There were at least 29 Turkish journalists in prison on journalism-related charges at the end of 1997—more than in any other country. Turkey has topped the list of countries which imprison journalists every year since 1994.
    There were also at least 37 Turkish journalists released from jail in the course of 1997—the largest number of releases CPJ has ever recorded in one year in one country.  International pressure and the growing assertiveness of Turkish journalists combined with the installation at mid-year of a more reform-minded government put a brake on new prosecutions of reporters and editors. There was one new case of a journalist convicted and imprisoned in 1997, as compared to 55 in 1994, 30 in 1995, and 27 in 1996. Yet the laws under which these journalists were prosecuted remain on the books, despite promises of sweeping reform.
    Both because of their sheer numbers and the complexity of their cases, the journalists imprisoned in Turkey have been a special focus of CPJ’s research efforts over the past year. Establishing a causal link between the prosecution and the professional activities of an imprisoned journalist often requires a subjective assessment of the political context and evidentiary basis of the conviction.
    CPJ’s analyses of these cases are based primarily on information gathered first-hand from court documents and interviews with imprisoned journalists’ colleagues and attorneys. CPJ’s research also incorporates information from the Turkish government itself. In January 1997, we submitted our research on imprisoned journalists in Turkey to the Turkish authorities for comment. In July 1997, the Justice Ministry responded with detailed remarks on 21 of the 78 cases we had documented. In September 1997, CPJ submitted further documentation about these cases to members of the Turkish cabinet for their review. CPJ also shared and compared documentation with the Paris-based Reporters sans Frontières, the Journalists Association of Turkey, and the Press Council of Turkey, which provided invaluable assistance in locating and analyzing court records. The Press Council also played a critical role in 1997 in interceding with CPJ on behalf of Turkey’s imprisoned journalists, including 1996 International Press Freedom Award recipient Ocak Isik Yurtcu, who was freed in August.
    As a result of this collaborative research effort CPJ removed three cases from its listing of imprisoned Turkish journalists, based on court documents showing that the three journalists had been convicted on charges unrelated to their profession. Newly obtained information also raised questions about the linkage between the profession and the conviction in another four cases of imprisoned journalists previously reported by CPJ; these cases are now listed as "unconfirmed," pending further inquiry.  Also on the basis of new information, CPJ confirmed four previously unreported cases of journalists who were in prison as of December 31, 1996; two were later released, and two remained in prison as of December 31, 1997.
CPJ has concluded that on December 31, 1997:
· At least 29 journalists were in prison in Turkey because of their work, compared to 74* confirmed cases one year earlier; they included one journalist who was sentenced in 1997, plus two journalists whose earlier imprisonments were not confirmed by CPJ until 1997.
· All but two of the imprisoned journalists were prosecuted under Articles 168 or 169 of the Penal Code for allegedly aiding or joining a banned "terrorist" or "separatist" organization.
· Thirty-seven journalists who had been imprisoned as of December 1996 were released in the course of 1997; all but two were on the list of 78 published by CPJ a year ago in Attacks on the Press in 1996. The 36 released journalists include six newspaper editors released as a result of a limited amnesty for jailed editors passed by parliament in August 1997 following CPJ’s July mission to Turkey. One imprisoned journalist was freed prior to an appeal hearing. Another 12 who had been held in pre-trial detention were released on bail, pending the outcome of their trials; five others were acquitted. Four journalists were released after serving out their terms; another eight were released for reasons CPJ has been unable to document.
· We categorize 13 journalists as "unconfirmed" cases of imprisonment. In five cases we have been unable to confirm reports of their release; in another four, as noted above, newly obtained information raises doubt about whether the journalists’ work was the main reason for their prosecution.
    This list is not exhaustive. We believe that there may be other journalists who are now in prison for exercising their internationally guaranteed right to freedom of expression. And we are aware of cases which we continue to investigate because we have not confirmed the initial report or are attempting to gather information about their prosecutions and alleged offenses that has hitherto been unavailable.

Background
Since 1994, Turkey has consistently imprisoned more working journalists than any other nation. Most of the journalists jailed in Turkey have been prosecuted for news coverage or opinion articles related to the conflict with Kurdish insurgents in Southeastern Turkey or for their affiliation with far-left publications that are viewed as sympathetic to armed guerrilla groups inside Turkey.
