Tweet
COURT OF APPEALS: "NO DEFAMATION OF HRANT DINK"
BIAnet.org
http://www.bianet.org/english/freedom-of-expression/134473-court-of-appeals-no-defamation-of-hrant-dink
Dec 2 2011
Turkey
The Court of Appeals quashed a verdict initially given in favour of
the family of slain Turkish-Armenian journalist Dink. A local court
had ruled for an attack on Dink's personal rights due to a documentary
on TRT. The Dink family lawyers demanded a revision of the decision.
Istanbul - BÄ°A News Center02 December 2011, Friday The Court of
Appeals 4th Chamber quashed a verdict initially given by a local court
in favour of the family of Hrant Dink, a Turkish-Armenian journalist
who was assassinated in 2007. The family had sued out a compensation on
the grounds of an attack on Dink's personal rights constituted by the
contents of the documentary "The Labyrinth of the Shahs" broadcasted
on the state channel TRT. The broadcasting company, Bey Productions
and OkkeÅ~_ Å~^endiller as the person who uttered the expressions
subject to trial were previously sentenced to a monetary fine.
Joint attorney Fethiye Cetin applied for a revision of the decision
given by the Court of Appeals.
The Dink family opened the case upon their claim that the documentary
gave the impression of Hrant Dink as being a perpetrator of the
MaraÅ~_ Massacre.
The Istanbul 4th Civil Court of First Instance approved the claim of
the Dink Family and decided for a compensation fine.
Revision of the decision of the Court of Appeals The documentary "The
Labyrinth of the Shah" was broadcasted on 28 December 2008. In the
11th episode of the documentary, a photograph of Hrant Dink was shown
full-screen in a section about the MaraÅ~_ Massacre while Å~^endiller
was speaking.
The following statement of Å~^endiller was subject to trial:
"This had nothing to do with Alevism or Sunnism. Armenian Garbis
Altınyan was part of this organization. As you know, Armenian Garbis
Altınyan was one of the prominent leaders in 1971 and one of the
founders of TÄ°KKO [Turkish Workers' Peasants' Liberation Army]. Here
you are, Hrant Dink, Armenian Garbis Altınyan and Orhan Bakır, let me
call him my master, all of them changed the name of the organization".
"Among the dead, among the militants who died in clashes later on, are
seven bodies without circumcision. What can Armenian Garbis Altınyan
and seven bodies without circumcision have to do with Alevis, Sunnis,
Kurds, Turkmens, and Avshars. As far as we see, an exterior focus
was behind this issue".
The Court of Appeals 4th Law Chamber decided to overrule the local
court's decision because the documentary was considered in line with
the principles of "truth, reality and objectivity".
Violation of procedure Lawyer Cetin requested to annul the decision
of reversal given by the Court of Appeals and uphold the decision of
the local court instead.
Cetin put forward a violation of procedure since the Court of Appeals
did not evaluate the decision why the ruling of the local court was
faulty and how the verdict of the superior court complied with the law.
In the request for a revision of the decision Cetin claimed that it
was "impossible to talk about conformity with the principles of truth,
reality and objectivity" in the context of the broadcast.
"If Hrant Dink is not involved at all in the referred incidents -
and he is not - then the esteemed chamber has to explain why the
plaintiffs used his name and his photograph and how this broadcast
can be in line with the law", Cetin commented.
MaraÅ~_ Massacre The MaraÅ~_ Massacre started with the killing of
two teachers and the bombing of a cinema. Alevi and people associated
with the left wing and the Republican People's Party (CHP) were being
targeted. A significant part of the Alevi population left the city
in south-eastern Turkey after the massacre. (YY/VK)
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
BIAnet.org
http://www.bianet.org/english/freedom-of-expression/134473-court-of-appeals-no-defamation-of-hrant-dink
Dec 2 2011
Turkey
The Court of Appeals quashed a verdict initially given in favour of
the family of slain Turkish-Armenian journalist Dink. A local court
had ruled for an attack on Dink's personal rights due to a documentary
on TRT. The Dink family lawyers demanded a revision of the decision.
Istanbul - BÄ°A News Center02 December 2011, Friday The Court of
Appeals 4th Chamber quashed a verdict initially given by a local court
in favour of the family of Hrant Dink, a Turkish-Armenian journalist
who was assassinated in 2007. The family had sued out a compensation on
the grounds of an attack on Dink's personal rights constituted by the
contents of the documentary "The Labyrinth of the Shahs" broadcasted
on the state channel TRT. The broadcasting company, Bey Productions
and OkkeÅ~_ Å~^endiller as the person who uttered the expressions
subject to trial were previously sentenced to a monetary fine.
Joint attorney Fethiye Cetin applied for a revision of the decision
given by the Court of Appeals.
The Dink family opened the case upon their claim that the documentary
gave the impression of Hrant Dink as being a perpetrator of the
MaraÅ~_ Massacre.
The Istanbul 4th Civil Court of First Instance approved the claim of
the Dink Family and decided for a compensation fine.
Revision of the decision of the Court of Appeals The documentary "The
Labyrinth of the Shah" was broadcasted on 28 December 2008. In the
11th episode of the documentary, a photograph of Hrant Dink was shown
full-screen in a section about the MaraÅ~_ Massacre while Å~^endiller
was speaking.
The following statement of Å~^endiller was subject to trial:
"This had nothing to do with Alevism or Sunnism. Armenian Garbis
Altınyan was part of this organization. As you know, Armenian Garbis
Altınyan was one of the prominent leaders in 1971 and one of the
founders of TÄ°KKO [Turkish Workers' Peasants' Liberation Army]. Here
you are, Hrant Dink, Armenian Garbis Altınyan and Orhan Bakır, let me
call him my master, all of them changed the name of the organization".
"Among the dead, among the militants who died in clashes later on, are
seven bodies without circumcision. What can Armenian Garbis Altınyan
and seven bodies without circumcision have to do with Alevis, Sunnis,
Kurds, Turkmens, and Avshars. As far as we see, an exterior focus
was behind this issue".
The Court of Appeals 4th Law Chamber decided to overrule the local
court's decision because the documentary was considered in line with
the principles of "truth, reality and objectivity".
Violation of procedure Lawyer Cetin requested to annul the decision
of reversal given by the Court of Appeals and uphold the decision of
the local court instead.
Cetin put forward a violation of procedure since the Court of Appeals
did not evaluate the decision why the ruling of the local court was
faulty and how the verdict of the superior court complied with the law.
In the request for a revision of the decision Cetin claimed that it
was "impossible to talk about conformity with the principles of truth,
reality and objectivity" in the context of the broadcast.
"If Hrant Dink is not involved at all in the referred incidents -
and he is not - then the esteemed chamber has to explain why the
plaintiffs used his name and his photograph and how this broadcast
can be in line with the law", Cetin commented.
MaraÅ~_ Massacre The MaraÅ~_ Massacre started with the killing of
two teachers and the bombing of a cinema. Alevi and people associated
with the left wing and the Republican People's Party (CHP) were being
targeted. A significant part of the Alevi population left the city
in south-eastern Turkey after the massacre. (YY/VK)
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress