Tweet
Today's Zaman, Turkey
June 15 2008
Newspapers forced to self-censor on Ergenekon coverage
by E. BARIÅ? ALTINTAÅ? - Ä°STANBUL
Journalists and newspaper editors who want to cover in depth the
course of an investigation into Ergenekon, a shady gang whose members
allegedly perpetrated a number of attacks and bombings to create chaos
that would eventually lead to the overthrowing of the Justice and
Development Party (AK Party) government, are increasingly hesitant
about being bold in sharing details with their readers as prosecutors
have immediately been launching investigations into virtually all news
stories on the topic.
So far the Justice Ministry has opened 472 investigations into media
outlets in the past three months over alleged violations of the
confidentiality of the Ergenekon case, Justice Minister Mehmet Ali
Å?ahin announced late last month in response to a parliamentary
inquiry raised by Democratic Left Party (DSP) deputy Süleyman
YaÄ?ız. A court ordered a ban on the case earlier this
year.
The justice minister said publicizing documents from testimony given
as part of the Ergenekon case violated the Code on Criminal Procedure
(CMK) due to the case's confidential nature, adding that despite this,
some media outlets had publicized the details of the case in a way
that violated its confidentiality and could affect the investigation.
The minister said in his statement that state prosecutors had the
authority to launch probes into these instances and had done so,
adding: `We have issued an internal memo to the Ä°stanbul Police
Department and ordered them to pursue any violations by media organs
of the confidentiality of the Ergenekon case and refer them to the
offices of the state prosecutors. As part of this, 472 probes were
launched in the first three months of 2008.'
However, the prosecutors might just be too sensitive about the
confidentiality of this case. Å?amil Tayyar, the Ankara bureau
chief of the Star daily, facing dozens of Ergenekon coverage-related
probes, said: `Turkey is not a state of law, but a state of
rules. They know how to use the legal system as it fits them,' he
said, offering an explanation as to why state prosecutors can appear
to be more sensitive about certain cases, than others.
Ali OdabaÅ?ı, the editor legally responsible for printed
material in the Zaman daily, also agreed that the prosecutors were
more active on the Ergenekon case. He said, `Although it is usually
natural for cases where a court has made a confidentiality ruling to
have many investigations, since the police scans press material and
then informs the prosecutors, in the Ergenekon case, some of the
investigations have been really unnecessary.'
He said Zaman was facing similar probes for nearly 30 stories, but
only three or four of these were potentially in violation of the
confidentiality order. `The minute they see the word Ergenekon, they
launch a probe without paying attention to whether the content is
really in violation of confidentiality. The majority of our stories
are simply reprints of information that has appeared elsewhere, so
there is no need to launch an investigation into those,' he said.
Star's Tayyar said he had no doubt that Oktay EkÅ?i, the chief
columnist of a daily owned by the DoÄ?an Media Group and
president of the Press Council, an umbrella organization for
journalists, played a major role in the increased sensitivity the
prosecutors have shown.
`After other newspapers published news stories about the details of
Ergenekon, EkÅ?i called all prosecutors to do their duty,'
Tayyar said, sharing his opinion that the DoÄ?an Media Group's
coverage of the details of the Ergenekon case was
restricted. `EkÅ?i asked why no one has done anything to stop
the publication of news on Ergenekon and put psychological pressure on
the prosecutors. The number of investigations involving Ergenekon
stories spiked after that particular statement.'
He said the press investigations had effectively worked to suppress
media interest in Ergenekon. The number of investigations, he said,
forced most editorial teams to impose a sort of self-censorship on
themselves to avoid trouble.
OdabaÅ?ı agreed. `First, the reporters themselves are
hesitant. They don't want to write. Instead of, say, three reports on
Ergenekon, you get one.'
Confidentiality of process and the right to information
In late March, Soner ArıkanoÄ?lu, a correspondent for the
Taraf daily, was detained over a news story on the Ergenekon
investigation that was published in his newspaper.
Veteran legal correspondent ArıkanoÄ?lu had written
recent exclusive reports in Taraf under his byline concerning an
ongoing probe into the illegal neo-nationalist gang allegedly
preparing the atmosphere in Turkey for a military coup against the AK
Party government.
ArıkanoÄ?lu's report covered the content of a compact
disc in the headquarters of the Workers' Party (Ä°P) -- whose
leader, DoÄ?u Perinçek, was earlier jailed over alleged
links to Ergenekon. The CD included maps and documents on detailed
plans of the gang to stage an attack on the Supreme Court of
Appeals. The report appeared in Taraf in March with
ArıkanoÄ?lu's byline.
