Close Menu
Market Data Newsletter
Tuesday, July 28
Global Free Speech

Azerbaijan: CPJ condemns shocking sentences handed down in Toplum TV case

News RoomBy No Comments4 Mins Read1,141 Views
Azerbaijan: CPJ condemns shocking sentences handed down in Toplum TV case

Listen to the article

0:00
0:00

New York, July 28, 2026 – The Committee to Protect Journalists condemns the extremely harsh prison sentences of up to 15 years handed down on July 27 to journalists and other individuals associated with leading Azerbaijani news outlet Toplum TV on charges related to receipt and use of foreign funds.

“The shockingly heavy sentences meted out to nine individuals linked to Toplum TV are a textbook example of how an absence of international accountability emboldens autocrats like Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev,” said Fiona O’Brien, CPJ’s Europe and Central Asia regional director. “More than two dozen journalists and media workers are now unjustly jailed in Azerbaijan, victims of a relentless crackdown on independent journalism. European states in particular must wake up to the fact that their increasingly warm ties with Aliyev’s regime – and their failure to hold it to international human rights standards – not only have devastating consequences inside Azerbaijan but also undermine their claims to stand for media freedom.”

The Serious Crimes Court in the capital, Baku, found the nine individuals — who include journalists, a journalist trainer, project managers, and the founders of media outlets — guilty of acting as an “organized criminal group” to commit multiple financial crimes connected to the receipt and use of Western donor funds, in violation of Azerbaijani legislation, by four connected organizations: Toplum TV; the nonprofit Institute for Democratic Initiatives (IDI); Fakt Yoxla, a fact-checking platform run by IDI; and Third Republic Platform, a political group.

The court delivered the following sentences, and ordered Toplum TV journalist Elmir Abbasov, who was the only defendant to remain free pending trial, to be taken into custody in the courtroom:

  • Akif Gurbanov, Toplum TV co-founder, IDI chairperson, and Third Republic Platform spokesperson – 15 years
  • Alasgar Mammadli, Toplum TV co-founder and media lawyer – 14 years
  • Mushfig Jabbar, Toplum TV video editor – 13 years 
  • Farid Ismayilov, Toplum TV reporter – 12 years
  • Elmir Abbasov, Toplum TV social media manager – 12 years
  • Ruslan Izzetli, Third Republic Platform co-founder – 15 years
  • Ali Zeynal, IDI journalist trainer – 14 years
  • Ilkin Amrahov, IDI project coordinator – 14 years
  • Ramil Babayev, IDI project coordinator – 13 years

The accused are among dozens of journalists and right defenders arrested in a major crackdown on the press and civil society following Azerbaijan’s military recapture of the Nagorno-Karabakh region in 2023. Most of the journalists have been charged over alleged receipt of Western funding, amid a decline in relations with the West following that military campaign.

Police raided the offices of Toplum TV and IDI and arrested most of those listed above in March 2024. In a separate case, Toplum TV presenter Shahnaz Baylargizi is under a travel ban pending investigation on similar charges.

In June last year, authorities sentenced six journalists and media workers from Abzas Media, Azerbaijan’s leading anti-corruption investigative outlet, and one from U.S. Congress-funded broadcaster Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty’s Azerbaijani service to prison terms of between seven and a half and nine years on similar funding allegations. Twelve journalists and media workers remain on trial in a case against Germany-based Meydan TV.

Azerbaijani law requires civil society groups to obtain state approval for foreign grants and authorities say the targeted outlets failed to comply.

In rulings on similar cases, the European Court of Human Rights stressed that such an omission was punishable under Azerbaijani law by fines, not criminal sanctions. Independent experts say that authorities refuse to register independent organizations seeking foreign grants, making it impossible to legally receive the funding.

Azerbaijan was the world’s sixth-worst jailer of journalists in 2025, according to CPJ’s prison census. At present, at least 25 journalists are being held in reprisal for their work. Authorities have also heavily restricted international media and sentenced exiled journalists to lengthy prison terms in absentia.

CPJ emailed the Office of the Prosecutor-General of Azerbaijan for comment but did not immediately receive a reply.

Read the full article here

Fact Checker

Verify the accuracy of this article using AI-powered analysis and real-time sources.

Share.

The FSNN News Room is the voice of our in-house journalists, editors, and researchers. We deliver timely, unbiased reporting at the crossroads of finance, cryptocurrency, and global politics, providing clear, fact-driven analysis free from agendas.

