Meydan TV case in Azerbaijan: 'Cancel trial and let us be punished under Ilham Aliyev’s decree'
Azerbaijan: sixth Meydan TV hearing
On 20 February, another hearing in the Meydan TV case took place at the Baku Court for Grave Crimes, chaired by Judge Aytan Aliyeva.
At the previous hearing, the judge refused to allow the journalists to leave the glass enclosure and sit next to their lawyers. The defendants protested against being held inside the glass cabin and against being denied the opportunity to deliver defence statements. During a speech by Aysel Umudova, the panel of judges abruptly left the courtroom.
The latest hearing also began with the defendants demanding to be removed from the glass enclosure.
When Aytaj Tapdig said that all 12 defendants were requesting to be seated alongside their lawyers outside the glass cabin, Judge Aytan Aliyeva prevented her from continuing. The journalist then raised her voice in protest and continued her statement:
“After the previous hearing, you drew up a report against us under the pretext that we had disrupted the proceedings. Afterwards, we were subjected to physical violence in the detention centre under the supervision of deputy head Javid Gulaliyev. I state here that both the head of the detention facility, Elnur Ismayilov, and Javid Gulaliyev are merely minor pieces on a chessboard. The order to use violence against us did not come from them, but from Ilham Aliyev and the presidential administration.
Being kept in a glass enclosure humiliates human dignity. In that case, we may refuse to take part in court hearings. Judges, you should know that you will not be able to do what Ilham Aliyev himself failed to do — you will not be able to silence us.”
“You will not be able to intimidate us with solitary confinement or your security forces!”
Khayala Agayeva, protesting against the defendants being kept inside the glass enclosure, told the judges that even if they were ultimately sentenced to between 12 and 20 years in prison, the court would not be able to prevent them from defending themselves now.
“Because of our protests at the previous hearing, we were ordered to provide explanations. Two days ago, violence was used against us in the detention centre under the guise of a ‘search’. My voice is hoarse from shouting during the abuse I was subjected to.
First and foremost, it is your duty to send an inquiry to the detention facility and investigate the violence. Moreover, the head of the detention centre, Elnur Ismayilov, told us that if another report is drawn up against us at the next hearing, we will be placed in solitary confinement.
I suggest not delaying the preparation of the necessary report and sending us back to the detention centre today. Because you will not be able to intimidate us with solitary confinement or your security forces! Throughout this entire trial, we will protest against every violation of our rights.”
Other defendants then continued to demand that they be removed from the glass enclosure. When Ulviya Ali said there was not enough air inside the cabin, the judge allowed only her to move and sit next to her lawyer. After taking her seat beside the defence counsel, Ulviya Ali filed a motion citing health concerns and requested permission to undergo a medical examination.
“In 2017, a microadenoma was detected in my head, specifically near the pituitary gland. Doctors recommended that I undergo annual MRI and CT scans to monitor the tumour. In addition, I have suffered for many years from insulin resistance, vitamin B12 deficiency, hypoglycaemia, elevated white blood cell levels and hypothyroidism.
Every year I underwent MRI and CT scans to monitor the microadenoma. However, I was arrested in 2025 and for nearly ten months have been unable to receive a proper medical examination, as the detention centre lacks the necessary equipment. Despite submitting a request to investigators, permission has not been granted.”
Ulviya Ali said that the Baku Court for Grave Crimes was currently the only authority she could appeal to for permission to undergo an examination and expressed her wish to be examined at a private clinic.
During the hearing, Nurlan Libre, who continues a hunger strike, reported that his condition had worsened and demanded that a doctor be called. Although a doctor arrived, an examination was temporarily impossible because of a faulty lock on the glass enclosure. Later, when the journalist was taken out of the cabin, he was placed in handcuffs. People present in the courtroom protested, saying he felt unwell and should not have been escorted away in handcuffs.
After returning to the courtroom, Nurlan Libre said the doctor had diagnosed him only with nervous exhaustion.
‘We will not remain in the glass enclosure’
Lawyer Zibeyda Sadigova then told the court that defendants in the detention centre were not being allowed to issue powers of attorney to their relatives. Responding to demands to resolve the issue, the judge said the matter would be considered.