ArıkanoÄ?lu was taken into custody by the police based on
the testimony of Perinçek's wife, Å?ule Perinçek,
who claimed that no such CD was ever found in the Ä°P
office. She accused ArıkanoÄ?lu of having sent the
contents of the CD to the police. Taraf's editorial on the story said
the newspaper was utterly confused as to how the police -- which knows
perfectly well that the CD was found during an operation -- could take
Å?ule Perinçek's allegations seriously.
Detaining a journalist based on the testimony of a spouse of one of
the suspects most certainly raised questions on the state of freedom
of the press in Turkey and readers' rights to information.
In a statement released on the detention, the G-9 Journalists Platform
said that ArıkanoÄ?lu's detention has `made freedom of
the press open to question once again.' The group said: `Such methods
of arrests and raids against media institutions are being perceived as
efforts to pressure journalists and at the same time hurt the
reputation of our country. We want our colleague, who was only doing
his job as a journalist, to be brought before a judge.'
Strange connections
The Ergenekon investigation began as the continuation of an
investigation into a house used as an ammunitions depot in June of
last year. Revelations emanating from the investigation thus far have
shown that many of the attacks attributed to separatist or Islamist
groups or seen as hate crimes against minorities were actually `inside
jobs' by people connected to Ergenekon.
People such as the lawyer of Yasin Aydın, one of the suspects
charged in the murder of Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink, have
appeared before courts as suspects in the Ergenekon operation.
The investigation into the gang has exposed links between an attack on
the Council of State in 2006, threats and attacks against people
accused of being unpatriotic and a 1996 car crash known as the
Susurluk incident, which revealed links between a police chief, a
convicted ultranationalist fugitive and a member of Parliament as well
as links to the plans of some groups in Turkey's powerful military to
overthrow the government.
Some of the nearly 50 suspects under arrest and awaiting trial so far
include Veli Küçük, a retired major general who
is also the alleged founder of an illegal intelligence unit in the
gendarmerie, the existence of which is denied by officials; Ä°P
leader Perinçek; controversial ultranationalist lawyer Kemal
Kerinçsiz, who filed countless suits against Turkish writers
and intellectuals at odds with Turkey's official policies; Fikret
KaradaÄ?, a retired army colonel; Sevgi Erenerol, the press
spokesperson for a shady group called the Turkish Orthodox
Patriarchate; and Sami HoÅ?tan, a key figure in the Susurluk
investigation. Ali Yasak, a well-known gangster linked to the figures
in the Susurluk incident, was also detained in the operation.
June 15 2008
Newspapers forced to self-censor on Ergenekon coverage
by E. BARIÅ? ALTINTAÅ? - Ä°STANBUL
Journalists and newspaper editors who want to cover in depth the
course of an investigation into Ergenekon, a shady gang whose members
allegedly perpetrated a number of attacks and bombings to create chaos
that would eventually lead to the overthrowing of the Justice and
Development Party (AK Party) government, are increasingly hesitant
about being bold in sharing details with their readers as prosecutors
have immediately been launching investigations into virtually all news
stories on the topic.
So far the Justice Ministry has opened 472 investigations into media
outlets in the past three months over alleged violations of the
confidentiality of the Ergenekon case, Justice Minister Mehmet Ali
Å?ahin announced late last month in response to a parliamentary
inquiry raised by Democratic Left Party (DSP) deputy Süleyman
YaÄ?ız. A court ordered a ban on the case earlier this
year.
The justice minister said publicizing documents from testimony given
as part of the Ergenekon case violated the Code on Criminal Procedure
(CMK) due to the case's confidential nature, adding that despite this,
some media outlets had publicized the details of the case in a way
that violated its confidentiality and could affect the investigation.
The minister said in his statement that state prosecutors had the
authority to launch probes into these instances and had done so,
adding: `We have issued an internal memo to the Ä°stanbul Police
Department and ordered them to pursue any violations by media organs
of the confidentiality of the Ergenekon case and refer them to the
offices of the state prosecutors. As part of this, 472 probes were
launched in the first three months of 2008.'
However, the prosecutors might just be too sensitive about the
confidentiality of this case. Å?amil Tayyar, the Ankara bureau
chief of the Star daily, facing dozens of Ergenekon coverage-related
probes, said: `Turkey is not a state of law, but a state of
rules. They know how to use the legal system as it fits them,' he
said, offering an explanation as to why state prosecutors can appear
to be more sensitive about certain cases, than others.
Ali OdabaÅ?ı, the editor legally responsible for printed
material in the Zaman daily, also agreed that the prosecutors were
more active on the Ergenekon case. He said, `Although it is usually
natural for cases where a court has made a confidentiality ruling to
have many investigations, since the police scans press material and
then informs the prosecutors, in the Ergenekon case, some of the
investigations have been really unnecessary.'
He said Zaman was facing similar probes for nearly 30 stories, but
only three or four of these were potentially in violation of the
confidentiality order. `The minute they see the word Ergenekon, they
launch a probe without paying attention to whether the content is
really in violation of confidentiality. The majority of our stories
are simply reprints of information that has appeared elsewhere, so
there is no need to launch an investigation into those,' he said.
Star's Tayyar said he had no doubt that Oktay EkÅ?i, the chief
columnist of a daily owned by the DoÄ?an Media Group and
president of the Press Council, an umbrella organization for
journalists, played a major role in the increased sensitivity the
prosecutors have shown.
`After other newspapers published news stories about the details of
Ergenekon, EkÅ?i called all prosecutors to do their duty,'
Tayyar said, sharing his opinion that the DoÄ?an Media Group's
coverage of the details of the Ergenekon case was
restricted. `EkÅ?i asked why no one has done anything to stop
the publication of news on Ergenekon and put psychological pressure on
the prosecutors. The number of investigations involving Ergenekon
stories spiked after that particular statement.'
He said the press investigations had effectively worked to suppress
media interest in Ergenekon. The number of investigations, he said,
forced most editorial teams to impose a sort of self-censorship on
themselves to avoid trouble.
OdabaÅ?ı agreed. `First, the reporters themselves are
hesitant. They don't want to write. Instead of, say, three reports on
Ergenekon, you get one.'
Confidentiality of process and the right to information
In late March, Soner ArıkanoÄ?lu, a correspondent for the
Taraf daily, was detained over a news story on the Ergenekon
investigation that was published in his newspaper.
Veteran legal correspondent ArıkanoÄ?lu had written
recent exclusive reports in Taraf under his byline concerning an
ongoing probe into the illegal neo-nationalist gang allegedly
preparing the atmosphere in Turkey for a military coup against the AK
Party government.
ArıkanoÄ?lu's report covered the content of a compact
disc in the headquarters of the Workers' Party (Ä°P) -- whose
leader, DoÄ?u Perinçek, was earlier jailed over alleged
links to Ergenekon. The CD included maps and documents on detailed
plans of the gang to stage an attack on the Supreme Court of
Appeals. The report appeared in Taraf in March with
ArıkanoÄ?lu's byline.
ArıkanoÄ?lu was taken into custody by the police based on
the testimony of Perinçek's wife, Å?ule Perinçek,
who claimed that no such CD was ever found in the Ä°P
office. She accused ArıkanoÄ?lu of having sent the
contents of the CD to the police. Taraf's editorial on the story said
the newspaper was utterly confused as to how the police -- which knows
perfectly well that the CD was found during an operation -- could take
Å?ule Perinçek's allegations seriously.
Detaining a journalist based on the testimony of a spouse of one of
the suspects most certainly raised questions on the state of freedom
of the press in Turkey and readers' rights to information.
In a statement released on the detention, the G-9 Journalists Platform
said that ArıkanoÄ?lu's detention has `made freedom of
the press open to question once again.' The group said: `Such methods
of arrests and raids against media institutions are being perceived as
efforts to pressure journalists and at the same time hurt the
reputation of our country. We want our colleague, who was only doing
his job as a journalist, to be brought before a judge.'
Strange connections
The Ergenekon investigation began as the continuation of an
investigation into a house used as an ammunitions depot in June of
last year. Revelations emanating from the investigation thus far have
shown that many of the attacks attributed to separatist or Islamist
groups or seen as hate crimes against minorities were actually `inside
jobs' by people connected to Ergenekon.
People such as the lawyer of Yasin Aydın, one of the suspects
charged in the murder of Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink, have
appeared before courts as suspects in the Ergenekon operation.
The investigation into the gang has exposed links between an attack on
the Council of State in 2006, threats and attacks against people
accused of being unpatriotic and a 1996 car crash known as the
Susurluk incident, which revealed links between a police chief, a
convicted ultranationalist fugitive and a member of Parliament as well
as links to the plans of some groups in Turkey's powerful military to
overthrow the government.
Some of the nearly 50 suspects under arrest and awaiting trial so far
include Veli Küçük, a retired major general who
is also the alleged founder of an illegal intelligence unit in the
gendarmerie, the existence of which is denied by officials; Ä°P
leader Perinçek; controversial ultranationalist lawyer Kemal
Kerinçsiz, who filed countless suits against Turkish writers
and intellectuals at odds with Turkey's official policies; Fikret
KaradaÄ?, a retired army colonel; Sevgi Erenerol, the press
spokesperson for a shady group called the Turkish Orthodox
Patriarchate; and Sami HoÅ?tan, a key figure in the Susurluk
investigation. Ali Yasak, a well-known gangster linked to the figures
in the Susurluk incident, was also detained in the operation.