Journalist Tolga Şardan waiting at the Ankara Courthouse just before he was arrested and taken to Sincan Prison on November 1 for his report on investigating corruption allegations in the judiciary. It should be investigated whether the name Şardan did not give in his article was the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor, whom he mentioned in his testimony.
“We are journalists, we will continue to do journalism”.
This was journalist Tolga Şardan’s response to a young colleague who asked him on November 1, “Tolga Abi, do you have anything to say?” as he was being taken to Ankara’s Sincan Prison after being arrested for his column published on the T24 news website on October 31.
When his statement to the prosecutor’s office was revealed, we realized that Tolga Şardan, in his statement given under the threat of arrest, revealed an allegation that he did not include in his news article because it was unconfirmed; and by doing that, he practiced journalism there as well.
Let me elaborate a bit.
In his article titled “What’s in the ‘judiciary report’ submitted by MIT to the Presidency?”, Şardan wrote the following sentence after reporting that the findings of the National Intelligence Organization’s (MIT) report on corruption allegations in the judiciary were presented to President Tayyip Erdoğan:
“In fact, Erdoğan is reported to have expressed his ‘disappointment’ with the information conveyed to him about a high-ranking member of the judiciary in Istanbul, and to have been very angry with the judiciary member in question.”
Who is that name Tolga Şardan mentioned?
Tolga Şardan did not give a name in the article. In fact, when I called him on the phone after the article, he said that the name was very high level, that the allegations were serious, and that he did not want to write it down because he could not get confirmation.
While testifying in the Audio-Visual room at the Ankara Courthouse, against the accusation of the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office of “disseminating false news in a way to cause public anxiety, fear and panic” according to Article 217 of the Turkish Penal Code, Şardan said the following:
“If I had acted in violation of Article 217 of the Turkish Penal Code, I could have used the raw information that I had accessed in the article in question but could not get confirmation of. In fact, let me say that there are some allegations about Mr. Şaban Yılmaz, the Chief Public Prosecutor of Istanbul Çağlayan Courthouse, in this information. Therefore, if I were a journalist with ulterior motives, if I were an inexperienced journalist, I would have acted against the personal rights and freedoms of public officials today.”
I wonder if the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor whom Şardan did not mention in his article because he could not get confirmation, was or was not Şaban Yılmaz?
What are the allegations? Truth or slander?
There is a way to find out if Şaban Yılmaz is the name mentioned by journalist Şardan; and if there are allegations, what they are, whether they are true or slanderous: That is to start the legal process and launch an investigation. In addition, there are the inspection boards of the Ministry of Justice and the Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSK), chaired by Minister Yılmaz Tunç.
Yesterday, on November 1, a while before Şardan was taken into custody and quickly arrested, I asked the Ministry of Justice whether there was any research, investigation or work by the Ministry’s boards on the issue Şardan wrote about. When the answer comes, it will surely be newsworthy.
Let us remind you: Şaban Yılmaz was Deputy Minister of Justice when Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor İrfan Fidan was appointed as a member of the Court of Cassation in December 2020 (and from there, with the signature of President Tayyip Erdoğan, two months later as a member of the Constitutional Court), again with the signature of the President.
His lawyer Suna Öztaşdönderen drew attention to the contradiction in his arrest when Şardan’s article should have been considered a denunciation and an investigation should have been opened, and said that neither the Presidency nor the MİT had refuted the article.
And guess what happened?
The disclaimer came 10 minutes later
The disclaimer, which did not arrive for 43 hours between the publication of the article, the detention order against Şardan and his arrest, arrived 10 minutes after his arrest. The Center for Combating Disinformation (DMM) of the Presidential Communications Directorate stated, “There is no such report by MİT as claimed.”
The choice of words in the disclaimer, which gives the impression of being almost custom-made, is important. For example, the DMM only says that there is no “report as claimed”. There is no indication that such a study was not carried out or that MİT Director İbrahim Kalın did not inform President Erdoğan on such an important issue.
However, it is known that MİT has been focusing on corruption and bribery allegations, especially in the judiciary, and has been investigating whether these allegations have foreign links or are related to national security. For example, in 2022, MİT uncovered Istanbul Public Prosecutor Davut Yılmaz, who had helped Iranian intelligence kidnap Iranian regime opponents in Turkey in exchange for money, and Yılmaz, who was arrested for espionage, was dismissed from his profession and disbarred by the HSK.
Tolga Şardan had actually written a story showing that MİT was not going beyond its duty, but rather doing its duty, but when it came out, it was caught by the Disinformation Law, which journalism organizations objected to.
Şardan’s investigation is from Istanbul
Another striking issue in the Şardan case is that the investigation that led to his arrest was opened by the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office, not Ankara.
The Presidency of the Republic is in Ankara, the Ministry of Justice is in Ankara, MIT is in Ankara, Şardan lives in Ankara, the incident concerns the functioning of the state happened in Ankara, the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office has a Press Crimes Investigation Bureau, but the investigation was initiated by the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office.
Tolga Şardan’s statement also refers to the allegations made a while ago by Ismail Uçar, the Chief Public Prosecutor of Istanbul’s Anatolian Courthouse, about the bribery ring in the judiciary, which were also mentioned in the Grand National Assembly of Turkey.
Minister of Justice Yılmaz Tunç later announced that an investigation had been launched into Uçar’s allegations and denunciations, but news reports on the allegations were banned.
It is not common in Turkey for a chief prosecutor on duty to denounce a bribery ring in the courthouse. Tunç now has the added responsibility of investigating Uçar’s allegations, as well as the situation that emerged with the arrest of journalist Tolga Şardan.
Bribery, corruption, gray list, economy
The investigation into allegations of bribery and corruption in the courthouse is important not only for individual rights and freedoms, and for Turkey to be a state of law – let alone a state of law – that properly enforces its own laws. It also prevents the necessary steps from being taken to overcome the economic crisis, thus damaging the economy.
The day before the detention of social media influencer Dilan Polat over money laundering allegations, the Minister of Treasury and Finance Mehmet Şimşek, in his Plan and Budget speech at the Turkish Grand National Assembly, once again emphasized the need for Turkey to be removed from the Gray List, a list of countries with serious accusations of money laundering and terrorist financing, which is an obstacle to investment.
Without a scalpel to the judiciary, where allegations of bribery and corruption are rampant, neither justice, individual rights and freedoms, nor steps to be taken in the field of economy will yield results.
Journalism is not a crime
In advanced democracies, the press is considered the fourth force in the functioning of the state and society, in addition to the judiciary, the legislature and the executive.
Just as a fair judiciary will one day be needed by everyone, a free press will one day be needed by everyone – when it wants to be heard.
The Disinformation Law that Şardan was arrested upon has just passed in the parliament in October 2022 amid fierce criticisms of the journalistic associations. On top of the arrest of journalists Merdan Yanardağ and Barış Pehlivan, now we have the case of Tolga Şardan.
Tolga Şardan must be released.
What needs to be done is to investigate the allegations made in his column and not to prevent it from investigated.
Journalism is not a crime.
As dear Tolga said, “We are journalists, we will continue to do journalism”.
