09.06.2026 14:01
Judicial sources stated that perception and propaganda activities regarding a trial in Osmaniye were being carried out through some accounts operating under the name Furkan Foundation and close to the Alparslan Kuytul group. It was emphasized that claims made during the hearing that the defendants or their lawyers were assaulted, that the judge had reached a decision beforehand, and that the trial was not conducted impartially, do not reflect the truth.
According to information obtained from judicial sources, it has been determined that some individuals operating under the name Furkan Foundation and affiliated with the Alparslan Kuytul group have been carrying out perception and propaganda activities on social media regarding the proceedings in file number 2025/729 of the Osmaniye 1st Criminal Court of First Instance.
VARIOUS CLAIMS SHARED ON SOCIAL MEDIA
It was stated that these posts were made particularly on the X platform and various other social media accounts. The posts included claims that the judge came to the hearing with a pre-prepared decision, that the trial was not conducted impartially, that the defendants and their attorneys were assaulted, and that the court would render its decision under the influence of law enforcement forces.
"NO ASSAULT OCCURRED DURING THE HEARING"
Judicial sources stated that these claims are baseless. It was indicated that no assault occurred during the hearing and that the trial process was conducted in accordance with procedural rules.
REQUESTS FOR RECUSAL OF THE JUDGE WERE EVALUATED
In the statement, it was noted that the request for recusal of the judge made within the scope of the file and the related objections were evaluated by the competent courts and rejected. It was also emphasized that no decision has yet been made in the said case.
"IT CONSTITUTES DISINFORMATION"
Judicial sources assessed that the claims that "the judge had pre-decided" aimed to create pressure on the court, influence the ongoing proceedings, and create a misleading perception in the public. It was stated that these posts therefore constitute disinformation.