A recent report issued by the Italian Federation for Human Rights (FIDU) raised concerns about the treatment of minors in Turkey in an ongoing high-profile trial and criticized the country’s judicial practices, particularly the application of anti-terrorism laws.
The trial mentioned, commonly referred to as the “Girls’ Trial,” involves 41 defendants, including 15 minors charged with alleged membership in a terrorist organization, part of a years-long crackdown on the Gülen movement.
The Turkish government, led by President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, has accused the faith-based Gülen movement, inspired by late Turkish cleric Fethullah Gülen, of orchestrating a failed coup in 2016, although the movement deny any involvement. Since then, Erdoğan’s government has carried out a sweeping crackdown, investigating more than 700,000 people on terrorism-related allegations, many for tenuous links to the Gülen movement.
Held at the İstanbul 24th High Criminal Court, the trial has attracted widespread attention and criticism for its focus on everyday activities, such as attending religious gatherings, going to the movies and using food delivery services, which prosecutors have framed as signs of terrorist activity.
The report describes in detail significant violations of the law in the trial and accuses the Turkish judicial system of systematic bias, lack of impartiality and procedural shortcomings.
Antonio Stango, the president of FIDU, was present as an observer at the trial in September. According to Stango, the trial is an example of problems in the Turkish judiciary, where he has observed a worrying trend toward politically motivated prosecution and judicial conformity to the prosecution’s position.
The defendants in this case are a mix of high school and university students whom prosecutors accuse of terrorism, although many of their activities appear to be everyday social interactions or religious practices.
The defendants, who were charged under Article 314-2 of the Turkish Penal Code, face prison sentences of five to 15 years.
The FIDU report notes that the charges against them lack clear evidence of a link between their actions and terrorism and constitute an abuse of anti-terrorism laws.
The report highlights that the indictment relies on circumstantial evidence and routine activities — such as participating in Quranic studies, communicating via popular mobile phone apps and meeting for dinner — that are being interpreted as acts of a clandestine organization.
One of the main criticisms in the report is the alleged bias of the Turkish judiciary and the lack of a presumption of innocence for the accused.
FIDU observers found that the presiding judge and the prosecutors often acted in tandem, with the judge adopting the language of the prosecutors and their assumptions about guilt in his questions. The report further notes the judge’s questions to defendants about why they met or prayed together, implying that such actions are evidence of misconduct.
The FIDU report also raises concerns about the treatment of underage defendants, many of whom were arrested during police raids in the early hours of the morning and detained without immediate access to legal counsel or their parents. Several minor defendants testified that they were forced to sign incriminating statements, with some claiming that they were pressured to incriminate friends or family members.
One 16-year-old defendant claimed she was interrogated for hours without her lawyer, in violation of Turkish law and international standards. She also said the prosecutor and her court-appointed lawyer pressured her to comply with the investigation or risk being sent to an orphanage. In another case, a minor reported that her lawyer advised her to cooperate fully with the prosecutor regardless of the questions asked, undermining her defense.
According to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which Turkey is a signatory, minors are entitled to special protection, especially in court proceedings. The report claims that the minors involved in the “Girls’ Trial” were denied this protection, raising concerns among international human rights defenders.
The report criticizes Turkey’s reliance on anti-terrorism laws to prosecute individuals for non-violent activities. It remarks on how digital communications, primarily messaging apps, like WhatsApp and Telegram, are heavily scrutinized in the indictment.
Turkish authorities cited frequent communication between defendants as evidence of organized criminal activity, a practice FIDU argues violates the right to privacy and freedom of expression under international law.
The FIDU report draws attention to the absence of any substantive evidence or incriminating content in these communications. In several instances, the indictment describes the use of a messaging app as inherently suspicious, a characterization FIDU contends is problematic.
The case reflects larger issues facing Turkey’s judicial system. Following the failed coup attempt in 2016, the government initiated sweeping purges, removing thousands of judges and prosecutors, and installed new personnel perceived to be more loyal to the government. Observers argue that this purge has significantly weakened judicial independence and led to a judiciary that frequently aligns itself with government policies.
FIDU’s report echoes findings from other human rights organizations, including the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the United Nations, which have criticized Turkey’s judicial conduct and use of anti-terrorism legislation. The ECtHR has repeatedly ruled that Turkey’s actions contravene the European Convention on Human Rights, particularly with regard to freedom of expression, association, and the right to a fair trial. The Turkish government, however, has largely ignored these rulings, and the Council of Europe has yet to enforce compliance effectively.
In light of its findings, FIDU urged the Council of Europe and the European Union to apply diplomatic pressure on Turkey to address judicial misconduct and adhere to international human rights standards.
The report calls for structural reforms in Turkey’s judiciary to protect judicial independence and restore fairness in trials involving politically sensitive charges.
FIDU also recommends that the Council of Europe commissioner for human rights and relevant UN special rapporteurs closely monitor the case, emphasizing that oversight is essential for upholding the rights of minors and ensuring fair trial standards. The report underscores that international intervention is critical to curtailing the misuse of anti-terrorism laws in Turkey and to protecting fundamental freedoms.