04.03.2025 15:51
Following the broadcast of the phone conversation with the expert on Halk TV, a decision was announced in the first hearing of the "Expert" case opened against journalists Suat Toktaş, Barış Pehlivan, Kürşad Oğuz, Seda Selek, and Serhan Asker. While a verdict of acquittal was given for the five journalists, a release order was issued for the detained Halk TV General Manager Suat Toktaş.
'The investigation into the "disclosure of the expert" has resulted in the acquittal of all defendants, including Suat Toktaş, the General Broadcast Director of Halk TV, who was arrested during the investigation.
The Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office initiated an investigation into the unauthorized recording and broadcasting of a phone conversation with an expert during a press conference held by Istanbul Metropolitan Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu. The charges included "attempting to influence an expert" and "listening to and recording conversations between individuals." As part of the investigation, Suat Toktaş was arrested, while program coordinator Kürşad Oğuz, journalist Barış Pehlivan, and Seda Selek were released under judicial control. The first hearing took place today at the 54th Criminal Court of First Instance in Istanbul. Seda Selek, Barış Pehlivan, Kürşad Oğuz, Serhan Asker, and the defendants' lawyers attended the hearing. Suat Toktaş was also brought to the courtroom from the prison where he is held.
"I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE NEWS TO BE BROADCAST LIVE WAS"
Defendant Seda Selek, who is not in custody, stated that her monthly income is 100,000 lira, saying, "I have been a journalist for 23 years, and I have been working at Halk TV for the last 4 years. I can say the following about the allegation that is the basis of the accusation: In sudden developments, our topics may change according to last-minute information. Ekrem İmamoğlu's press statement was delayed until 11 that day, and we broadcasted it live. After the statement, we had half an hour left, and we continued to discuss this topic. Our program flow is planned a day in advance, but when there is a last-minute developing event during a live broadcast, it is presented live. That day, there was a press conference by Ekrem İmamoğlu, and we brought it to the screens. After the press conference ended, we continued to discuss this topic with the guests on the program. In the following minutes, I was told from the control room that there was an important issue and it would be presented on screen. I knew it was Barış Pehlivan's news, but I didn't know what the content was; I learned it at that moment. What we brought to the screen was the audio recording with the expert. We only brought this to the screen, and then we continued to talk about Ekrem İmamoğlu. It was a sudden development during the broadcast. What we did was a journalistic activity. It is clear that I had no knowledge of the incident and that it was a developing event during the broadcast; this is entirely a journalistic activity," she said.
"I DID IT WITH A JOURNALISTIC REFLEX"
Defendant Hakan Kürşad Oğuz, who is not in custody, stated that his monthly income is 100,000 lira, saying, "I have been a journalist for 30 years, and I have always tried to do better. I am worried and sad for future generations, for my children. Ekrem İmamoğlu was at a press conference where the name of the expert was mentioned that day. Everyone was curious, 'Who is this expert?' It is very natural for a journalist to be curious. I saw that journalist Barış Pehlivan was having a phone conversation, and with a journalistic reflex, I wanted to record the conversation between Barış and the expert. Recording seemed right to me to avoid any mistakes in a future incident. The expert knew that the conversation was with a journalist; in fact, he said, 'Let's talk face to face.' We recorded it and sent it. Our aim was to approach it from a news perspective and conduct journalism objectively. Even if we hadn't published this audio recording, it would have been reported. I want to emphasize that I recorded it solely with a journalistic reflex. I know that Suat Toktaş also published it with this reflex. As for the part about influencing the judiciary through the expert, I didn't even understand how that could happen. There is no material basis for such a crime; it is contrary to the natural flow of life. The accusation that is the subject of today's trial is nothing but a violation of the fundamental principle of journalism," he said.
"WOULD HE MAKE A JOKE IF HE DIDN'T WANT TO TALK?"
