Day: February 16, 2026
Hearing in Meydan TV case in Azerbaijan
On 13 February, the Baku Court for Serious Crimes, chaired by Judge Aytan Aliyeva, held the fifth hearing in the Meydan TV case. The proceedings again began with the state prosecutor continuing to read out the operative part of the indictment.
Before the session started, civic activist Amrah Tahmazov was removed from the courtroom for chanting “Freedom for Meydan TV!”
When state prosecutor Ergin Gafarov took the stand to present the charges, Nurlan Libre addressed the court, saying he had been on hunger strike for 28 days. He also said force had again been used against him and that he had been kept in handcuffs while being transported from the detention centre to court.
Later, the journalist was taken for a medical check-up. After returning to the courtroom, he said his blood pressure had been measured and he had been given heart medication.
“While I was being brought here, sheets of paper containing my court statement were taken from me. The last time I was examined and had a blood test was eight days ago at the detention centre. I have still not been given the results of either of the two tests,” he added.
In response, the judge told Nurlan Libre that the court would send a formal letter to ensure his transfer from the detention centre to court was carried out in accordance with the law.
On 6 December 2024, several Meydan TV staff members were detained, including Ramin Deko (Jabrailzade), Aynur Ganbarova (Elgunes), Aysel Umudova, Aytaj Ahmedova (Tapdig), Khayala Agayeva and Natig Javadli.
They were charged under Article 206.3.2 of the criminal code (smuggling committed by a group of persons in prior collusion), and the criminal case against them became known as the “Meydan TV case”. Later, journalists Shamshad Aga, Nurlan Libre, Fatima Movlamli, Ulviya Ali and Ahmed Mukhtar were also arrested as part of the same case.
In August 2025, the charges against the journalists were toughened and new articles were added to the case.
Meydan TV says the arrests are linked to its critical reporting.
“Let Sulkhana Hajiyeva be our lawyer”
During the prosecutor’s statement, Ramin Deko also addressed the court, saying his lawyer had not visited him in the detention centre. He asked for a state-appointed defence lawyer.
The journalist said he would like Sulkhana Hajiyeva to represent him. She was dismissed from her post as a judge at Baku’s Khatai District Court seven months ago and is now working as a lawyer.
“She issued the ruling on my arrest, so let her now become my lawyer.”
Shamshad Aga supported the request. Nurlan Libre said the pressure on Hajiyeva and her removal from the judiciary were politically motivated, and stressed that they wanted her as their defence lawyer. (Sulkhana Hajiyeva, formerly a judge at Baku’s Khatai District Court, was known as one of the judges who issued the highest number of rulings against civic and political activists — ed.)
While the indictment was being read out, Shamshad Aga again interrupted the prosecutor, saying he had the right to immediately respond to the claims being made. He again pointed out that the indictment repeatedly stressed that Meydan TV lacked state registration, noting that the outlet is registered in Germany.
Journalists bang on glass cage in protest
As at the three previous hearings, the journalists protested against the continued reading of the indictment. Aynur Elgunes said she could not speak because the microphone inside the glass cage was hung too high, and asked to be moved next to her lawyer.
The judge rejected the request, prompting a protest from Elgunes.
Fatima Movlamli also objected to the defendants not being allowed to leave the glass cage and sit beside their lawyers. In response, Judge Aytan Aliyeva said: “You cannot dictate terms to us.”
“We are not dictating terms — we were arrested by diktat,” Movlamli replied.
During Movlamli’s statement, the microphone was switched off, prompting protests from the defendants. For several minutes, the journalists inside the glass cage banged on the glass with their hands.
State prosecutor Ergin Gafarov continued reading the indictment, but tensions soon rose again. A court employee suddenly removed the microphone hanging above the glass cage.
The journalists objected to the removal. They held one side of the microphone while court staff held the other, each side trying to pull the device towards them. At that point, Judge Aliyeva told the journalists: “Be quiet.”
“Our voices could not be silenced by Ilham Aliyev — do you think you can?” Khayala Agayeva replied.
Aynur Elgunes, protesting against the state prosecutor, said:
“Our nerves are not made of rubber like his, and he should immediately finish reading the indictment.
While he has been reading it out, his Azerbaijani has noticeably improved, his diction is better — that should be enough.”
Nurlan Libre said the process was being deliberately dragged out so that members of the public and embassy representatives would lose interest and stop attending.
When it was her turn, Aytaj Tapdig protested and demanded that only the operative part of the charges against her be read out, without the rest of the document. As others whose charges had not yet been read supported the demand, the reading of the indictment was soon concluded.
After that, the judge asked the journalists one by one whether they were familiar with the charges and whether they pleaded guilty.
“A mobile number in my name was activated in 1899”
Responding to the judge’s question, Aynur Elgunes said she did not consider herself guilty.
“I have no access to any state resources. If you are looking for smugglers, you should look among officials.”
