Court Defense of Dogan Yurdakul, January 27, 2012

January 27, 2012 § 2 Comments


File No: 2011/14

Defendant: Dogan Yurdakul

Plaintiff: K.H

Re: Service of my pre-defense

Your Honor, Esteemed Court,

I stand before you because of my thoughts.

The entirety of the accusations raised against me is directed at my personal thoughts. I consider these accusations, as an insult to my personality and to the freedom of thought and expression in general, since they cause me to defend myself, by aiming at my thoughts and at expressing such thoughts in written or at expressing such thoughts during my telephone communications.

In the meantime, even though indicating and refuting various and fictitious assumptions which constitute the basis of the criminal charge are already like a punishment in the first place, I have to do that so.

Your Honor, when commencing the first hearing, you have suggested as ‘facts and fictions shall be separated’ by the court. By considering your suggestion as an assurance, I am going to try to indicate and answer the fictions mentioned in the criminal charge against myself, on the purpose of simplifying this separation process.

The police have seized my two computers on the date I got detained. None of the so-called ‘documents’ which constitute the grounds of the criminal charge and which are actually hacking products were found on my computers. Moreover, “the input method” of such made up documents has been ascertained by four expert reports which have been obtained by our attorneys, and thus these documents have lost their evidential values.

I got detained pursuant to the arrest warrant (69/50) issued on 02.03.2011 and I got imprisoned pursuant to the investigation report issued (Folder: 28, Page: 259) on 04.03.2011. No evidence against me, other than being called as ‘Dogan’ and ‘Dogan Abi’ in both of two documents named as ‘Hocadan Notlar’ and ‘Soner Bey’den’, could be adduced. Despite the fact that I have denied this accusation at the Prosecution, my detention has been requested and I got imprisoned. There are no other new evidences adduced in the criminal charge or in its attachments which have been issued 6 months after such documents. Only some of my articles and telephone communications concerning newsworthy subjects have been entered into the criminal charge and into its attachments.



Your Honor, Members of the Court,

I am not being detained because of my thoughts for the very first time. This case is a ‘déjà vu’ state in my situation. I have already seen this odd movie, twice. However, they were during two different military coup eras. I have never been sent to jail because of my thoughts during any of the civil government periods which I inveigh against. I happen to be sent to jail for the very first time because of my articles I wrote during the period of a civil government which calls itself ‘Advanced Democrat’!

The persecution I face with during the military coup eras and during this period shows similarity in terms of their effects on my private life.

Your Honor, I smiled in sorrow from deep inside when you asked my marital status during the identification because I got married with my first wife when I was convicted in Mamak Prison. I lost my second wife when I was under arrest in Silivri Civil Campus. In 1981, my daughter was two years old and lived in exile with me and with her mother and she used a United Nations Passport for years.  Now she is 32 years old, she lives in France and she follows what his father is being through by following the events on internet and on social networking sites.

Your Honor, Members of the Court,

I have never been able to stand before my natural judge as a result of the articles I have written. I stood before Martial Law Courts, State Security Courts and now I stand before the Special Court. When I told this to my attorney, Mr Serkan Gunel, he responded as: ‘Then, you have stood before your natural judge only during your divorce’. I wish for your court to set a first step to give an end to this suffering, of the journalists and authors of this country, caused by being have to stand before extraordinary courts because of their thoughts.

I had been convicted for 20 months in Mamak Military Prison during the Coup of March 12th. I got sentenced to more than 200 years. They all got set to zero when the Article 142 of Turkish Criminal Code got revoked. Back then, the rationalization of ‘squelching the thoughts’ was ‘being a communist’, now this fact has turned up to be ‘being a terrorist’. Namely, there is no difference at all from the viewpoint of hostility against fundamental rights and freedoms.

It is not possible to say that there is a difference in terms of the logic established within the procedure of preliminary investigation, either. Back then, they used to try to find evidence through defendants and now they are still trying to find evidence through defendants. Back then, they used to find an individual whom they were not happy with his/her thoughts and fabricate a crime which fits him/her, they currently do the same so. I would like to give an example to this former procedure.

I was put on trial within the scope of TIIKP (Revolutionary Worker Villager Party of Turkey) a.k.a. ‘Safak Davasi’ (Dawn Case) during the Coup of September 12th. There was another case called as ‘Revolutionary Organization of Land Forces’ pending at the same time against some Army Officers in addition to this case. A First Lieutenant who was one of the defendants of such case had experienced this event. We had found the chance to hear the story from him since he was shuttling back and forth together with us between the prison and the Martial Court.

