10/04/2025 | Writer: Kaos GL
The second hearing of the Eskişehir Pride March trial was held. Defense attorneys protested the submission of the case file to the prosecutor on the same day, before the expert report was prepared. The next hearing is scheduled for April 30.
Photo: Nalin Öztekin/MLSA
The second hearing was held in the trial of 10 individuals who were detained in Eskişehir in 2024 while attempting to participate in a press statement planned as part of Pride Week. During the hearing, defense attorneys protested the decision to submit the case file to the prosecutor on the same day without the completion of the expert report.
According to a report by Nalin Öztekin for MLSA, some of the defendants and their lawyers attended the hearing at the Eskişehir 16th Criminal Court of First Instance, alongside observers from the Istanbul and Ankara Bar Associations.
At the beginning of the hearing, Attorney Çiğdem Kolot from the Ankara Bar Association’s LGBTI+ Rights Center noted that the same police officers who were on duty during the incident were also present in the courtroom. Kolot argued that their presence created psychological pressure and requested their removal from the courtroom on the grounds of the right to a fair trial.
The defense attorneys argued that the expert report submitted to the file was procedurally and substantively flawed. One of the defendants, Mati, criticized the report for completely omitting police violence:
“In the Republic of Turkey, corruption is a crime, and the person who prepared this report for money has committed corruption. Even a five-year-old could have interpreted the footage better.”
Attorney Hasan Çayır added:
“Without any secure area being established, my clients were surrounded within 10 seconds. The police intervention was unlawful. On top of that, we are now facing a report that does not reflect the truth.”
Attorney Esra Başbakkal also argued that the report had no legal merit and demanded it be removed from the case file and the footage reviewed by forensic medicine experts.
Prosecutor reiterated demand for conviction
Despite the objections raised by the defense, the prosecutor repeated the previously submitted opinion, requesting that the defendants be convicted for "violating Law No. 2911 on Meetings and Demonstrations" and for "resisting law enforcement officers."
In response, Attorney Fatma Girgin pointed out that although the court had sent the case for expert analysis on February 18, it also forwarded the file to the prosecutor on the same day. Girgin emphasized that it was procedurally improper for the prosecutor to submit an opinion before all evidence had been collected.
“We reject both the opinion and the expert report”
Defendant Mati stated that they were exercising a constitutional right and denied violating Law No. 2911. Another defendant, Solak, asserted that no crime had been committed and said:
“There is no offense here. We reject both the prosecutor’s opinion and the expert report.”
Simay Ada Kart, who participated in the hearing via video conference from Silivri Prison, where they are held in pretrial detention in a separate case, responded to the prosecutor’s opinion by stating:
“Hundreds of LGBTI+ individuals have faced injustice, yet these courts are prosecuting us instead of those targeting our community. Participating in a peaceful and democratic action is not a crime—intervening in it is.”
Upon the defense’s request for time to prepare their final statements, the hearing was adjourned to April 30.
Click-In the Eskişehir Pride March case, the expert witness ‘did not see’ the torture
Click-The prosecutor who fell asleep during the hearing demanded sentences for the defendants
Click-Eskişehir Pride March trial started: Defendants tell of torture
Tags: human rights