Related Articles

Global Free Speech

Cockroach Janta Party protestors holding posters of Bhagat Singh at Jantar Mantar, July 2026. Photo: Pelph Hoters/CC0 1.0 Towards the end of last year, when I was editing our magazine about Gen Z revolts around the world, I asked around about India. Was a Gen Z revolt likely there? After all, young people had toppled governments in neighbouring Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal. The consensus was that despite the increasing authoritarianism of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his government, India was on a different trajectory to its much smaller neighbours. The young middle class were largely apolitical. Earlier protests had simply “petered out” because the country was so diverse no one could agree with one another. Eight months later, it turns out there is something which unites young people – the understanding that they are despised by the political elites. The Cockroach Janta Party was formed after a satirical call on social media by student Abhijeet Dipke, a recent graduate from a US university who heard the chief justice of India comparing young unemployed people to “parasites” and “cockroaches”. What would happen, he wrote on Instagram, if all cockroaches came together? It was a call that resonated. Within days of being formed the party’s Instagram account had 22 million followers – far more than the nine million following Modi’s BJP. The authorities tried to strangle the movement at birth, and the Cockroach Janta Party‘s X account was closed down pretty quickly by Elon Musk’s platform after anonymous complaints. But that didn’t stop the momentum and soon the anger was focused on the leak of medical exam questions, meaning millions would have to do expensive retakes. The issue was emblematic of wider problems of graduate unemployment reported to be at 40% for under 25s. In the last week we have seen thousands of Gen Z demonstrators taking to the streets calling for the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan. Even the India opposition leader Rahul Gandhi (who has not been popular with young people) has tried to get in on the act and was briefly arrested after joining a sit-in in Delhi. Other disturbing responses have included violence used against some protesters, the prohibition of protests near the parliament building in Delhi and the use of internet shutdowns being deployed in areas where demonstrations were planned to start on Monday. Internet freedom campaigners in India, including the Software Freedom Law Centre (SFLC), have condemned the targeting of the protest with an internet shutdown as setting “a dangerous precedent” as it “strikes at the heart of the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression”. They also are demanding to know why no order was issued to authorise the blackout, seemingly in violation of the law and not in accordance with the Supreme Court’s ruling on this issue. India has long turned to internet shutdowns for the flimsiest of excuses. According to Access Now India was the world leader for shutting down the internet for six years in a row ending in 2023 (ahead of places like Iran, Russia and Myanmar). The SFLC warn that together with reports of social media content about the protest being “shadow banned”, as well as the closure of roads and metro stations, the government seems to be trying to disrupt protest rather than guarantee public safety. None of this is deterring Cockroach Janta Party supporters. If anything, it seems to be encouraging protesters to turn out. And the party’s popularity carries with it a message; globally connected young people are coming together and they are forces to be reckoned with. READ MORE

Global Free Speech

The Royal Courts of Justice. Photo: StevovoB/NeedPix Years ago when still a baby defence barrister, a brief landed on my desk. The defendant, we shall call him Mohammad, was from Somalia. He was a PhD student travelling for his studies to Germany when civil war broke out. Mohammad’s sister was raped by soldiers; his father murdered. Newly married with a baby, he used all his money to pay for passage to the UK. This meant using forged travel documents. The family were eventually granted asylum. But Mohammad kept the forged passport; a symbol of his past life, perhaps. On a trip to visit German friends, the forged passport was discovered. He was charged with an offence to which he had no defence in law. The first trial saw running battles between me and the judge. At every opportunity he angrily reminded the court  of the defendant’s guilt. His summing up consisted of countering the arguments I had advanced in Mohammad’s defence. After two days deliberating, the jury were discharged, unable to reach a decision. The second trial was before a different judge. No angry exchanges. Just a measured, even-tempered stewardship of proceedings. A unanimous acquittal followed. Absent a bullying judge, this jury felt free to deliver a verdict according to their conscience; a principle called jury equity. I did not explicitly reference this principle in my closing speech. Nonetheless, it has often featured, in cases like Mohammad’s, when attempting to appeal to a jury’s sense of compassion. It was clear when Mohammad walked tearfully from the dock, that every right-minded person in that courtroom knew his prosecution, though lawful, was wrong. And so to the Filton trial and the unprecedented prosecution of my friend, Rajiv Menon KC, due to stand trial on 28 July for alleged contempt of court. Rajiv was lead counsel representing the first of six Palestine Action defendants charged with offences arising out of an incident in 2024 at an arms factory in Filton, Bristol, owned by Israeli-based Elbit Systems. During the incident, the defendents smashed equipment and one injured a police officer.  At the trial the judge made orders prohibiting defence barristers from mentioning jury equity in their closing speeches. That effectively meant forbidding them from telling the jury that they (the jury) were free to act on their conscience despite the law. The trial judge alleges that Rajiv disobeyed the order and has asked another judge to try him for contempt. The Filton trial was, in many ways, different from Mohammad’s. However, the principles at stake are the same. You may not agree with the Filton defendants’ cause or their methods. And, we can all sympathise with the police officer injured whilst doing her job, but we must all surely agree that every defendant deserves a fair trial. By severely limiting some defences, removing other defences altogether, and making orders disallowing defence counsel from referring to long-established basic principles like jury equity, a trial judge is at risk of reducing the jury’s role to a ceremonial one. That is why everyone should care about what happened in the Filton trial and what is happening now to Rajiv Menon. This is not just about a closing speech made by one defence barrister. Most defence barristers have, at some point, relied on the constitutional right of a jury to acquit even when a judge thinks that guilt is a forgone conclusion. It is a principle considered so important that it is enshrined on a plaque in the Central Criminal Court. And yet, today the very mention of it is being prohibited in protest trials, with the accompanying threat of contempt proceedings. This is about the essence of why the jury equity principle is necessary and has survived so long. It is recognised as a useful long-stop against state oppression. I would add, as a Black person who has observed first-hand the oppressive way in which our people are policed, the collective wisdom of twelve strangers along with jury equity, is sometimes our only chance of justice. Let’s be clear, this attack on jury equity and the heavy-handed attempt to gag defence counsel, is an attack upon basic freedoms. It will have a chilling effect on all defence barristers in politically sensitive cases as well as on the right to protest. Other important safeguards will be caught in the dragnet. Defence counsel’s obligation to fight fearlessly and the very concept of jury trial itself, are all up for grabs. In the 1980’s, during a wave of far-right attacks on Black communities in Bradford, twelve men were charged with offences linked to stockpiling 38 petrol bombs. One of the twelve, Tarlochan Gata Aura, admitted making and storing the bombs to protect his community. The late Sibghat Kadri QC, head of the chambers where I trained, was one of the defence barristers in that trial which ended with acquittals despite overwhelming evidence against them. Constantly interrupted by a hostile judge, the defence were warned against making the trial political. Kadri, a barrister who believed it was every lawyer’s duty to fight inside and outside the court, must be turning in his grave. READ MORE

Add A Comment
Leave A Reply