Dinç Bilgin, who owned the Sabah-ATV group at the time, spoke to commission members, saying “mistakes were” made at the time of the coup by various groups, including the media. “The entire country was scared at that time, and so were we. If we had a prime minister and a Parliament like we do now, none of this would have happened. There was a tradition to oppose the elected in the media. The media wasn’t democratic, courageous and anti-coups d’état.”
In response to a question from the commission members on how it could be possible for newspapers of vastly different political views and ideologies to unite in their support of the military, Bilgin said, “Remember the Turkey of that day. Let alone the army chief, even statements from a senior general would shake the world. It was a period when we, as the media, weren’t democratic and courageous enough.”
He talked about the publications and broadcasts of his newspapers and television network: “It was a period of which I am now ashamed. We did stories that I am ashamed of. It was a strange Turkey — one that was out of tune. Huge mistakes were made. One of these mistakes was the role of the media in privatizations. Off the top of my head, I can think of the Trakya power distribution tender that was given to one media group, and the Bursa power distribution tender, which was contracted to another one. The press shouldn’t have gone into other businesses. I lost everything when I got involved in businesses outside journalism.”
Bilgin also responded to questions about Etibank, which he formerly owned. The bank went bankrupt and was confiscated, and Bilgin was sentenced to 58 months in prison on embezzlement charges.
“The biggest mistake in my life was entering that Etibank tender.” Noting that as other media groups were supportive of the Motherland party (ANAP), his group supported the True Path Party (DYP). “Media bosses shouldn’t own banks. Media bosses shouldn’t do anything but journalism. I never asked [ANAP leader Mesut Yılmaz] for this tender. One night, [ANAP minister] Cavit Çağlar called me and asked me to become a partner with him in Etibank.”
Not military or media alone
Bilgin said during the Feb. 28 coup period, commonly called a “post-modern coup in Turkey,” every institution had a responsibility in what ensued after the military released its memorandum on Feb. 28, 1997. “There was also the judiciary. Remember the prosecutors of the day.” However, he also said that resisting what he called the “rotten climate” dominant at the time might have been impossible for prosecutors.
Turgay Ciner, head of the Ciner Media Group, which currently owns the HaberTürk newspaper, told the commission, “There was media terror in those days. I suffered badly as a businessman. I think the energy and banking privatizations of the Feb. 28 period should be investigated.” He said he would have never entered the media world if he hadn’t been deprived of his assets during the Feb. 28 period. “They gave me shares in newspapers in return for what I was owed, so I had to enter the sector,” he said.
Aydın Doğan, the owner of the Doğan Media Group, also testified to the commission after Bilgin. He also agreed that the media had made mistakes. “The media also makes mistakes. We are trying to do our best to minimize those mistakes.”
He pointed out: “I believe that every time democracy was interrupted, it was because of the weakness in the political administration. If politicians can stand courageously, these things won’t happen; the latest example being the Apr. 27 [2007] memorandum, when the government stood up and there was no risk of a takeover.”
He added, “Had [Prime Minister] Necmettin Erbakan stood on a tank like Yeltsin did, Feb. 28 wouldn’t have happened.”
Doğan’s Hürriyet is remembered as an ardent supporter of the coup, although he denied this in his session with the commission on Friday.
He continued, concerning his group’s newspapers including Hürriyet: “We tried to be as independent as we could be as journalists. We never continued long-term ties with any political parties. And as the prime minister says, nothing should be left in the dark.”
Doğan said the police department, the National Intelligence Agency (MİT) and even other news sources might have used the media at the time. “The media is often used. You have to have relationships with all kinds of sources if you are in publishing.”
He also responded to a question on the state of his relationship with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. “Very well,” he said. “We don’t have a close friendship, but we are in a very civil relationship. I always show him respect as needed, and he always inquires about how I am doing whenever he sees me. I have no problems right now, but I can go talk to him if I have any. The tensions that were public a few years ago do not exist anymore.”
In response to a question on his opinion as to whether it could be possible for media conglomerates to have business relations with the state and still be partial and concerning changes in the newspaper, including the firing of some writers and Aydın Doğan’s name being taken off Hürriyet’s masthead on June, 6, 2010, Doğan said he had never been pressured to do anything by the government.
“The Hürriyet masthead information was legally separated from all my other companies because my children wanted that. I don’t have signature power in any of the Doğan companies; I withdrew my name from all the companies and distributed work between my children. I am only the honorary president of Doğan Holding now; there was no pressure.”
He said on the subject of firing Emin Çölaşan and Bekir Coşkun, known for their strong and highly vocal opposition to the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) government: “I fired Emin Çölaşan. My daughter and the editor-in-chief tried to talk me out of it. Emin had become unmanageable. He cost me $10,000 an article. And I think I made the right decision. Bekir, I’ll never forgive. I did everything to make sure he stayed with Hürriyet. I offered to buy him an apartment in İstanbul. They gave him a lot of money, I don’t know how much.”
“Not a single politician or the military applied any pressure, but at times they made recommendations.”
In response to a question on whether he had business ties with the military, Doğan said, “Thinking of Feb. 28 as the period between 1996 and 2000, I didn’t win any tenders at the time.” He said his purchase of the oil company POAŞ in 2000 happened through a televised tender. “I put $530 million in equity capital and didn’t use any loans from public banks.”
He said none of his newspapers’ headlines were supportive of the Feb. 28 intervention.
(Today’s Zaman)