This First Lieutenant had gotten informed on as ‘a communist, even an anarchist’ by another Army Officer an acquaintance of his because of a private hostility between them. Even back then, likewise today, such charges used to cause being placed under arrest just like today’s terrorism charges do. They start torturing the First Lieutenant when they capture him and put him under pressure by saying ‘confess, which organization are you from’. The First Lieutenant resists for a while by responding as ‘I am not into politics, what crime are you talking about?’, however he cannot stand the torture even though he resists and says ‘Okay, stop it, I will confess’. They call a halt to torturing. However the First Lieutenant neither had heard of an organization name nor did he have an idea about this matter. “Could you list me the names of the organizations?’ he says and they list them so. He asks about the penalties appraised for the membership of such organizations, and they tell him. He asks the organization which requires the lightest sentence and they say ‘Penalty for being a member of Safak Organization is 7-15 years’, and he says ‘Okay, I am a member of this organization then’. They obtain his written deposition confessing the membership of ‘Revolutionary Organization of Land Forces’ and have it signed. They also torture other defendants and get them to confess their relationships with him, and he gets arrested pursuant to the Article 141 of the Turkish Criminal Code.

The sole fact which is different today in the procedure of finding a defendant first and then fabricating a crime fitting the defendant is technology which has been replaced with torture. Now, a defendant with offensive thoughts is being determined and s/he gets connected with a fictional organization by means of anonymous advice notes, anonymous witness testimonies, wire tapping, bugging and other technical surveillances. There may be differences in methods; however, there is no difference in terms of prejudice and malevolence against the defendant. However, people see it even in the movies and on TV that this is not the way of doing it within the scope of contemporary law.

Various TV shows about crime scene investigation, forensic medicine and even shows about law, demonstrate how carefully the evidences such as hair, feather, and cigarette butts etc. are being gathered and evaluated. We also witness that even the confession of the defendant alone is not sufficient to open a case most of the time, furthermore, support of a psychologist is demanded in such cases since ‘a human being in a normal state of mind does not confess his/her wrongdoings’. We see that the judges deny the case if prosecutors cannot provide the court with concrete evidences.

Your Honor, Members of the Court,

The officials, who had carried out the investigations back in the military period I have mentioned, at least tried to fit the charges in a cast. Today even such attempt is not found necessary, various crime types are invented depending on the situation of the defendant. I will present the examples of this fact arising from the accusations directed at me.


New crime types which do not exist in the laws have been created in the criminal charge. Some selected sentences, even some of the words, picked out of my articles and of my telephone communications have been tried to be fit into these created crimes.

Some examples out of these made-up crimes, which also mean the violation of my area of freedom of thought, are as follows:

1.’Influencing the world of politics’: Such issue has been considered as a crime and referring to me on the 22nd page of the criminal charge, it is mentioned as ‘it is ascertained that an intensive study is being carried out within this scope’. Moreover, the crime of performing social engineering has been created as a sub-crime of this ‘crime’. In line with such made-up crimes, some sentences taken out of various telephone communications and some parts of various articles and news have been quoted as ‘corpus delicti’ under the title ‘actions carried out on the purpose of influencing the government and opposition parties’.

The idiom of ‘sideways engineering’ has entered into the Turkish Dictionary of TDK (Turkish Linguistic Society), however the idiom of ‘social engineering’ has not. In effect, this term is being used widely by the media members to present the meaning of ‘influencing the society, canalizing the public opinion into a direction’ as a metaphor, however, using such metaphor to define a crime is not compatible with neither legitimacy nor solemnity of a criminal charge which is served to a court in order to provide heavy imprisonments against individuals.

2. ‘Crime of creating a perception such as there is an ongoing civil war in the country’: One of the ‘news’ cited for this made up crime on the 112th page of the criminal charge is an article of mine bearing the title ‘Çelebi Efendi O Kitabı Tanıdı: Yeni Soğuk Savaş’ (Celebi Efendi Recognizes The Book: The New Cold War). It is obvious that the word of ‘War’ mentioned in the title of this article which was repeated 4 times in the Attachments (6/391, 17/153, 28/40 ve 62/157) evokes the charged ‘crime’. However, as it can clearly be understood from the title of this one paragraph article, a book is being discussed in the article. It is being mentioned in the article that, Ilker Basbug, The Chief of General Staff at the time the article was written, suggests his visitors Fatih Altayli and Murat Bardakci by showing the book that  ‘new external threat’ is being discussed in the book. Namely it has nothing to do with civil war, furthermore knowing that the term cold war is not related to the term civil war is not an issue of intelligence. On the other hand, this new ‘crime type’ invented by the ciriminal charge does not have a place in the Turkish Dictionary of TDK, either. There is no idiom such as ‘creating perception’ is in the dictionary. The word ‘Perception’ is in the dictionary and it has the following meanings:

