The court case against journalist Veysi Sarısözen and Günlük newspaper concessionaire Ziya Çiçekçi was contiued yesterday (26 October) before the Istanbul 12th High Criminal Court. Sarısözen and Çiçekçi are tried on the grounds of an article entitled "We do not make propaganda for an organization, the people do", printed in the daily's issue on 6 February 2009. Sarısözen is the author of the article in question and Çiçekçi is held responsible for its publishing.
According to prosecutor Hüseyin Ayar, the newspaper article opposed article 7/2 of the Anti-Terror Law (TYM) concerned with "making propaganda for an illegal organization". In his revised indictment Ayar demands prison sentence of 7 years and 6 months for Sarısözen and Çiçekçi.The TYM forsees imprisonment of between 1 and 5 years in such cases.
"We do not need to make propaganda, the people are doing it anyway"
Sarısözen, who is tried in an additional case because of the contents of his defence, stated, "I never ever stepped up in public and cheered for the PKK, but I became witness of 1 million people in Diyarbakır shouting for PKK. There is no need for us to make propaganda because the people do so anyway".
bianet asked Sarısözen who was in the court room during the hearing. Sarısözen replied, "We are face to face with the court". The journalists are represented by lawyer Özcan Kılıç. The trial is to be continued in March 2010.
Sarısözen wrote in his article, "For instance, we define the PKK differently from how Erdoğan defines it... We say that the PKK actions fall within the legal ban of an armed organization with the aim of rebellion and insurrection... So why should we make propaganda for this organization? The people in public are making propaganda anyway. And I never shouted 'Bijî PKK' ['long live PKK'] nor wrote it anywhere. But my statement that I saw a million people in Diyarbakır at the Newroz festivals making propaganda for an illegal organization opposing the Anti-Terror Law is seen as the ground for guilt".
Prosecutor Ayar said in indictment, "It is understood that the suspected editor in chief is complicit in a crime in the manner of having read the article and publishing it without seeing an element of crime. The PKK organization is not recognized as a terror organization by himself and by the people, to the contrary of characterizing it as a movement of insurrection and rebellion; the people did not consider the person a terrorist who was called one by the Prime Minister, and propaganda was spread in the entire article". (EÖ/VK)
