An appeals court has acquitted an LGBTI+ and human rights activist who was previously sentenced to prison for “insulting the president” in two social media posts.
The Adana Regional Court of Justice 2nd Penal Chamber overturned the conviction of Aytok Zozan Viyan, concluding that the legal elements of the alleged crime were not formed. The court also ordered the treasury to pay 30,000 liras in legal fees to Viyan.
The Mersin 26th Penal Court of First Instance had previously sentenced Viyan to one year and two months in prison. The local court refused to apply discretionary sentence reductions or a deferral of the announcement of the verdict, citing Viyan’s “personality traits”:
“… no grounds for discretionary mitigation were found, given that the defendant showed no signs of remorse, the identified negative personality traits, their behavior before and after the crime, and the expected benefit in light of the deterrent purpose of the sentence…”
The local court stated in its reasoned decision that no remorse was observed from the defendant. It added that discretionary reductions were not warranted due to negative personality traits and behavior before and after the crime.
The posts
The Mersin Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office had filed the indictment based on two posts shared on X, formerly Twitter, in late 2024. The prosecution claimed the posts constituted the crime of insulting the president and requested a prison sentence.
The first post, dated Oct 30, 2024, stated, “The president of the country I live in considers me an enemy, I am proud, phobic!”
The second post, shared on Nov 20, 2024, with a hashtag opposing the government policy of appointing trustees to opposition municipalities, said, “We will not bow down to you, dictator. Peoples and nations have the right to self-determination.”
In the defense before the penal court of first instance, Viyan stated that the posts were shared to bring a critical perspective to developments in Turkey and the world.
“I think my posts should be evaluated within the scope of freedom of expression,” Viyan said, demanding an acquittal.
Viyan’s lawyer argued that the posts were political criticisms rather than insults. The lawyer noted that the word “phobic” was a critical expression against discrimination in the context of LGBTI+ rights, while the term “dictator” was a criticism aimed at trustee appointments and the right to vote and stand for election.
On appeal, the defense argued that the posts were taken out of context and that Viyan was contributing to a public debate regarding discrimination against LGBTI+s and trustee policies.
Personal information leaked in targeted campaign
Viyan told bianet that process began in Jan 2024 after being targeted by anonymous social media accounts that leaked photos, identification, communication details, location, and family information.
Viyan said a complaint was filed through lawyers in Mersin, which led to the closure of some accounts, but others continued the leaks. Viyan was later called by the police, and officers used threatening language.
Viyan went to the police station with a lawyer to give a statement, where police only asked about the post containing the word “phobic.” However, Viyan discovered five to six months later that the lawsuit also included the post containing the word “dictator.”
Viyan criticized the local court’s refusal to apply a deferral of the announcement of the verdict based on personality traits.
“The decision stated that the deferral was not applied due to statements about my personality traits. Systematically, this is also phobia,” Viyan said. “Furthermore, it is very clear that the reason this lawsuit was opened was my LGBTI+ identity.” (HA/VK)
Source: BIANET
