DİYARBAKIR - The Court of Appeal upheld the 1 year, 6 months and 22 days prison sentence  given to journalist Abdurrahman Gök, who photographed the murder of Kemal Kurkut.

 

The final hearing of the lawsuit filed against journalist Abdurrahman Gök, who photographed the shooting of university student Kemal Kurkut by the police during the Newroz celebrations held in Amed in 2017, was held on June 30, 2022. Diyarbakır 5th High Criminal Court sentenced him to 1 year, 6 months and 22 days in prison on charges of "being a member of a terrorist organization" and "making propaganda for a terrorist organization". The punishment was based on the fact that journalist Gök shared images of the fighters fighting against ISIS and their symbols on his social media account in his news while following the ISIS attack on Kobanê in 2014.

 

'THERE IS NO INACCURACY IN DECISION'

 

The 9th Penal Chamber of the Diyarbakır Regional Court of Justice found the prison sentence given to journalist Gök to be "justified" and upheld it. Claiming that "there is no inaccuracy" in the decision, the Court of Appeal rejected the application by unanimous vote.

 

TEMUR: THE COURT DID NOT APPROACH IN A LEGAL MANNER

 

Evaluating the appeal decision, Gök's lawyer, Resul Temur, said: "Abdurrahman Gök presented to the court where he was tried, the news releases of the photos that were the subject of social media posts, together with his defense petition, in which he wrote the stories of the photos. Despite this, he was sentenced without any discussion about the news and his journalist identity. However, TMK 7 The last paragraph of /2 aims to protect the journalist because of the news he made, by stipulating that sharing and expressions shared for the purpose of reporting and that do not exceed the limit of criticism should not be considered as criminal elements. The court did not approach the law and avoided applying the provisions of the law."

 

'WE WILL FILE AN APPEAL'

 

Stating that they appealed the decision because the local court's decision was inaccurate, Temur said: "Our appeal application, which we made on the grounds that the decision did not comply with the legal and even legal criteria, was rejected on the merits within a short period of 3 months. While the Regional Court of Justice rejected the appeal on its merits, it did not even feel the need to discuss our application petition, our objections in our petition, and the news images we submitted to the court in its decision. The decision of the Court of Appeal was not justified in the originality of the file, and as such it acted contrary to the provision of a reasoned decision. This decision reveals that the courts of appeal do not have a legal view and aim to punish journalists who provide news and thoughts that concern the society. We will file an appeal on the ground that the relevant decision is not legal or legal."