ARMENIAN CONFERENCE FALLOUT: TRIAL OF FIVE

UNCLAS ISTANBUL 000172

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/SE

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PGOV PHUM TU
SUBJECT: ARMENIAN CONFERENCE FALLOUT: TRIAL OF FIVE
PROMINENT JOURNALISTS BEGINS

REF: A. 05 ISTANBUL 2058


B. 05 ISTANBUL 1680

This message is sensitive but unclassified. Not for internet
distribution.


1. (U) Summary: Nationalist tensions took center stage at
the opening hearing of five Turkish journalists charged with
insulting and seeking to influence the Turkish judiciary as a
result of columns they wrote criticizing the court injunction
that temporarily blocked last September's "Alternative
Armenian Conference." Legal counsel for the nationalist
lawyers group whose complaint led Istanbul prosecutors to
file the initial charges protested vociferously when the
judge did not permit a statement to the court. Police
closely controlled access to the court and the streets
surrounding it, however, preventing recurrence of the mayhem
that surrounded December's Pamuk hearing. End Summary.


2. (U) The first hearing in the case against journalists
was held February 7 at an Istanbul courthouse outside which a
group of nationalist protesters demonstrated under heavy
security. Adding to the sense of drama surrounding the
hearing was the presence of high-profile EU observer, Joost
Lagendijk, the co-chair of the Turkey-EU Joint Parliamentary
Group, who was himself the subject of a Turkish prosecutor's
investigation (eventually dropped) for "insulting
Turkishness." (Note: Lagendijk was particularly outspoken
in the case of Orhan Pamuk, and earned the wrath of Turkish
nationalists for his criticism about the state of freedom of
speech in Turkey. End note.) Press reports indicate
Lagendijk was accompanied to the court by 10 police officers,
in a clear attempt to prevent a recurrence of the fisticuffs
suffered by EU observers at the Pamuk hearing.


3. (U) All five defendants appeared in court and provided
both oral and written statements to the effect that their
articles were not an attempt to "insult" or "influence" the
judiciary, but rather should be seen in the context of
freedom of expression. (Note: Some were charged under
multiple articles of the penal code. Four of the journalists
were charged under Article 288 for attempting to influence
the judiciary, while three were charged under Article 301 for
insulting the judiciary. End note.) Also in attendance at
the hearing were lawyers affiliated with the nationalist
Union of Turkish Jurists, the group that had initially
brought the complaint about the articles to the prosecutor's
office last fall.


4. (U) Turkish media reported that the judge occasionally
was forced to call police in to "silence" this group of
nationalists lawyers to maintain order in the court. In
response, the group reportedly has asked for the judge to
recuse himself, alleging his partiality in not allowing them
to give statements as complainants. The session adjourned
with the next hearing set for April 11, when the court will
have had time to examine the defendants' statements and
documents, as well as the recusal request.


5. (SBU) Comment: Though the freedom of expression
principles at stake are similar, the hearing lacked the
celebrity attention that accompanied Orhan Pamuk's trial last
December. The dismissal of Pamuk's case was a positive
development, but ongoing court cases underscore the fact that
neither law nor tradition protects controversial speech in
Turkey. Some individuals currently charged with "insulting
Turkishness" under Article 301 -- reportedly including
academic Baskin Oran, who wrote a report on minorities in
Turkey -- prefer to face the legality of such cases directly
and publicly, rather than have the charges against them
dismissed. The issue will thus likely remain at the center
of Turkey's human rights agenda with the EU in coming months.
End comment.
JONES