An Istanbul court has acquitted the president and executive board members of the Istanbul Bar Association (IBA) of terrorism-related charges, marking a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate over the Turkish government’s use of criminal law against legal professionals. The ruling, delivered on Friday, comes after the IBA issued a public statement in December 2024 condemning the killing of two journalists in northern Syria, as well as the detention of journalists and lawyers during a peaceful protest in Istanbul.
Prosecutors had accused the IBA of “spreading terrorist propaganda” and “disseminating misleading information,” invoking provisions from Turkey’s anti-terrorism and penal code. The case was closely monitored, reflecting broader concerns over government actions against legal advocates and associations.
Concerns Over Legal Independence
Following hearings held by the Istanbul Heavy Penal Court No. 26, all 11 elected leaders of the IBA were acquitted of both charges. Prior to the court’s decision, various human rights organizations expressed alarm that the prosecution represented an abuse of counter-terrorism legislation, undermining the independence of the legal profession. They argued that the Bar Association was acting within its statutory rights to address human rights and rule of law issues.
International observers, including UN experts, have consistently raised concerns regarding the misuse of counter-terrorism and misinformation laws to target legal professionals for their advocacy work. They warn that such practices could jeopardize the right to a fair trial and erode critical safeguards essential for judicial independence.
Implications and Calls for Reform
UN human rights experts have also expressed serious concerns about the ongoing application of Turkey’s counter-terrorism framework against lawyers and human rights defenders. They have pointed to instances of prosecutions linked to professional activities and the imposition of lengthy prison sentences on legal advocates.
While the acquittal is seen as a positive development, rights groups insist that systemic reform is necessary to prevent similar prosecutions in the future. They have urged Turkish authorities to cease parallel civil proceedings targeting the Bar Association’s leadership and to ensure the autonomy and self-governance of bar associations.
Additionally, there are calls for Turkish law to align more closely with international standards governing the legal profession. The outcome of this case may have lasting implications not only for the IBA but also for the broader landscape of legal advocacy in Turkey.
