Before the trial, there had been a call to gather in front of the courthouse to support the students. Courthouse entrances become crowded before the students’ trial. Many students came to the courthouse to side with their friends. A group of İstanbul University academics were also at the hearing room to support the students.

In response to the call for support, Kağıthane Governorship announced that any kind of activities and protests at Çağlayan Courthouse and its surroundings were banned.

The square next to the courthouse was closed with barriers and many police officers was deployed there since morning hours. For entrance into the courthouse, only a corridorlike area was left empty in the square. The floor where the trial room was located was also closed with barriers.

The hearing, which was expected to be held at İstanbul 21^st Criminal Court of First Instance, was held at one of the largest courtrooms of the courthouse, 27^th High Criminal Court.

Except for Eda Kalafat, all the students who stood trial were present. A large number of riot police and private security were deployed in the corridor where the courtroom is located. The hearing started an hour and a half later than announced. The delay caused tension from time to time between those waiting at the barriers and the private security.

The journalists who came to the courtroom to observe the hearing were admitted to the courtroom first, then the lawyers were taken in. The court usher wore his mask halfway, the audience and the journalists reacted against this. The court usher said, ‘Shut up,’ in response to the warnings. However, they apologized later.

In the hearing, it was observed that the judge who performed their duty in the first hearing had changed.

Witness: ‘I did not witness the picture being hung’

At the hearing, Alparslan Çepni, who testified against the students and is one of the heads of security in the university, was heard. Çepni said that upon news about the image at the exhibition that was published on Yeni Şafak newspaper on January 29, the heads of security decided to ‘interfere with such images.’ He stated ‘I was told that this kind of picture was hung. There were other complaints about the picture, saying that it was an insult to religion of Islam. We warned the students, they did not remove it and said, “There is no such thing here, we added the explanation below, it has nothing to do with Islamic values.” We heard that the picture went missing around 17.00. The three friends took the statement down. They told me for the statement to be processed, it needed the signature of someone from the security, so I signed it.’

Upon the judge’s question, the witness security chief stated that he did not see the moment the picture was hung.

Regarding to hanging of the picture, Levent Pişkin, one of the students’ lawyers, showed the witness the signature on the statement in which the accused students’ name was also included. The witness stated that the signature was his own. Pişkin asked ‘Are you not aware that signing a statement about an incident you did not see is a crime? Did you witness who hung the picture?’ and Çepni answered that he did not witness the incident.

Witness: ‘The picture disturbed me’

Another private security guard, witness Faruk K. Said ‘I was there to check out the posters upon instruction. The Kaaba photograph had LGBT banners and Shahmaran figures all around.’ He stated that he asked the students to remove the picture on the grounds that it was ‘against Islam.’

Lawyer Pişkin asked ‘On what basis, depending on which duty and law you thought that the picture was against Islam and constituted a crime? Why did you feel the need to warn them?’ and the witness answered:

‘He who lives in the religion of Islam knows these things. LGBT and Shahmaran banners on the Kaaba photo are not acceptable to me. I say this as a Muslim, and I do not approve of this. I was disturbed, so I warned them. I did not say that I was disturbed, I warned them by saying it was wrong.’

Lawyer Özge Tokgöz stated that even though the witness expressed in his statement today that he saw the two students hanging the picture, there was no such statement in his statement at the police office. The lawyer said ‘It bothers me that he comes here with a memorized statement and testifies as if he is a party. I do not accept memorized statements.’ The lawyer asked, ‘Based on what right, what authority did he say, “Remove the picture”?’ Prosecutor and the judge objected to the question and intervened.

The judge interrupted another lawyer asking a question about witness’ look to them and responded to the lawyers, raising his voice, and saying, ‘Are we at war?’

The lawyers got interrupted by court judge frequently as they asked questions. Therefore, defendant lawyers claimed that the court judge guided the witness and requested a recusation.

The prosecutor asserted that this request was made to prolong the case and asked for rejection of the request.

However, the court judge said that they did not find the lawyers’ justifications of request for recusation proper and refused the request. The lawyers requested the case to be sent to high criminal court to decide on a verdict about request for recusation.

It was decided for the case to be sent to high criminal court. The hearing was adjourned to November 17.

What happened?

The first hearing for the case was held on March 17, 2021. Seven students were accused of ‘inciting the population to hatred and hostility’, allegedly, after they hung a ‘Kaaba image with Shahmaran figure and LGBTI+ flag’ during the protests at Boğaziçi University. On January 30, the students Doğu Demirtaş and Selahattin Can Uğuzeş were arrested within the scope of investigation.