Lawyer Javad Javadov filed a motion to change the pre-trial detention measure for Aytaj Tapdig and Nurlan Libre, whom he represents, requesting that they be transferred to house arrest. The court rejected the motion, which the state prosecutor had opposed.
Lawyers then again submitted motions requesting that the defendants be removed from the glass enclosure and allowed to sit alongside their defence counsel.
Lawyer Nazim Musayev reminded the court that during the first hearing it had granted the defendants permission to sit next to their lawyers and demanded that the decision be enforced.
Despite the lawyer pointing out that there were empty seats available beside him, the judge refused to allow Khayala Agayeva to move next to her defence counsel. In response, the lawyer challenged the composition of the court and asked for a recess to submit a written motion for recusal.
After the break, a written motion for recusal, signed by both the lawyers and the defendants, was submitted to the court.
“We will not remain in the glass enclosure”
Lawyer Zibeyda Sadigova then told the court that defendants in the detention centre were not being allowed to issue powers of attorney to their relatives. Responding to demands to resolve the issue, the judge said the matter would be considered.
Lawyer Javad Javadov filed a motion to change the pre-trial detention measure for Aytaj Tapdig and Nurlan Libre, whom he represents, requesting that they be transferred to house arrest. The court rejected the motion, which the state prosecutor had opposed.
Lawyers then again submitted motions requesting that the defendants be removed from the glass enclosure and allowed to sit alongside their defence counsel.
Lawyer Nazim Musayev reminded the court that during the first hearing it had granted the defendants permission to sit next to their lawyers and demanded that the decision be enforced.
Despite the lawyer pointing out that there were empty seats available beside him, the judge refused to allow Khayala Agayeva to move next to her defence counsel. In response, the lawyer challenged the composition of the court and asked for a recess to submit a written motion for recusal.
After the break, a written motion for recusal, signed by both the lawyers and the defendants, was submitted to the court.
‘We can protest here and stage an action’
Following the lawyers’ statements, the accused journalists said they supported the motion challenging the composition of the court.
Supporting the recusal request, Shamshad Agha reminded the court that during the first hearing the defendants had been given a choice — to sit next to their lawyers or remain in the glass enclosure.
“No decision was made that those who chose to remain in the glass cabin at the time would be unable to move next to their lawyers at later hearings. I said then that I would temporarily stay in the enclosure and move to sit with my lawyer at subsequent proceedings.
After the last hearing, as if sending people to deal with disobedient children, you sent staff to the detention centre and reports were drawn up against us. Our protest at the previous hearing was fully justified. If we are again not allowed to leave the glass enclosure and deliver our defence statements, we can both protest here and stage an action!
At the very first hearings, I already proved that this investigation was fabricated. Based on the evidence I presented, you should have terminated this false criminal case. If you intend to continue treating us in this way, then this trial should be cancelled. Just as Tsar Alexander issued decisions by decree rather than through a court, Ilham Aliyev should issue a decree once and for all declaring us criminals.”
“Aytan Aliyeva, leave the courtroom!”
During the journalists’ statements, the judge repeatedly interrupted them and prevented them from completing their remarks.
Fatima Movlamli said she supported the motion challenging the composition of the court filed by the other defendants. However, when she attempted to explain her position, the judge declared the speeches finished and gave the floor to the state prosecutor to present his position on the recusal request. Movlamli and the other journalists protested.
Tensions escalated after court staff removed the microphone suspended above the glass enclosure.
In protest, Aytaj Tapdig loudly shouted: “Aytan Aliyeva, leave the courtroom!” After the panel of judges left the courtroom and later returned, it was announced that the recusal request had been left without consideration.
Lawyer Zibeyda Sadigova then filed a motion requesting that her client, Shamshad Agha, be transferred to house arrest.
She said her client was widely known in society as a respected person and that there were no grounds to believe he posed any danger to the public. Journalist Aynur Elgunes also took the floor and supported the motion.
“Since Shamshad Agha’s arrest, seven members of his family have died. His sister is now seriously ill. He must be with his family.”
Shamshad Agha supported his lawyer’s motion but demanded not only to be transferred to house arrest, but also that all those detained in the case be acquitted.
State prosecutor Ergin Gafarov said there were no grounds for transferring Shamshad Agha to house arrest and opposed the motion. The court rejected the request.