(According to the Turkish meaning of the word Algi (Perception))

1) income, receivable, bribe, tax

2) the spoon used to collect poppy milk

3) (in psychology) directing attention on something for it to be borne in upon, comprehend

‘Causing to perceive’ (Algilatmak) is also in the dictionary, and it means ‘causing to comprehend’ however the word ‘creating perception’ is not Turkish, this criminal charge has to define this new ‘crime type’ once again.

3. The crime of diminishing the reputation of Ergenekon case and its efficiency on public opinion

The statements I have made during a telephone conversation with Soner Yalcin and what I have written in one of my articles are cited as ‘evidences’ of the ‘crime’ derived on the 113th page of the criminal charge. What do ‘reputation’ and ‘efficiency on public opinion’ of a case mean? There is no word in TDK Turkish Dictionary such as diminishing the reputation (itibarsizlastirmak). The verb ‘discredit’ means: damage in reputation; The verb ‘diminishing the reputation’ (itibarsizlastirmak) means: losing its reputation and value. The equivalent of this word in French is ‘discrediter’ and it means falling from grace, losing face. Since the root of this word is credit, you can call it as losing credit! Reputation is abstract, relative, nominal, namely again according to TDK, ‘something considered as a fact when it is actually not. Fiction’. Therefore, when you are talking about the reputation of a case, it means you are talking about something ‘fictitious’, namely something ‘disputable’. I wonder, why does not the reputation of a case such as a homicide, rape, drug dealing, robbery, malpractice become an issue, but only the reputation of some of the political cases become an issue. Is it because of the hesitation caused by the fragile structure of the criminal charge? Whatever, let’s skip it. There is not a crime such as diminishing the reputation of a case and its efficiency on public opinion, available in our laws. Therefore, charging me with such a crime is not legal.

4. ‘The crime of mentioning that the prosecutors of Ergenekon are not interested in Susurluk’: It is raised on the pages 76, 112 and 121 of the criminal charge that I have committed this crime during an online meeting held on MSN about current news, by means of asking the question of ‘Why is Mehmet Agar being questioned?’. 15 years after I committed this ‘crime’(15.09.2011), Mehmet Agar got sentenced to 5 years, I do not want to talk about the case since it is still at the stage of appeal. I just would like to settle this discussion by reminding the fact that everyone has been asking this question in the papers, on TV and even in the cafés since Mehmet Eymur got questioned within the scope of ‘murders by unknown assailants’ investigation.

5. ‘The crime of Encouraging the people of our country to hit the streets by making news citing the events in Egypt’: It is raised that (Criminal Charge p. 15, 68, 112) I have committed this ‘crime’ during a telephone conversation about the current news with Baris Pehlivan by discussing how to publish the news of the mass picketing to be organized in Ankara against the ‘Bag Law’ by various unions. As a matter of fact, neither Egypt nor the events in Egypt have been mentioned in the news which constitutes the basis of the assertion, however, if drawing an analogy with the Arab Spring is considered as a crime, then it is possible to observe that such ‘crime’ is being committed in the newspapers and on the televisions every day and every hour. I will not dwell on this new ‘crime type’ any further. However I feel obligated to mention these examples: The Time Magazine named ‘the protesters’ as the person of this year. Stephan Hessel who is almost 100 years old wrote a tiny little book called as ‘Indignez vous’ – ‘Time for Outrage’ and it sold millions all over the world. One of the notable legists of Turkey, Sami Selcuk said: ‘We have to stand against slavery’. So it means that, there is a thin line to be determined fairly between the freedom of expression and encouraging people for grudge and hostility.

Other than those I have mentioned, the criminal charge includes various charges such as ‘crime of disinformation’ and ‘crime of black propaganda’.

