Verdict hearing in Gezi Park case against Ayşe Barım expected today

In the case against talent manager Ayşe Barım, who was arrested over claims that she directed artists during the Gezi Resistance protests and was released on the 248th day of her detention, the prosecution submitted its opinion on the merits to the court.

While the indictment requested that Ayşe Barım be punished for the crime of “aiding an attempt to overthrow the Government of the Republic of Turkey,” the trial prosecutor sought an aggravated life sentence for the crime of “attempting to overthrow the government.”

In the prosecution’s opinion, it was alleged that during the Gezi Park protests that took place 12 years ago, Ayşe Barım carried out planning, organization, and direction activities through artists, managed the process both via social media and on the ground, and therefore participated in the crime of “attempting to overthrow the government.”

The opinion argued that the Gezi Park protests were carried out within an organized, systematic, and planned framework, and claimed that Ayşe Barım “demonstrated initiative in planning, organizing, and directing activities on social media and in the field on behalf of artists and actors who enjoyed public sympathy and had a high potential to mobilize large crowds.”

It was stated that there were no records showing that Ayşe Barım had any communication with the main actors of the Gezi Park protests prior to the demonstrations; however, it was alleged that she established frequent and systematic contact during the preparation and initial phases, and that these contacts could not be considered coincidental.

The opinion further alleged that Ayşe Barım acted together with Osman Kavala, Mehmet Ali Alabora, and Çiğdem Mater Utku, and claimed that she carried out “active planning, organization, and direction activities on behalf of the community of artists” during the Gezi Park protests. Taking into account the ruling of the 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation numbered 2023/12611 (Merits) and 2023/6359 (Decision), it was argued that the actions in question constituted the crime of “attempting to overthrow the government.”