    In January, CPJ submitted detailed information on 78 imprisoned journalists to Turkish authorities for their review and comment. The Turkish Embassy in Washington, which had challenged the accuracy of CPJ’s information publicly and in subsequent private meetings with CPJ representatives, agreed to forward the list to the Justice Ministry. We received no response until July, shortly before CPJ sent its delegation to Turkey, when the embassy sent CPJ a memo conveying comments from the Turkish Justice Ministry on 21 of CPJ’s 78 cases. It is significant that in only four of the 78 cases of jailed journalists we documented did Turkish authorities challenge any of the factual information. In three of four, we were not able to verify the Justice Ministry’s statements about the charges against the defendants. In the fourth case, we verified the Justice Ministry’s statement about the charge against the defendant and, based on court records, we determined that the case was not related to the defendant’s work as a journalist.
    In 14 cases about which CPJ received official comment, Turkish authorities either reiterated information that CPJ had previously reported—for example, stating that a journalist was convicted for membership in a specific outlawed organization—or provided details about the criminal prosecutions that did not contradict CPJ’s original reports.

CPJ Methodology and Classifications
The preponderance of the information below comes from CPJ investigations in Turkey between July and December 1997. The information was gathered in Istanbul and Ankara, through dozens of interviews with reporters and editors, as well as with lawyers who had represented newspapers, magazines, and individual journalists indicted under the provisions of Turkey’s Penal Code and Anti-Terror Law for a variety of criminal offenses.
    We have relied heavily on documents, such as indictments, transcripts of court proceedings, and court decisions, in ascertaining the facts about the state’s prosecution of imprisoned journalists, evaluating Turkish authorities’ assertions about the nature of the offenses, and determining whether the journalists in prison are in fact there for their journalistic work. Since many of the journalists whose imprisonment we have documented have been formally charged with violent offenses, court documents containing detailed accounts of the prosecution’s rationale and evidentiary process and the defense’s response are essential to our analysis of the cogency of the state’s accusations. These documents rarely provide conclusive evidence about whether a journalist was imprisoned because of his or her journalistic work. Rather, they typically offer a window into a defendant’s trial, noting the state’s accusations against the defendant, evidence it presented in court to support its claim, and, often, the defense’s argument. And they often reveal the vicious circularity that characterizes many prosecutions of journalists in Turkey, when the state claims that the journalist’s affiliation with a legal publication or possession of copies of a legally circulating newspaper constitutes proof of illegal activity.
    Because the documents are not always available or what is available is sometimes incomplete, we have cross-checked the information on the imprisoned journalists using a variety of sources, including the independent research of other international and local press freedom organizations and human rights groups, and interviews with the imprisoned journalists’ colleagues and lawyers.
    Confirmed cases of journalism-related prosecutions include working journalists and others who have been prosecuted as a result of journalistic activities. When a journalist has been formally charged with a criminal offense such as membership in a proscribed organization or specific acts of terrorism, we have used the following criteria in making our determination that the underlying motive for the prosecution is the journalist’s work: 1) Court documents indicate that the state has based its accusations, wholly or in part, on a journalist’s affiliation with or work for a particular publication; 2) There has been a pattern of government harassment of the journalist and/or his or her publication; 3) A defendant appears to have been denied due process or contends that confessions or other self-incriminating statements were given under torture; credible accounts of the torture of defendants, coercion of witnesses, and falsification of documents in Turkish criminal justice proceedings are too numerous to disregard such claims.
    All but two of the cases in the "confirmed" category involve journalists charged and convicted under Articles 168 or 169 of Turkey’s Penal Code, under which it is a crime to belong or provide assistance to armed insurgent groups or proscribed political organizations. Membership and assistance are both loosely defined. The Turkish government has used the broad provisions of these articles against journalists and publications affiliated with or sympathetic to Kurdish separatists or banned leftist political groups. Many of the cases in this category demonstrate a pattern of harassment of particular publications which we believe makes credible the contentions of journalists convicted under Articles 168 and 169 that they were prosecuted because of their work as journalists. We have grouped those cases by the publication with which the journalist is or was affiliated and have provided a brief explanation about the publication’s content and political history.