As is mentioned by my friends who took the floor before me and by our attorneys, the rule of ‘Nulla poena sine lege’ is one of the fundamental tenets of law. No man can be judged because of a crime which has not been expressly defined by the laws. Every single act which is not expressly defined as a crime by the laws is within the area of freedom of an individual. Accusing an act within the area of freedom by means of made up grounds is the violation of such area of freedom.

It is our right to expect the presence of solemnity and legitimacy within such criminal charge which demands such heavy punishments.


The persons who prepared the criminal charge assume that writing or using some words constitutes evidence for the crime of ‘membership of a terrorist organization’. There is a search engine on the homepage of the internet site of Oda TV which I am also a columnist of it. When you type the names, for instance, ‘Ergenekon Case’, ‘Coup’, ‘War’, ‘Weapon’, ‘Psychological Movement’, ‘Phone Tapping’, ‘Ocalan’, ‘PKK’, ‘AKP’, together with the name Dogan Yurdakul and click on the search button, you can find the articles I have written until the date I got arrested which have the titles including these keywords amongst 255 articles of mine. The persons who prepared the criminal charge and its attachments obviously used such method and picked the articles with similar keywords in their titles without spending an effort to take a look at their contents. Since they did not pay attention whether the contents of the articles serve their purpose, humorous situations occurred. I have given an example above. Another example would be my article with the title ‘A military coup plan or a civil coup plan?’ The news and articles in the papers on that date have been summarized in this article. Its title is also a headline given by a well-known chief editor – columnist for his article published on that date. The persons who prepared the criminal charge thought that the headline was given by me because they did not read the contents of the article and they considered the article as an ‘element of crime’ right when they noticed the word ‘coup’ in the title and filed it. When you take a look at my 47 articles which have been quoted between the 35th and 222nd pages of the Folder Attachment 28, you can clearly see that one or two words in the titles of these articles have been caught by the radar.

Your Honor, Members of the Court,

I have prepared a French-Turkish Dictionary which includes 80.000 words and idioms after 7 years of study. The words considered ominous by the criminal charge are included in this dictionary with their extended explanations. Frankly, I wonder why my dictionary is not among the corpus delicti.

The very same method applies for my telephone communications. For instance, on the 52nd page of the criminal charge, the telephone communication I have had with Soner Yalcin concerning his visit to express his condolence upon my big sister’s pass away has been adduced evidence for ‘organizational contact’ because the word ‘YALCIN HOCA’ (typed in capital letters) was mentioned during it. Making a statement such as ‘The Oda TV Operation is a ‘BLOW’ (typed in capital letters) (T.N.: Blow and Coup is expressed by the same word (Darbe) in Turkish Language) dealt on freedom of press’ during a conversation I have made with Mumtaz Idil is on the 110th page of the criminal charge as a corpus delicti. Again, it is incomprehensible why the statement of ‘WE WILL HAVE TO RE-ORGANIZE THE OFFICE if our friends stay any longer (in prison – (Translator’s Note)) I made during a conversation back then is on the 113th page.

Another example to the ridiculousness of the logic of searching for a crime in being mentioned together with the name of Mr Yalcin Kucuk is demonstrated on the 41st page of the criminal charge. The expression on a note which is alleged to have been ‘seized’ on Mr Kucuk’s computer refers as ‘Dogan Yurdakul is an appropriate name. Candan  is smart and from TK, etc’ (T.N.: The name Candan also means ‘Honest’ in Turkish language. According to the form of this sentence, it can also be perceived as ‘Dogan Yurdakul is an appropriate name. He is honest, smart and from TK, etc.’). The conclusion reached in the criminal charge concerning this paragraph, reminds us of the sentence which is used to teach the importance of the place of comma: ‘Woman without her man is nothing’. Candan, who is mentioned in the concerning quote, is another individual. The characteristics listed there are not of me but of that individual. However the conclusion reached in the criminal charge is: ‘Ergenekon Terror Organization gives an instruction to Dogan Yurdakul to behave.’

Your Honor, Members of the Court,

I got graduated from Law School of Ankara University in 1969. We, the seniors of this term, gather once in every 10 years and take a stroll down memory lane. In year 2009, we have organized a meeting at the faculty, with a group of attendants formed by almost 100 friends who are lawyers, prosecutors, judges, academicians, bureaucrats and all are older than 60 years of age, to celebrate the 40th anniversary of our graduation and we have had a dinner altogether, afterwards, in the evening. The news I have made about this event with pictures and the telephone conversation I have had with Soner Yalcin concerning this event has been put on the 112th page of the criminal charge and repeated twice in its attachments as ‘an act intended to diminish the reputation of Ergenekon Case’.

