German Former Co-Chair of the Green Party Example: Cem Ozdemir In 2015 he visited Armenia and laid a wreath on the Genocide Memorial. Mayor of Ankara Contact Melih directly, Ozdemir’e Twitter, “German Green Party MV I ask my curiosity. Please answer [C.Ö.]… Is your origin Armenian? Mesaj
Journalist reacting to the message of GOkcek Hayko Baghdad answer [C.Ö.]? ”,” M.g. Armenian Armenian shouting stone, “I said,” I officially said Armenian. Open a lawsuit? @ 06m.g. “,” They officially gave the capital to Armenia.
The local court accepts GOkcek’s messages as the motive
In the last message of Baghdad, “If we have explained enough of the situation is okay. [M.G.] disgusting man. And as I said for a thousand years: Long live the brotherhood of the peoples ”.
According to the newspaper Murat Inceoglu, Hayko Baghdad uses the ‘disgusting’ expression of the court as a result of the move Baghdad, GOkcek’e insulted on the grounds, was fined.
The local court accepted GOkcek’s messages as the reason for provocation and sent a discount to Baghdad to pay 1160 TL. Due to the decision taken at the end of 2015, Baghdad exercised its right of individual application to the Constitutional Court (AYM) in January 2016.
Baghdad argued that the expression ‘disgusting ğı he used was not insulting and argued that his punishment was a violation of his right to expression. Baghdad also claimed that Gokcek, who had sued thousands of people, abused his freedom of rights.
‘There is a possibility that GOkcek may be subject to harsh criticism because of his provocative style’
Examining the file, the Constitutional Court said that the limits of criticism for a politician are wider than an ordinary person. The court stated that there is a possibility that GOkcek may be subject to harsh criticism for using a provocative style in expressing his views on the agenda.
Regarding the expression ‘disgusting da in the decision, “Although the word ‘abominable’ used by the applicant is not said to be offensive or disturbing, it should be taken into account that the statement is used in a racial-based and high-blooded political debate initiated by the complainant. In fact, the court of first instance accepts the complainant’s Twitter shares as a reason for unjust provocation to reduce the applicant’s punishment. However, the applicant’s allegations that the complainant used systematic and degrading statements against the Armenians had not been adequately assessed. “ The statement said.
9 thousand 150 TL moral compensation
The Constitutional Court found Baghdad’s claim to be justified on the grounds that Baghdad said the words angrily and that punishment could lead to silence of different voices and that journalistic activity would be suppressed. The Constitutional Court decided to abolish the conviction of Baghdad and to pay 9 thousand 150 TL for non-pecuniary damages.