The Constitutional Court said the same
The Constitutional Court (AYM) had not said anything different than what the prosecutor wrote in his recent opinion in the spying case against journalists Can Dündar and Erdem Gül. The prosecutor said outright that there was no evidence proving that these two journalists were spying.
Wasn’t that what the top court said? Remember, Dündar and Gül had individually applied to the AYM on grounds that they were unjustly arrested and their press freedom was violated. The AYM ruled that the conditions for their arrest were not present. The court also decided that with the arrests, freedom of the press was also violated.
The justification was very simple. The court declared that relevant support was not able to be submitted by the office of the prosecutor for the spying charge and there was no other concrete justification for the arrests other than the news story. Because there was no legal explanation of their arrests, the court decided on the inappropriateness of the proceeding. Because there was no convincing evidence that the reason for the arrests was not related to journalism, the procedure was considered against press freedom.
Nevertheless, the AYM has had a run of bad luck after this.
As if the trial was over and they had been sentenced to life imprisonments, as if the top court had released the convicts with a trick, as if a horrible crime was committed such as releasing dangerous criminals to the street, as if they were pardoned, snatched away from the hands of justice… as if justice was blocked…
Actually, it was only the declaration that rights were violated by the arrests when there was no legal necessity for it. Even if they were to be found guilty at the end, the court was defending the just trial rights of the defendants.
The court was accused of protecting spies and releasing traitors from prison. They were serving the “parallel structure” and/or were servants to “the superior mind.”
The court was also claimed to be the domestic tools of foreign powers carrying out operations in Turkey, also an extension of the evil forces weakening the country.
There were curses, insults, threats and pressures; the head of the court was targeted and his reputation was at stake. There was an unprecedented lynching and humiliation.
But after all this turmoil, what do you think happened? The AYM was right. Because there was no evidence to prove it, the spying charge was dropped from the indictment.
The court reached that decision only because it was acting justly and lawfully; because the present file did not lead to any other option but that.
Well, the top court was only serving justice then. It did not claim that something existed when it did not.
Now, if its correctness has been confirmed, then the negative campaign should not be forgotten.
Don’t you think there is a need for an apology?
But, let me warn you at the beginning: This apology cannot be circumvented by hiding behind President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.
It is a different thing to dislike the ruling of the court and criticize it, it is yet another to attempt to defame it by resorting to the dirtiest methods one can think of.
Those who have attacked the Constitutional Court and its members without any reservation should not make themselves scarce now. Now is the time for them to stand out and apologize properly.