16.02.2025 13:00
A decision has been made in the compensation lawsuit filed by President Erdoğan against CHP Chairman Özgür Özel following the statements made at the rally in Esenyurt after the arrest of Ahmet Özer. The court rejected President Erdoğan's claim for 1 million lira in non-pecuniary damages. The justification stated that Özel's words constituted heavy criticism and did not constitute an attack on personal rights.
President Erdoğan's lawyers filed a lawsuit against CHP Chairman Özgür Özel regarding his statements about President Erdoğan during a speech at a rally held in Esenyurt Square after the arrest of Esenyurt Mayor Ahmet Özer on October 31, 2024. In the lawsuit, it was requested that Özel be tried for "publicly insulting the President" and "defamation," and that he be sentenced to pay 1 million lira in non-pecuniary damages.
THE COURT RULED AGAINST PAYMENT OF DAMAGES
The Istanbul Anadolu 8th Civil Court, which heard the case, rejected the lawsuit. The court ruled that Özel's statements constituted heavy criticism and did not constitute an attack on personal rights, thus ruling against the payment of damages. In its reasoning, the court quoted the Constitutional Court's decisions stating that "ensuring social and political pluralism depends on the peaceful and free expression of all kinds of thought. In this regard, the freedom to express and disseminate ideas is vital for the functioning of democracy." The European Court of Human Rights also stated that "freedom of expression applies to information and ideas that may be considered offensive, shocking, or disturbing."
The reasoning included the determination that "freedom of expression is a requirement of pluralism, tolerance, and open-mindedness, without which we cannot speak of a democratic society." It emphasized that any intervention in freedom of expression cannot be considered a legitimate intervention in accordance with the requirements of a democratic society if it does not meet a pressing social need or is not proportionate, even if it meets a pressing social need.
"NOT A SPEECH THAT HARMS PERSONAL RIGHTS"
The reasoning stated the following: "When the concrete case is examined within the scope of these statements, it is seen that the defendant's speech addressing the public due to the arrest of the Esenyurt Mayor included statements such as 'the arrest process is contrary to law and justice, the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor initiated the investigation and the arrest based on orders and instructions received from the defendant, the Chief Prosecutor is similar to Zekeriya Öz, and the situation where the government decides whether there is a problem in the country indicates the existence of dictatorship.' It has been understood that the words directed at the plaintiff in the content of the speech are limited to these.
It is not possible to consider the situation where the words directed at the plaintiff are aimed at an ordinary citizen as equivalent to the situation where they are directed at the plaintiff, who is the President. As stated in the established case law of the ECHR, it is established that a person in the public eye has an obligation to endure even the harshest criticisms; it has been understood that the words spoken by the defendant targeting the plaintiff remained within the scope of heavy criticism and could not be considered an attack on personal rights. It has been established that the defendant did not make a speech that harmed the personal rights of the plaintiff; therefore, it was necessary to decide to reject the case as stated below."