Sabah is a leading independent Turkish daily with a circulation of 479,000 in 2007.

EW: Why is the case being investigated in German courts and not in Turkey?

YB:  It was first discovered outside of Turkey and the German courts did a great job of investigating it.  The German Court opened the case, which is still ongoing.  The verdict was recently handed down, basically stating that they 'have found no evidence that the 16 million euros went to a political party but they believe that it was used for political purposes'.  They named four people from Kanal 7 (see editor's note), a Turkish TV station.  The German Courts plan to announce a detailed verdict in six weeks.  The German Court said that it now expects Turkey to take over the investigation.  Even though it initiated outside of Turkey it has now flowed into Turkey; the Turkish media needs to follow up.  

(Kanal 7 belonged to YIMPAS, a holding that was known for its connections to Turkey's ruling Justice and Development Party, AKP)

EW:  Do you think that the Turkish courts / judiciary will actually investigate?

YB:  Yes, I do.  There is a growing pressure on the government, specifically the judiciary, to take this case and look into it.

EW:  Where is this pressure coming from, the public? International organizations? Or the media?

YB:  Mainly from domestic media pressure and public opinion pressure.  There is also a lot of pressure on Kanal 7 to be transparent.

EW:  Do you feel that Dogan has gone too far in their coverage?

As far as the coverage by Dogan, it was correct and necessary.  It has big editorial value, and this is front-page stuff.  So I believe they made the right decision, as any editor would have.  The Prime Minister and Dogan revealed other parts of the controversy, the dark side of the Turkish media; how it is shaped by powerful media moguls.  It all goes back to the 1990s when they were trying to increase power interests and contradicting each other, ultimately causing more conflict between them.  The media serves political purposes as well - it's a vicious cycle.  It's a dirty pattern and it has only started to change since the AKP party came to power.

The latest row symbolizes how nasty and arrogant political and media figures can be in a polluted atmosphere.  I do feel that Dogan is on the right side and that they are doing the right thing, they covered the story correctly.  I also feel both sides handled the situation correctly.

EW:  How will the Turkish press escape this crisis?  Do you feel the government will impose laws restricting the press and freedom of press?

YB:  I don't expect anything like that.  The government has reasserted its commitment to European Union reforms, which means easing rules and regulations on the media.  I don't expect any legislation.  However, there are certain laws that exists, such as the terrible Internet law, which bans us from visiting certain sites, such as YouTube.  It is a problem that goes unnoticed that needs to be resolved.  There are no problems with print censorship; we are allowed to print what we like without governmental censorship.

EW:   You stated in on of your articles that, "the Turkish press stands at a cross-roads where it must either find the true path of independence or fall victim to a lethal partisanship" - How can the Turkish press "stand-up"? And how can they develop more investigative journalism to get to the heart of issues?

YB: "That is the $50,000 question"

There needs to be a contract with the owner stating that the editors are totally independent.  There needs to be NO financial management interference, no control from the owners and no political interference.  Newsrooms should always have the last word.  Now that there are more reforms on the political side - the continued path towards the EU - there needs to be more economic reforms and foreign investment in order to establish a strong media with higher standards and more competition.

EW: How difficult is it for Sabah to remain neutral, and for you personally?

YB:  As for me - I work independently, I am the vice president of ONO (Organization of News Ombudsmen).  As for Sabah, I have been openly critical of them and some of their columnists.  Sabah's position has definitely been weakened by financial difficulties.

I just don't think that the staff at Sabah is being bold and rigorous enough.

There is a lot of pressure from Sabah readers - they want to get the news.  Sabah is not doing well, they could have done better in reporting this, and they still can do better (as there will be a lot of upcoming corruption cases)

EW:  What are your readers saying about Sabah's position?  How do they respond?

YB:  Sabah has been through a lot of difficulties (it collapsed in 2000 and a problematic take-over).  The latest owners came to power the beginning of this year, and since then, perceptions of the paper have changed, mainly because the CEO of the company is the son-in-law of the Prime Minister and the chief of the media board is his brother.  Circulation has gone down by more than 50,000 in the last 3 months.  

The image (of Sabah) has to be changed and this has to be done between the readers, the journalists, and the owners.   I hope that the current ownership will realize how important it is to have a free and independent press.

Sources:  Newsweek, Dogan Holding, Turkey Daily News