovinare #SEEMO #pressfreedom #mediafreedom #freemedia

23 January 2025: Call for release of Mzia Amaglobeli in Georgia

January 23, 2025 • • disabled comments

23 January 2025: Press freedom partners call for release of Mzia Amaglobeli, end to crackdown on free press

The undersigned press freedom, journalists and human rights organisations call for the immediate release of veteran Georgian journalist and founder and director of the online newspapers Batumelebi and Netgazeti.
Amaglobeli, who announced to have been on hunger strike since January 20 after being abused while held in detention said “The charges against me today are the product of repressive, treacherous, and violent processes targeting humanity, freedom of speech, and expression.”

She faces charges of assaulting a police officer—carrying a sentence of up to seven years in prison—following an altercation with Batumi Police Chief Irakli Dgebuadze.

Amaglobeli was first arrested on January 11 for an administrative offense after placing a sticker about an upcoming general strike on the wall at the entrance of a police station. She was released the following day and, while speaking with her supporters outside the police station, police began arresting several of them. This led to an altercation between Amaglobeli and Dgebuadze, during which Amaglobeli is accused of slapping Dgebuadze. She was then charged under Article 353(1) of the Georgian Criminal Code (“Assault on a police officer, a special penitentiary service employee, or another public official or institution”), a serious offense that can carry a punishment of 4 to 7 years in prison. On January 14, Amaglobeli was ordered to remain in pre-trial detention.

On January 15 Nona Kurdovanidze, Chairperson of the Georgian Young Lawyers’ Association—a respected Tbilisi-based human rights watchdog, stated that Dgebuadze spat in Amaglobeli’s face and denied her access to water and toilet facilities for an extended period. Two days later, Gyla revealed that the Special Investigation Service (SIS), a body responsible for investigating crimes committed by officials, had been aware of the ill-treatment allegations while Amaglobeli was held in custody. Kurdovanidze noted that the SIS received detailed information directly from the alleged victim.

On January 20, Amaglobeli announced a hunger strike. In a letter published by Netgazeti, she wrote: “ These processes have been unfolding over the past year and are embedding themselves into our daily lives as a dictatorship. I refuse to accept the regime’s agenda […]. Freedom is far more valuable than life, and it is at stake. Fight before it is too late.”

According to Transparency International Georgia, video footage of the incident shows that the slap lacked sufficient force to cause harm,” and therefore does not meet the threshold of seriousness required for charges under the criminal code.

Prior to Amaglobeli’s arrest, the editor-in-chief of Batumelebi, Eter Turadze, was harassed by Dgebuadze. Batumelebi has repeatedly reported on and exposed alleged human rights violations under Dgebuadze.

In a separate case, the Batumi City Court sentenced Guram Murvanidze, a camera operator and photographer with Batumelebi, to eight days of administrative detention. Murvanidze was detained by police on January 12 while covering a protest. The prosecution accused him of isobeying a lawful order from law enforcement officers.

We urge the Georgian authorities to immediately and unconditionally release Amaglobeli and put an end to this unprecedented crackdown on the media. We furthermore demand a thorough investigation into the mistreatment she endured.

Signed:

International Press Institute (IPI)

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)

Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

Justice for Journalists Foundation (JFJ)

IMS (International Media Support)

Media Diversity Institute (MDI)

Media Diversity Institute Western Balkans (MDI WB)

PEN International

Civil Rights Defenders (CRD)

Kathy Kiely, Lee Hills Chair in Free Press Studies, Missouri School of Journalism

Society of Journalists (Warsaw)

IRMI – Institute for Regional Media and Information (Ukraine)

South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)