DİYARBAKIR - At the hearing of TJA Term Spokesperson Ayşe Gökkan, the prosecutor demanded a prison sentence of up to 35 years, while the court decided to continue her detention.

 

The 21st hearing of the lawsuit filed against Free Women’s Movement (TJA) Term Spokesperson Ayşe Gökkan on allegations of "being an executive of a terrorist organization" and "membership in a terrorist organization" was held at the 9th High Criminal Court of Diyarbakır. Ayşe could not attend the hearing due to a problem that occurred while she was expected to attend the hearing with the Sound and Video Information System (SEGBİS). Her lawyers Berfin Gökkan, Özüm Vurgun and Gözde Engin were present at the hearing.

 

While TJA activists, Rosa Women's Association, independent feminists, and Ayşe's family wanted to attend the hearing, the court board only took two members of her family into the hall, saying they would not take viewer.

 

The chief judge noted that Ayşe's detention was evaluated, and it was decided to continue her detention.

 

Prosecutor wanted sentence

 

The prosecutor of the trial explained his opinion on the merits, which combined with the Democratic Society Congress (DTK) activities, the actions and events she attended, the statements of confidential witnesses, her membership in the Rosa Women's Association and the alleged activity within the TJA, "being a member of the terrorist organization" twice demanded a prison sentence of up to 30 years and the continuation of detention. The prosecutor also demanded a prison sentence of up to five years for Ayşe for allegedly committing more than one crime of "propagandizing for a terrorist organization."

 

‘She testified 600 times’

 

Ayşe's lawyers stated that they objected to the decision to continue her detention and pointed out that she had previously been acquitted in the consolidated file, but that the prosecutor requested a penalty from the same file. Reminding that she gave 600 statements out of 168 files opened against their client, the lawyers demanded her release, emphasizing that their client had no suspicion of escaping.

 

After a long recess, the court decided to continue the detention, arguing that there is strong suspicion of crime and that judicial control measures could not be applied in accordance with CMK/100 article. The next hearing has been postponed to September 13.