As a matter of fact, most of my articles mentioned in the criminal charge and in its attachments are repetitions. They are repeated from 3 to 6 times. My professors at the law school, Prof. Faruk Erem, who had been giving his lectures under the name ‘Humanist Criminal Law’, and Prof. Ugur Alacakaptan whose signature is appended on my diploma; have not taught us something like ‘you give an impression to the judges that a man is a criminal when you repeat an article of a columnist for 40 times.’.


As I have mentioned above, the accusations against me depends on a couple of so-called documents ‘found’ in the computers of Oda TV. Their names are ridiculous, their contents are inconsistent and nonsense, their fashions are even worse than a primary school student could write. If the claims, of writing upon an instruction, raised against a person, such as me who has an accumulation of knowledge developed in more than a half century, is a shame once, then the claims of writing in line with these ‘documents’ is a shame twice. If I happened to see a foolish title such as ‘teRTEmiz’ which reflects the initials of the PM, then I would toss it out even without reading the article below this title instead of writing an article in line with it. However it is raised that I criticized AKP in line with this article. I am a columnist who has been criticizing all governments elected since 1963, with his pen, everyone is aware that I do not need to get instructions from such disturbed people to criticize AKP. For instance, it is being claimed that I have written my article, dated 17.08.2008, with the title ‘So there can be evidence of bribing’, upon the instructions of ‘make news about malpractice’ raised in the fabricated articles with titles ‘Hocadan Notlar’ and ‘teRTEmiz’. My article, which is being mentioned on the 392nd page of the 15th attachment folder, is about the Saban Disli incident which its conclusion is known by everyone. However, the persons, who smelled ‘organizational instruction’ out of the word ‘bribe’ mentioned in the title, did not pay attention to the time and date of the article. This article of mine was written 22 months prior to the fabrication of ‘Hocadan Notlar’ and 5 months prior to the fabrication of ‘teRTEmiz’.

I have watched, both Maras Massacre and Corum Massacre, on site, as a journalist, 30 years ago. The pictures I have taken in Corum, also the news and articles I have written, can be found in the archives of Aydinlik newspaper. Again 30 years ago, I got detained when I was on my way to Trabzon to investigate the murder of a lecturer as a journalist. Today, these two incidents are included in the criminal charge and its attachments as ‘corpus delicti’! Because, two friends of mine with whom I followed those incidents are suspects without arrest in Ergenekon Case! A suspect is a suspect as the name implies, considering that ‘having a phone call with him is an organizational connection’ is ridiculous. Besides I have had my conversations with those friends of mine when Ergenekon Case did not exist. ‘The Organizational Chart’ on the 241st page of the 28th folder which has been drawn depending on such telephone communications is unreasonable and incomprehensible. Moreover, I have never had a telephone call with 2 of the persons in this chart. I am not entering into the details of the telephone tapping in my defense.

Your Honor, Member of the Court,

I have written four investigative books on the Deep State and the background of Military Coups. I have written two of these books in cooperation with my friend Soner Yalcin. Writing a book in cooperation requires a dense information traffic and only authors who have carried out such study can be aware of it. In foreign languages, cooperative performances in the form of two virtuosos giving a piano concert together such as Pekinel Sisters do and cooperative studies in the form of two authors writing a book together such as me and Cengiz Erdinc do, are called as ‘four hands’ study. Accusing the individuals, who have overcome two studies such tough as that, with ‘writing articles upon instructions’ is not fair at least in the conscience of tens of thousands of people who have read such books.

I have reviewed the deep state – mafia relationships in my book called ‘Abi’. It was a pleasant surprise to see a state official whom, in this book, I have presented his actions in the form of using outlaws in corrupt practices, Mehmet Eymur, in this criminal charge. In the beginning of my defense I have mentioned some of the similarities of this case with the ones during the coups of 12th March and 12th September. Availability of the name of a personnel, who has appeared on the backstage of both military coups, in this investigation and besides in the investigation report which constitutes my reason of arrest is another example to that similarity.

Hoping for help from what Mehmet Eymur has written against me is the proof of the failure of the persons, who carry out this investigation, in finding evidence. However, I still want to thank to the persons who have prepared this criminal charge, in this regard. An article published on the internet site called which is owned by this individual is entered as the Attachment No: 7 of the investigation report and available on the 243rd page of the 28th folder. Mehmet Eymur, in this article, reveals state secrets by disclosing the information of stationing an agent next door to my mother’s apartment, which is filed in my tagging file at MIT (National Intelligence Organization). I thank to the persons who prepared such investigation report for giving me the opportunity to serve a criminal complaint by evidencing and officializing the malpractice of a state official.