Aynur Elgunes protested against the decision.
“These are people who are merely legitimising this spectacle,” she said.
Request to be sent to detention centre over alleged violence against three journalists
Lawyer Nazim Musayev said that two days earlier Khayala Agayeva, Aytaj Tapdig and Aysel Umudova had been subjected to violence at the Baku pre-trial detention centre.
“Ten people burst into their cell, twisted their arms and dragged them outside while squeezing their necks. Although the law does not allow male staff to search female prisoners’ belongings, male detention centre employees were present during the search of their cell. The violence used against them constitutes a criminal offence.
I believe the state prosecutor should have reacted to this incident, which took place on 18 February, before we did.
I ask the court to submit a request to the Prosecutor General’s Office to investigate the violence and provide a legal assessment of the actions of those involved. At the same time, an appeal should be sent to the leadership of the Penitentiary Service demanding an internal inspection.
The fact that the corridor cameras are monitored from the office of detention centre head Elnur Ismayilov further underlines the importance of an investigation.”
Responding to the judge’s question about whether they had appealed to any authorities over the incident and, if not, why, Musayev said this had not been possible given the timeframe.
“The incident took place two days ago. After the information became public, I was able to visit the detention centre yesterday, meet Khayala Agayeva and learn the details. We then prepared a written motion and submitted it to the court as part of these proceedings.”
Lawyer Javad Javadov, representing Aytaj Tapdig, supported the motion and also called for a request to be sent to the Prosecutor General’s Office to investigate the alleged violence.
Lawyer Rovshana Rahimli, representing Aysel Umudova, said the court should obtain recordings both from the body camera of one of the officers who entered the cell during the search and from the corridor surveillance cameras, which record continuously.
Journalist Nurlan Libre, taking the floor, said that detention centre staff led by deputy head Javid Gulaliyev had also entered his cell the previous day to conduct a search, adding that the deputy head had behaved rudely towards him.
“When I asked about the reason, Javid Gulaliyev replied: ‘We simply want to.’ The inspection of every personal belonging is a violation of the right to privacy.”
Referring to their earlier statements at the beginning of the hearing, Aytaj Tapdig and Khayala Agayeva supported the motion and demanded that those responsible for the alleged violence be held accountable.
“I demand that the head of the detention centre, Elnur Ismayilov, and his deputy, Javid Gulaliyev, be held criminally liable,” Tapdig said.
Judge Aytan Aliyeva said the court had decided to send an inquiry to the detention centre regarding the matter. Lawyer Nazim Musayev objected, noting that while the inquiry itself was a positive step, the response was predictable.
“You are sending a request to the same body that used violence and asking whether they committed it. Since the answer to this request is already known in advance, it reduces the effectiveness of the judicial process.”
In response, Judge Aytan Aliyeva said that just as the court shows respect to lawyers, they should also show respect to the court.
“No more words are required,” she said.
Lawyer Nazim Musayev replied: “Do not resort to intimidation.”
‘Who can guarantee that tomorrow we will not be raped there?’
Aysel Umudova said that when detention centre staff entered their cell to conduct a search, she had been in the toilet.
“I asked to be given a minute to come out, but the head of the search department, Alibala Rahimli, broke the door open and entered together with other male staff members.
Deputy head Javid Gulaliyev, emphasising his semen, told us: ‘My seed is everywhere.’
Anything can happen to us. Who can guarantee that tomorrow we will not be raped there?
I demand that a submission be sent to the Prosecutor General’s Office to investigate the violence and hold those responsible accountable.”
Afterwards, disagreements arose between the defence and the panel of judges regarding the further course of the proceedings. The defence did not have a unified position on whether the trial should proceed to the examination of evidence or move to the stage of free testimony.
At that point, addressing the judges, Aytaj Tapdig said:
“You can see that the communication barriers you have created between the defendants and their lawyers are obstructing the proceedings.”
Lawyer Rovshana Rahimli asked the court to declare a recess so that the defendants and their lawyers could discuss the issue.
Judge Aytan Aliyeva then adjourned the hearing and scheduled the next session for 13 March at 14:30.
Azerbaijan: sixth Meydan TV hearing
