In a discussion program broadcasted on HaberTürk channel on November 28, 2020, CHP’s Mersin PM, Ali Mahir Başarır, referring to the sale of the Tank Pallet Factory to Qatar, claimed that "For the first time, the state's army was sold to Qatar". This claim triggered a week-long political discussion during which political parties denounced Başarır’s statement. Most prominently, MHP’s leader, Devlet Bahçeli, accused Başarır of ‘treason’. However, the controversy over Basarir’s statements went well beyond the harsh criticism from political parties. State institutions jumped on the bandwagon, attempting to punish both the PM Başarır and HaberTürk channel. In this direction, first, Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office launched an ex officio investigation against the PM Başarır.[1] Article no. 301 of the Turkish Penalty Code, which had been instrumentalized in politically-motivated cases in the past, was, once again, at play, and brought forward to accuse PM Başarır of “openly humiliating the government of the Republic of Turkey and the military of the state.”

In what followed, the Radio and Television Supreme Council (RTÜK, Radyo ve Televizyon Üst Kurulu) ruled for suspension of the discussion program for 5 times and fined HaberTürk channel at highest level.[2] By the punishment imposed on HaberTürk, RTÜK undermined the essence of freedom of expression and media as well as violated the principle of individual criminal responsibility, if there is a crime at all. In recent years, RTÜK’s increasing policy of censorship as well as intimidation and suppression of the opposition media is regarded as one of the major reasons behind Turkey’s declining scores in a variety of international indexes. If the government envisions a country, where young people have a better future, citizens live in prosperity, and foreign investors have trust in the economy, then the government, as an utmost priority, must secure the freedom of expression and media. This can only be achieved not by arbitrary and unpredictable practices of the government and state institutions such as RTÜK, which follow its political agenda, but by truly independent courts.

In the face of increasing national and international pressures, the government finally decided to announce the "number of cases" on November 25. After the release of the number of cases, the sudden jump to 22 thousand daily cases overnight confirmed how rightful the existing suspicions were. Manipulation over the number of daily cases, indeed, created weaknesses in the fight against COVID-19. As Esin Davutoğlu Şenol of Gazi University stated, if those data were known, all hospitals would continue to work under pandemic conditions; teachers and parents would not get caught the virus in schools.[3] Although releasing actual data on the number of daily cases should be regarded as a step forward, doubts about the number of deaths continue. According to the Ministry of Health data, there had been 12.672 COVID-19 related deaths in the past 9 months across Turkey. However, according to Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality data, there had been 11.600 deaths in the same period only in Istanbul.[4] Such a mismatch over the COVID-19 related deaths reveals how reasonable to be skeptical about the data released by the Ministry of Health.

Thirteen judges and prosecutors were dismissed from profession due to their connections and affiliations to the FETO/PDY terrorist organization by the decision of Council of Judges and Prosecutor (HSK)  dated November 27, 2020, published in the official gazette in December 3, 2020, .[5] This decision was based on  provisional article no. 35 of the Decree no. 375 that was annexed by article no. 26 of the Law no. 7145 to. This rule empowers HSK for three years following the removal of the state of emergency,  to dismiss judges and prosecutors, who are found to be in contact with or linked to terrorist organizations. Based on this mandate, HSK dismissed total 28 judges and prosecutors in four different occasions in 2020.[6] As in previous decisions, the last HSK decision did not provide an explanation as to what evidence was found against each judge and prosecutor.  Moreover, in the decision, HSK stated that the assessment was not based on a concrete action investigation that qualifies as a criminal or disciplinary offense that the judges and prosecutors might have committed. Rather, the decision included an evaluation as to whether judges and prosecutors have any connection with organizations or groups, defined as acting against the national security of the state by the National Security Council (MGK, Milli Guvenlik Kurulu), in the form of membership, affiliation, contact or association. In such an evaluation, the decision is made based on the data gathered from social environment information, denunciations and complaints, information obtained from prosecutions and investigations, analysis reports of the General Directorate of Security and Bylock contents. Although it is understood from the decision that the written defense of each judge and prosecutor was received, it is not entirely clear whether each judge and prosecutors were informed about their individual offense. Without relying on evidence that is based on a concrete action, the dismissal of a judge or a prosecutor is clearly against the rule of law and undermining the Constitutional principle of guaranteed tenure of judges. Moreover, these dismissals create a climate of fear among all judges and prosecutors and violate the right of fair trial of individuals who are under investigation and prosecution.

---