Defendant Barış Pehlivan, who is not in custody, stated that his monthly income is 100,000 lira, saying, "Half of the indictment is filled with these two conversation records. Yes, everything is in this indictment, but there is no record of the alleged 'evidence of the crime' for which a prison sentence of up to 14 years is sought. I was one of the journalists invited to the press conference of İBB President Ekrem İmamoğlu. I was available, so I went. I didn't know the subject of the press conference when I went. I had no prior discussion or plan with Halk TV, that is, with Suat Toktaş or with Kürşad Oğuz. The press conference of Ekrem İmamoğlu ended. I wanted to ask the relevant expert about the allegations against him. I reached out to him for this and asked my questions. It was entirely a journalistic reflex and a meeting made to break news. I am sure that both Kürşad Oğuz and Suat Toktaş acted in a way that said, 'Let’s ensure that not a single word of my conversation is misrepresented, let’s give the right to respond to remain objective against the allegations, and let’s do good journalism.' According to the allegation, the expert did not want to talk. There is no sentence in the phone conversation indicating that he did not want to talk to me. On the contrary, when I asked him his age, he jokingly replied, 'Don’t add at night, 36 and a half.' Would a person make this joke to someone they didn't want to talk to in the middle of a conversation? In summary, there was no expression of will that the expert did not want to talk to me. Despite knowing that I was a journalist calling from Halk TV, he answered my questions. If we were a drug lord, a bribing bureaucrat, or a harassing cult leader, our case would have been closed. But we are not. Thank goodness we are not. We are just journalists. I know that the hidden crime of this case is the brave journalism done by Halk TV. Despite all threats and pressures, the price is being demanded for only submitting to the truth. Let there be no doubt; what I have done is a guarantee of what I will do. I have done journalism so that the people in this country can learn the truth, I am doing it, and I will continue to do it," he said.
"NOTHING BUT A JOURNALIST WILL COME OUT OF ME, I WON'T BE AN ACTIVIST"
Defendant Suat Toktaş, who is in custody, stated in his defense, "I was arrested on suspicion of fleeing and tampering with evidence. If I wanted to flee, I could have done so that day. While my friends were in custody, I managed the broadcast at the channel for a night. I was at my post; I could have fled, I had the opportunity, but I did not. The same audio recording is being published by others, and comments are being made on it. But it is forbidden for us, while it is free for them. We are talking about a 2-minute and 40-second audio recording, so there is no tampering with evidence. I have been in custody for 34 days. We are people who love this country; we have nowhere to go. What is being judged here is journalism. Those who look from a political perspective see politics here, those who look from a judicial perspective see a crime here; I only see a journalistic activity. Journalism has been forgotten in Turkey; we are trying to explain what journalism is amid these political conflicts. I want a verdict of acquittal for all of us in this case. We are here in a situation where an investigation should not have even been opened. The days when a press conference will be held are announced in advance; we speak in the public interest and based on public curiosity.
```html
There was a great public interest, we are a channel that broadcasts for 18 hours. In a place where curiosity is so high, we couldn't stay silent. For an hour and a half, we hear the name of an expert. As Halk TV, we call everyone without distinguishing between the opposition and the government. The real journalism is to call that person, to ask about the allegations. Barış is looking for them, introducing himself, wanting to conduct an interview, asking questions. The questions he asks are completely journalistic questions. The audio recording comes to me, I do not cut it, I do not edit it, I broadcast it as it is. In fact, there is also criticism of Halk TV in the audio recording. A correct question I asked has led to a distortion of will in the answer I received. If I had the intent to commit a crime, I would publish it repeatedly. Later, the name of the expert was given in a coded manner. Would someone with the intent to commit a crime do these things? If I knew that this audio recording was an unauthorized recording, I would not publish it. What would I do? I would try to get permission. The audio recording is a crime subject to complaint. The day after I was arrested, the expert comes to the courthouse and files a complaint against us. There is an investigation initiated ex officio, and later a complainant is found. That complaint is about Barışlar, there is no complaint against me or Kürşat. I have no political engagements. I do not jump on screens, I do not make programs, I do not put on a show, I do my job. Nothing other than a journalist comes out of me. I do not turn into an activist. I have always been against those who confuse journalism with activism.
ALL DEFENDANTS WERE ACQUITTED
In the indictment, the prosecution requested that Barış Pehlivan and Kürşad Oğuz be sentenced to 6 to 14 years, and Suat Toktaş, Seda Selek, and Serhan Asker to 4 to 9 years in prison. The prosecution requested the continuation of Suat Toktaş's detention. The court panel decided to acquit all defendants.
```