Search
Close this search box.
Search
Close this search box.

Top court rules prisoner’s solitary confinement over victory sign violated free expression

The Constitutional Court has ruled that a disciplinary punishment given to a prisoner in Izmir was unjustified and violated their freedom of expression.

The court ordered the state to pay Nihat Ekmez 30,000 Turkish liras in compensation.

Ekmez, an inmate at Izmir No. 2 Type-T Closed Penal Institution, had made the victory sign while parting from his family during a monthly open visit. The visitors responded with ululations and also made the same gesture, according to witnesses. The prison administration interpreted the gesture as a symbol associated with ‘terrorist organizations’ and launched a disciplinary investigation against Ekmez, eventually sentencing him to 11 days in solitary confinement.

The disciplinary board accused Ekmez and his visitors of using the gesture to show support for the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and spread the group’s propaganda.

The appeals

Ekmez challenged the decision by appealing to the Karsiyaka Court Penal Execution and the Karsiyaka 1st Heavy Penal Court, but both app
eals were rejected.

Ekmez then filed an individual application through his lawyer to the Constitutional Court, claiming that his constitutional rights had been violated.

In its ruling, the Constitutional Court emphasized that Ekmez, despite being incarcerated, still retains his right to freedom of expression. The court stated that this right could only be restricted in prison settings under circumstances necessary for maintaining security and discipline.

The court found the punishment imposed on Ekmez disproportionate, noting that there was no concrete evidence to suggest that his gesture threatened prison security. It criticized the Disciplinary Board for not providing a clear explanation of how Ekmez’s gesture fell under the category of ‘using symbols associated with criminal organizations.’ The court also pointed out that the lower courts failed to thoroughly investigate this aspect of the case.

As a result, the Constitutional Court awarded Ekmez compensation for non-pecuniary damages and referred the
case back to the Karsiyaka 1st Court of Penal Enforcement for a retrial.

Source: English Bianet