Hazar Kolancalı, Sena Nur Baş, Selahattin Can Uğuzeş, Mahmut Can Bodrumlu, Eda Kalafat, Doğu Demirtaş and Rümeysa Özüyağlı are on trial within the scope of the case. A prison sentence of one to three years is requested each of the students.

At the hearing on March 17, Demirtaş and Cam Uğuzeş were released. The judicial control decision of ‘not leaving the residence’, also known as house arrest, was also lifted at the first hearing.

The post Request for Recusation in ‘Kaaba Exhibition’ at Boğaziçi University Lawsuit appeared first on Sivil Sayfalar.

A large number of people arrived before the courthouse to support the students on trial for allegedly “participating in an illegal, unarmed meeting or rally, and not dispersing despite the police warning.”

Remarkably, the court allocated only three minutes for the hearing

As a large crowd continued to wait outside the courthouse, another group entered the building and gathered in front of the courtroom. Only the students on trial and their lawyers were allowed into the courtroom. Since the courtroom was small, the students’ families and friends who came for support were not allowed to attend the hearing.

Journalists were allowed to monitor the hearing only from the door of the courtroom.

The lawyers’ request for the hearing to be shifted to another courtroom was rejected. The courtroom in question was one of the smallest in the courthouse. The reason for the selection of a small courtroom for such a high-profile case was put as “lack of available courtrooms,” in one of the biggest courthouses of Turkey, comprised of 18 blocks. Commonly dubbed as ‘Caglayan Courthouse,’ the building – infamous for trials identified to be political o controversial – is officially called Istanbul Justice Palace.

The hearing started with an ID check for the students. The presiding judge reminded that the students’ photographs had been requested in advance and asked them to hand over their photographs for a comparison with the recorded footage.

After the ID check, students’ lawyer Levent Pişkin delivered a defense speech, demanding that the court lift the probation measures – namely, periodically giving signatures at police stations and an international travel ban. Pişkin argued that the probation measures had turned into a sanction. “There is no risk of flight, and the students delivered their defense speeches. There is no new evidence. We demand an immediate end to the probation measures.”

Pişkin also requested the immediate acquittal of the students

In his judicial opinion, the trial prosecutor requested the continuation of the probation measures regarding the students until all their defense speeches are completed.

In his decision, the judge lifted the probation measure of giving signatures at police stations. But decided the continuation of their international travel ban. The judge also rejected the lawyers’ request for acquittal.

The next hearing is scheduled for June 28th.

All because a LGBTI+ flag was flared

A student had waved an LGBTI+ flag on top of the main gate of Boğaziçi University’s South Campus on February 1st, and in reaction, a disciplinary investigation had been initiated by the university administration. Before the disciplinary committee’s meeting on March 25th, a group of students staged a protest within the university campus carrying LGBTI+ flags in support of their friend, and four of them were detained by the police.

Eight students protesting the detention of their friends were themselves detained at the gate of the North Campus. The following day, all the detained students were brought to the Istanbul Courthouse in Çağlayan. Other students arrived before the courthouse to stage a protest in solidarity with their detained friends, and more students were detained during this protest.

In its indictment, the Terror Crimes Investigation Bureau of Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office stated that the students “placed LGBTI+ flags on their shoulders,” and were “part of the group that staged a protest, unfurling LGBTI+ flags and colors.” However, there is no explanation in the indictment as to how these actions might constitute a crime.

The indictment also states that the “terror archive records” of the students detained for allegedly resisting the police were checked; however, the students had no precedents.

In the indictment, 12 students are charged with violating “Law no. 2911 on Meetings and Demonstrations.” Each student faces six months to three years in prison.

What is Happening at Boğaziçi University?

The protests at Boğaziçi began in January against President Tayyip Erdogan’s appointment of a rector at Istanbul’s prestigious Boğaziçi University; and briefly spread in Istanbul and other cities in February, leading to the detention of 600 people and some clashes with police.

Interior Minister Suleyman Soylu repeatedly labelled the students “LGBT deviants” and Erdogan praised his AK Party’s youth wing for not being the “LGBT youth.”

Protests have continued on campus, with students and academics gathering daily to protest what they say was the undemocratic appointment of Melih Bulu, an academic and former political candidate, as rector.

The post Students Appear in Court in the LGBTI Flag Trial appeared first on Sivil Sayfalar.