It is news for them, but crime for Cumhuriyet!

However, a quick scan of the archives will show that many other journalists representing various media outlets went to Kandil to interview PKK administrators in that process. Yet, the prosecutor turns a blind eye on those ones.

Kandil Interviews

During the Cumhuriyet investigations, Ahmet Şık’s “Either Apo to Kandil or we will go to Imrali” interview from March 16, 2015, Ayse Yildirim’s “Demirtas even risked his own life” interview On June 2, 2015 with Cemil Bayik, Co-Chairman of KCK Executive Council, became subjects for accusations. During the time these interviews were published, peace talks were still continuing. During the peace talks, hundreds of interviews with PKK in Kandil or in mountainous regions were published. In fact, a member of the Anadolu news agency was in attendance at the press conference where the PKK revealed their intention to send their ammunitions abroad. After this press conference, Murat Karayilan answered questions from many journalists including Asli Aydintasbas from Milliyet, Rusen Cakir from Vatan Egi Basara from Radikal and Sirin Payzin from CNN Turk, and this conversation was celebrated as a victory for journalism.

The Kandil interviews were even published in the partisan newspapers. On November 23, 2009, interviews with Murat Karayilan anon June 16, 2010 with Mustafa Karasu were published in Turkiye newspaper. On October 2, 2010 in Sabah newspaper, one of the correspondents made news of Karayilan’s statement in Kandil. The Kandil interviews also were included in Vatan newspaper (on February 1, 2013) and Milliyet newspaper (June 26, 2011). Interviews with Ocalan conducted by Important members of the Turkish media, including Mehmet Ali Birand and Avni Ozgurel, can be found in news archives.

 Gulen’s Photograph

Another accusation constantly brought up by Alev Coskun, since she could not find anything else, was also taken seriously by the prosecution. Coskun also provided the following “testimonial” by alleging that there was a rule that no news ever appeared above the Cumhuriyet logo and that news involving religious sect members would never appear on the first page: “ on May 23rd, on the first page of the newspaper, and next to the Cumhuriyet logo, a photo of the leader of FETÖ, Fetullah Gulen, was accompanied by the words ‘They say mansion to my poor home’. In addition,on the May 24th edition, it was similarly served.”

In the May 23rd 2015 dated Cumhuriyet news article, claims of the visit by Berat Albayrak, Erdogan’s son-in-law, to Gulen’s place in Pennsylvania was included. The main focus of this news was the relationship between Albayrak and Gulen. Right next to this news was another article with the following headline: “The cemaat’s fear of the government” which highlighted the financial relationship between the religious sects and the government. On the May 24, 2015 edition, our columnist Tayfun Atay wrote about the fight between cemaat and the government and criticized their relationship, formed through liberalism, based on mutual self-interest. Alev un is mistaken and tries to deceive. News of the religious sect can never appear anywhere in Cumhuriyet, not just on its logo. However, news criticizing the relationship between these sects and the government can appear anywhere in Cumhuriyet, just like in the ay 23-24 editions. A journalist can meet with anyone and can have an interview with both the President and the head of a criminal organization.

This very basic journalism rule was not taken into account when Cumhuriyet is the entity in question. The Anti-Terror Law also stipulates that a declaration must be an element of "promoting violence" in order for the propaganda of a terrorist organization to constitute a crime. The Constitutional Court also counted the seizure of Ozgur Gundem due to Abdullah Öcalan's declaration as infringement of the press and freedom of expression. According to the Constitutional Court's decision, it is not a reason for punishment unless the newspaper praises violence by a member of an illegal organization; a newspaper can state the opinion and thoughts of a member of an illegal organization. The prosecution could not find any crime in either of the interviews and invented a new crime such as "making the illegal organization look nice” specifically for Cumhuriyet.

 There is FETÖ, There is no FETÖ

Ahmet Şık’s news pieces dated July 8th 2015 “Ours is Journalism, yours is betrayal”; “The prosecutor of MIT trucks’ file; MIT condoned Reyhanli, if we had not given them information, we could have prevented it” dated July 9th 2015 ; and “The secret in the truck came to light” dated February 13th 2015 were subjects of accusation. Ahmet Şık was imprisoned on the pretext of the propaganda of FETÖ and PKK two months after the big operation. However, FETÖ accusation was removed from the file and reorganized in the form of accusations due to supporting the PKK and DHKPC. Because, to accuse a journalist of being affiliated with FETÖ, who was in fact imprisoned for one year for exposing the Gulenist Organization for the first time in the Turkish media, even elicited a reaction from the partisan journalists. to escape from these criticisms, the prosecutors did not charge Şık with FETÖ accusations; but this was just used to create an illusion.However, even though there is no accusation of FETÖ in the indictment, the news that the prosecutors have associated with FETÖ remained exactly the same.

Decision of non-repudiation issued

Accusing Ahmet Şık with helping DHKP-C is a real scandal. In fact, this accusation was already The investigated two years ago by the Press Prosecutor and a decision was made for non-prosecution.The news in question was an interview with the DHKPC members who took Prosecutor Mehmet Selim Kiraz as a hostage before being martyred. The prosecutor’s office could not find anything to put into the file and used this old news story which was finalized for non-prosecution. However, Şık questioned the legitimacy of the action and pointed out the action’s wrongfulness with his questions during the interview.