Listen to the article
Turkish Court Upholds Suspended Sentence for Journalist in Terrorism Propaganda Case
A Turkish court on Wednesday reaffirmed a 15-month suspended prison sentence for journalist Neşe İdil on charges of disseminating terrorist propaganda through her social media posts, despite a prior ruling by Turkey’s Constitutional Court that had ordered a retrial.
According to the Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA), the İstanbul 22nd High Criminal Court maintained its previous judgment from February 2024. This decision comes after the Constitutional Court found a violation of İdil’s right to a fair trial in October 2025 and mandated a new hearing.
The case centers on İdil’s social media posts from 2015 on the platform X (formerly Twitter). The journalist had shared images showing armed members of the Women’s Protection Units (YPJ) celebrating after liberating the Syrian Kurdish town of Kobani from the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).
Turkish authorities consider the YPJ problematic due to its status as the female branch of the People’s Protection Units (YPG). The Turkish government views the YPG as an extension of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), which has waged a decades-long insurgency against the Turkish state. The PKK is designated as a terrorist organization by Turkey and many Western nations, including the United States and the European Union.
İdil’s legal representative, Didare Hazal Sümeli, argued in court that the posts fell squarely within the bounds of freedom of expression and did not constitute propaganda since they did not incite any segment of society to violence. The defense also highlighted that the investigation itself was procedurally flawed, as it was initiated based on a complaint filed through the Presidency’s Communication Center (CİMER).
In her defense, Sümeli made the significant point that the YPG and its affiliated YPJ were not officially designated as terrorist organizations at the time the posts were made. The lawyer also cited relevant Supreme Court of Appeals rulings in similar cases to bolster İdil’s position.
The journalist retains the right to appeal the court’s decision, though the path forward remains uncertain in Turkey’s increasingly restrictive media environment.
İdil’s case exemplifies a broader pattern in Turkey, where authorities have consistently employed broadly worded counterterrorism legislation to prosecute journalists, writers, academics, and activists. Human rights organizations and press freedom advocates have noted that these prosecutions often target individuals based on their reporting activities, sources, or published content rather than evidence of involvement in violent activities.
The Committee to Protect Journalists and other international monitoring organizations have repeatedly expressed concern about Turkey’s use of terrorism charges as a means to silence critical voices. In many instances, legitimate journalistic activities covering Kurdish issues or the conflict in southeastern Turkey have been reframed by prosecutors as support for terrorism.
Turkey’s application of counterterrorism laws against media professionals and civil society figures has drawn persistent criticism from international bodies. The United Nations, European Union, and Council of Europe have all urged Ankara to end practices that violate international human rights standards and to restore essential legal protections for free expression.
The broader context of press freedom in Turkey remains troubling. According to Expression Interrupted, a project that monitors press freedom in the country, 27 journalists are currently imprisoned in Turkey. This statistic aligns with the country’s dismal ranking in the 2025 World Press Freedom Index published by Reporters Without Borders (RSF), where Turkey stands at 159th out of 180 nations.
Media experts note that the continued prosecution of journalists like İdil contributes to a climate of self-censorship and has a chilling effect on coverage of sensitive topics, particularly those related to Kurdish issues, government criticism, or national security matters.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
12 Comments
This case raises serious questions about the independence of Turkey’s judiciary and the country’s commitment to press freedom. Convicting a journalist for social media posts, despite a Supreme Court ruling, is very troubling.
I agree, this is a worrying development. The lack of judicial independence is a major concern and undermines Turkey’s democratic institutions.
Concerning to see the Turkish court disregard the Supreme Court’s previous ruling. Press freedom is essential, even for sensitive topics like terrorism. I wonder if there are political motivations behind this decision.
I agree, the lack of judicial independence is troubling. Journalists should be able to report on sensitive issues without fear of retaliation.
Disappointing to see the Turkish court disregard the Supreme Court’s previous ruling and uphold the conviction of this journalist. Reporting on sensitive topics like the Kurdish conflict should not be criminalized.
You’re right, this case is a clear violation of press freedom and the rule of law. The government’s crackdown on dissent is deeply concerning.
The Turkish government’s treatment of the YPG and its media coverage is concerning. Journalists should not be punished for reporting on issues of public interest, even if they are politically sensitive.
Absolutely. The government’s conflation of the YPJ with the PKK is questionable and appears to be a pretext for cracking down on dissent. Respect for the rule of law is crucial.
This case highlights the ongoing challenges faced by journalists in Turkey, particularly when reporting on issues related to the Kurdish conflict and terrorism. The government’s actions appear to be politically motivated and a threat to press freedom.
Absolutely. The disregard for the Supreme Court’s ruling is very troubling and suggests a lack of judicial independence. Journalists should be able to report on matters of public interest without fear of retaliation.
This case highlights the challenges journalists face in Turkey when covering topics related to the Kurdish conflict and terrorism. The government’s crackdown on dissent is extremely worrying.
You’re right, the government seems intent on suppressing critical reporting, even when it contradicts their own top court’s rulings. Sad to see this democratic backsliding.