Your Honor, Members of the Court,

I feel ashamed here before the contemporary world for being have to defend my thoughts I have expressed by means of my articles and communications which are taken into the criminal charge. I felt like being through an incident, which I had been through in the past, once again when I read and finished the criminal charge and its attachments. After 12th September, I have served as a translator between the Turkish workers and official authorities in Brussels where I have moved in 1981. A neighborhood of Brussels was like invaded by Turkish migrant workers from Afyon, Emirdag. Their restaurants, cafés, markets and bakeries had Turkish names. They even had an application served to the Municipality intended for the name of the main street of the neighborhood to be changed as Emirdag Street. One day an incident takes place in one of these Turkish restaurants. A Turk wants to break an onion in half in ‘our style’. (T.N.: Crushing the onion by laying it on a solid surface (such as table) and striking a blow on top of it). The bud of the onion pops out and hits another Turk, who is having his meal on the next table, in the eye when he strikes a blow on the onion. Coincidentally, those two men have had hostility against each other for a long time. The person who accidentally got hit in the eye says ‘How dare you!’, grabs fork and knife and attacks on the other one with fury developed by the hostility; following the fight and reciprocal injury and police intervention the matter gets brought to court. The person who got hit by the bud files a complaint against the other person who tried to break the onion in half by saying ‘he attempted to kill me’. I am the translator of the defendant, namely ‘the person who attempted homicide by onion bud’, and his attorney during the hearing. The case cannot proceed because of the insistence of the plaintiff, who got hit in the eye by an onion bud, on his accusation. The judge is in a hard situation since he cannot comprehend the incident. Therefore he seeks my assistance and asks: “Monsieur, is this a common situation in your country? I mean, do people pick a fight over crushing an onion?” So I tell the Belgian judge that they have already been in hostility for a long time, the onion is just an alleged excuse.

Now the Oda TV criminal charge reminds me of this judge. I think like, what if he read this criminal charge? Would he ask me like that?: “Monsieur, do terrorist organizations form in that fashion in your country? I mean, do they kill men by means of articles and books?” I do my best to follow the news and comments on our case published in foreign press. The appearance of the charges in this case are quite similar to ‘homicide attempt with onion bud’, when looking from outside.

Your Honor, Members of the Court,

My profession is writing. I know no other business; I have been earning my life by writing since I was 17. I have been accused because of my articles during the periods March 12th and September 12th. I have been tortured, I have been imprisoned. I have been set free and continued writing. I got imprisoned again, got out and wrote again. Those times passed, the ones who imprisoned me are all forgotten but I am still writing. I am in prison once again, I am going to get out and I will write again. As long as I can hold a pen, I will keep on writing until I am dead.

Your Honor, Members of the Court,

The things written in the accused articles are my thoughts, whether they are liked or not. The only sanction of expressing the thoughts is not being liked if it is not within the frame of insulting. Claiming that ‘forming an armed terrorist organization’ crime is committed by expressing the thoughts, is inventing a new crime type which is not available in law.

Contemporary law does not accept it, contemporary human being does not accept it, neither do I.

I hope and wish for the Esteemed Court to give an end to this déjà vu I am being through, to this bad horror movie.

The accusations against me are groundless and inappropriate. So I request to be released.

Yours Sincerely,

S. Dogan Yurdakul

2 No’lu Kapali Cezaevi

B-9 Ust Kogus


Translation by Kerem Ağacikoğlu – Sworn translator

Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

§ 2 Responses to Court Defense of Dogan Yurdakul, January 27, 2012

  • M eksi says:

    This is a poor English translation. I urge the site to have it reviewed b a native English speaker. It’s a shame that important messages are lost in the translation.

  • Hi,

    I’m working for an international Free Press – organization based in Holland. For the international day of press freedom on the 3d of may, one of our themes is citizen journalism in Turkey.
    I was wondering if you have ever had troubles making this weblog. Have you ever been contacted about not being able to post this information on the internet? Have you ever been threatened? Do you know a citizen journalist who has had that problem?

    Thank you!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading Court Defense of Dogan Yurdakul, January 27, 2012 at Turkey press freedom.


%d bloggers like this: