Istanbul / Silivri, September 2025 – The trial of Istanbul Bar Association President Professor İbrahim Kaboğlu and ten executive board members has been adjourned until 5 January 2026, after two days of hearings were held inside the Marmara Prison Complex courtroom in Silivri rather than the Istanbul Çağlayan Courthouse.

The relocation of the trial has been fiercely criticised as unconstitutional and a direct violation of the right to a fair and public hearing. Kaboğlu objected that conducting proceedings in a prison setting violates Article 36 of the Constitution (right to a fair trial), Article 141 (public nature of hearings), and the principle of the rule of law under Article 2. He warned that allowing trials to be arbitrarily moved to prison courtrooms on the basis of vague “factual reasons” undermines the very essence of the right to defence.

The court rejected the objections, ruling instead that the hearings will continue in Silivri in five consecutive sessions starting 5 January 2026, to allow the prosecution to prepare its final opinion.

Defendants Resist: “Our Will Is Under Pressure”

Bar Association board member Metin İriz opened his remarks by refusing to deliver a defence: “The court has transferred our trial to a prison complex. This is an attempt to place our will under pressure. I will not make a defence under these conditions.”

President İbrahim Kaboğlu reiterated that from the outset, the investigation had been marred by unlawful practices and amounted to a violation of the right to a fair trial: “Nowhere in the world has a professional legal institution been prosecuted through such breaches of law. Different rules seem to apply in Çağlayan and Silivri. For a fair trial, hearings must be held in Çağlayan.”

Bar Leaders Condemn the Process

Union of Turkish Bar Associations President Erinç Sağkan described the court’s refusal to move proceedings back to Çağlayan as a restriction of the right to defence. He criticised the failure to hear defence counsel before rulings and the dismissal of requests for constitutional review: “From the very beginning, irregularities have plagued this case. The Justice Ministry gave authorisation to investigate the Bar leadership on the very day the investigation began, violating its own regulations. This case should have been simple, but its handling leaves us with grave doubts.”

Sağkan underlined that defending rights is at the heart of the legal profession: “Sometimes the field you defend is risky, sometimes it angers the state. But defending rights – even when it is inconvenient – is the duty of lawyers.”

Other bar leaders expressed similar concerns:

• Ankara Bar President Mustafa Köroğlu: “What is on trial today is the independence we achieved in 1969. Bar associations are not there to please governments but to defend the law.”
• Bursa Bar President Metin Öztosun: “Constitutional rights are being denied. With politically instrumentalised rulings like this, Türkiye is being pushed toward authoritarianism.”
• Muş Bar President Kadir Karaçelik: “Silivri has become a judicial isolation zone – transferring high-profile cases here is a way of shielding them from public scrutiny.”
• Manisa Bar President Sevgi Başak Yeşil: “As the only woman bar president here, seeing colleagues prosecuted for bar activities wounds my conscience. This trial should end in acquittal.”
• Siirt Bar President Muhammed Alptekin: “Every time I come to Silivri, I learn again that trials here should be livestreamed – there are no crimes or criminals in this courtroom, only history being recorded.”

Criminal and civil proceedings against the leadership of the Istanbul Bar Association have sparked outrage from the international legal community, with 12 prominent human rights and legal organisations filing a joint amicus curiae brief urging Turkish courts to drop the charges.

The case stems from a statement issued by the Istanbul Bar Association on 21 December 2024, following the deaths of Kurdish journalists Nazım Daştan and Cihan Bilgin, reportedly killed in a Turkish drone strike in northern Syria. In its declaration, the Bar demanded an effective investigation into the killings, reminded authorities of protections afforded to journalists in conflict zones, and called for the release of protestors and lawyers detained during related demonstrations in Istanbul.

Instead of addressing these concerns, Turkish prosecutors launched criminal proceedings against the Bar’s president, Professor İbrahim Kaboğlu, and ten members of the executive board, accusing them of “propaganda for a terrorist organisation” and “disseminating misleading information.” Simultaneously, a civil lawsuit was filed seeking the dismissal of the Bar’s leadership for allegedly acting beyond its legal duties. On 21 March 2025, the Istanbul 2nd Civil Court of First Instance terminated the board’s mandate, a ruling currently under appeal.

Amicus Brief: Baseless Charges, Political Purpose

In a joint intervention submitted to the Istanbul 26th Heavy Penal Court on 5 September 2025, organisations including the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI), Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE), and others argued that the proceedings are incompatible with Türkiye’s international obligations.

The amicus brief describes the charges as vague, overbroad, and legally baseless, relying on expansive anti-terrorism and disinformation laws that fail to meet international standards of legality, necessity, and proportionality. It stresses that no part of the Bar’s statement could reasonably be interpreted as incitement to violence or support for terrorism; instead, it reflects the Bar’s statutory duty to defend human rights and uphold the rule of lawTürkiye_ Drop Case Against Bar….

Baroness Helena Kennedy, IBAHRI Director, called the criminalisation of the Bar’s statement “legally indefensible and politically alarming.” Thierry Wickers, President of CCBE, warned that the case represents not only an attack on the Istanbul Bar but on the very foundation of an independent legal profession: “one of the main pillars of a democratic society and a fundamental guarantee for ensuring the rule of law and preventing abuse of state power.”

Part of a Wider Crackdown

International observers have characterised the case as part of a broader pattern of intimidation against Türkiye’s legal profession. Dinushika Dissanayake of Amnesty International highlighted the systemic misuse of anti-terror laws: “What is happening in this case sets a dangerous precedent: criminal law is being weaponised against lawyers and human rights defenders for simply carrying out their work.”

Ali Yildiz, Director of the Arrested Lawyers Initiative, echoed these concerns: “Prosecution against the board of directors of the Istanbul Bar is not an isolated case. It is part of a wider crackdown against the legal profession which has been ongoing since 2016. As in this case, corrupt members of the judiciary are instrumental in cracking down on the legal profession. In exchange, they enjoy impunity and promotion – like Akın Gürlek, who was promoted as Chief Prosecutor of Türkiye’s largest city after presiding over notorious cases against CHD lawyers, journalists, and opposition figures.”

Legal watchdogs have also noted the political context, pointing to Gürlek’s controversial record and role in prosecuting politically sensitive cases. The Arrested Lawyers Initiative described the March ruling as emblematic of political interference in the judiciary, noting that defense motions were rejected and court proceedings bore the hallmarks of a show trial.

International Call for Acquittal

The 12 organisations have urged the court to uphold Türkiye’s binding obligations under international human rights law, including the rights to freedom of expression, freedom of association, and the independence of lawyers. They argue that the charges serve an ulterior political purpose and risk setting a chilling precedent for the legal profession.

As the second hearing opened in Istanbul on 9 September 2025, international pressure mounted for the acquittal of the Bar’s leadership. Observers warn that failure to do so would not only silence one of Türkiye’s most prominent legal institutions but also strike at the heart of the right to defense for all citizens.

Categories: Situation in Turkey, Turkey Human Rights Blog

Tags: ERINC SAGKAN, IBRAHIM KABOGLU, Istanbul Barosu