Ramin Deko also said he regarded his detention as politically motivated and did not admit guilt.
Shamshad Aga said the criminal case was fabricated, unlawful and biased, and had been prepared unprofessionally.
“The case file states that on 6 December 2024, Ramin Deko returned to the country on a Tbilisi–Baku flight and was detained on Zykh Highway with €38,000.
How could such a large sum be brought through customs and then transported as far as Zykh? Were the border and customs officers on duty that day held accountable? If so, why is there not a single word about it in the 30 volumes of the case file?
The materials also say that a mobile number registered in my name was activated in 1899. At that time, even my grandfather had not yet been born, and the Azerbaijani Republic did not exist. Look at the kind of case they have prepared: 83 years before I was born, a mobile number was already registered and activated in my name.”
The journalist also noted that 1899 was the birth year of Azerbaijani writer Jafar Jabbarli.
Another of Shamshad Aga’s objections concerned the reasoning section of the record of testimony given by Ulviya Ali as a witness on 16 January 2025.
“In the reasoning section of that document, I am listed as a defendant. But I was detained as a suspect on the night of 4–5 February, 20 days later.
Before that, I was not involved in the process either as a witness or as a suspect. Does that mean I was already a defendant 20 days before my arrest? I ask and demand clarification: under what law and on what procedural basis is this regulated?”
Shamshad Aga also referred to a hearing at the Baku Court of Appeal, chaired by Judge Javid Huseyn, which considered his appeal against pre-trial detention.
“The ruling on my appeal says that ‘the management of AbzasMedia claims that €40,000 were planted in the office by police’.
Let us first clarify which case you are trying me under: the AbzasMedia case or the Meydan TV case?
This criminal case is a copy of the one against AbzasMedia, rewritten from it, and that is further proof that it has been fabricated.”
“Let the Institute of Linguistics examine these materials in court”
The journalist added that the case file contained a single sentence running to 22 pages. He said the European Court of Human Rights had issued clear rulings on such matters, stressing that charges must be formulated in a logical and comprehensible way.
“I demand that the Institute of Linguistics be asked to carry out a linguistic examination of the indictment, and that its representatives come to court and present their conclusions.”
Nurlan Libre, responding to the judge’s question about whether he understood the charges, said he did not and did not admit guilt.
“There is one document about me. It says I received €100 and another €150. So I’ve been held here for a year over €250?
Ilham Aliyev had me arrested, and he will be the one to release me. I expect nothing from you.”
When Aytaj Tapdig was asked whether she understood the charges, the judge did not allow her to speak and switched off the microphone. Tapdig then raised her voice.
“Yes, I understand the charges perfectly. It is you who do not. The essence is Meydan TV, the essence is our fight for a free press.
For this stack of papers you are holding without shame, all 12 defendants should be acquitted. The investigation you conducted in such an immoral way is a complete disgrace. You have failed in the Meydan TV case, gentlemen.
Let us define the roles correctly. Do not be under the illusion that by taking this position you can judge us. It is our job to investigate. We will ask questions, and the government whose interests you represent will have to answer. We will expose your crimes, and you will be the ones found guilty.”
At the end of her statement, Aytaj Tapdig said she considered the question “do you plead guilty?” to be insulting and forbade it from being asked to her throughout the proceedings.
Responding to the judge’s question about whether she understood the charges, Ulviya Ali said:
“It is obvious that the accusations are slander. I do not plead guilty. I demand that the court open a criminal case against the authors of these charges under Article 270 of the Criminal Code on violations of international flight rules, because the case materials show they have flown too high and reached the highest level of absurdity.
No one should be surprised that I am making such motions. The investigative group applied the charges against us in exactly this way.
I am not a member of the organised group described in the indictment. I am a member of a much larger organised group: independent journalists.
Long live the free press! Long live independent journalism!”
“If you interrupt me, I will climb onto the table and continue speaking”
Responding to the same question from the judge, Fatima Movlamli said she was engaged solely in journalistic work and was known in society as an honest and reliable journalist. She described the charges as slander and fabrication.
Khayala Agayeva, in turn, said that when authoritarian regimes become even more authoritarian, journalists are the first to be targeted.
“That is exactly what the Azerbaijani authorities have done, turning their claws on journalists. No dictatorship can cope with a society where the press is free. That is why we are in prison. Even while under arrest, we will continue to bring light into the darkness.”
When Aysel Umudova was asked whether she was familiar with the charges, the judge intervened and did not allow her to speak. Umudova said it was her right to address the court and continued answering in a raised voice.
“If you interrupt me, I will climb onto the table and continue speaking!”
When the judge tried to stop her again, Umudova attempted to climb onto the table, but a court guard prevented her from doing so.
Raising her voice, Umudova continued to say the case was fabricated and that they had been arrested on political orders. After that, the panel of judges adjourned the proceedings indefinitely and left the courtroom.
Hearing in Meydan TV case in Azerbaijan