In Turkiye, the 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals has initiated a criminal complaint against the individuals comprising the Constitutional Court (AYM) who rendered a verdict on a human rights infringement involving Can Atalay, a deputy from the Turkish Workers' Party in Hatay.
 |
| Can Atalay |
The 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals has recently filed a criminal complaint against the members of the Constitutional Court (AYM) subsequent to their decision in a case concerning a human rights infringement, specifically involving Can Atalay, a deputy from the Turkish Workers' Party representing Hatay. This development has been met with surprise and astonishment. The ruling has generated much debate and disagreement, as political leaders and legal experts have raised apprehensions over its potential impact on the constitutional structure of the nation.
According to the decision made by the Constitutional Court, Can Atalay, who was elected as a Member of Parliament in the general election conducted on May 14, was found to have had his rights infringed, despite being convicted in the Gezi Park Case.
The anticipated action of the Istanbul 13th Criminal Court was to execute the ruling made by the Constitutional Court, resulting in the release of Atalay. Nevertheless, the regional court opted to postpone its ruling, so intensifying the dispute between the aforementioned legal entities, ultimately leading to the involvement of the Supreme Court.
The 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals has declined to adhere to the Constitutional Court's ruling on the violation, asserting that the previous verdict affirming the conviction of Can Atalay on November 8th was accurate.
The act of non-compliance resulted in the initiation of a criminal complaint against the members of the Constitutional Court, alleging their infringement of the Constitution and their exceeding of their designated powers.
Additionally, the Chamber proceeded to inform the Turkish Grand National Assembly of the need to diminish Atalay's membership, so exacerbating the ongoing problem.
Professor Dr. Osman Can, who formerly served as the Rapporteur of the Constitutional Court, has raised significant concerns over the potential consequences of this development. He has emphasised that such a development has the potential to impair the functionality of the Constitutional Court and result in the erosion of its fundamental roles and responsibilities. The individual saw the situation as a prospective "coup" inside the field of political science and emphasised the need for prompt remediation of the errors.
The ruling rendered by the Supreme Court and the following filing of a criminal charge have elicited significant responses from political personalities. The Chairman of the Republican People's Party (CHP), Özgür Özel, strongly criticised the ruling made by the Supreme Court, characterising it as a "endeavour to incite rebellion." In response, he called for an unusual secret meeting of the party group. The Minister of Justice, Yılmaz Tunç, responded to Özel's remarks, underscoring the importance of the Constitutional Court's ruling and the potential risks it entails.
In a remarkable development, the 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals has filed accusations against some individuals from the Constitutional Court, asserting their infringement of the provisions of the Constitution. This action represents an unparalleled occurrence within the annals of the Republic.
The judgement has been characterised by legal experts, such as Lawyer Ali Gül, as a "legal scandal," with emphasis placed on the Supreme Court's lack of jurisdiction to dismiss rulings made by the Constitutional Court.
In light of the criminal complaint, the Constitutional Court has said that its members have encountered threats from many terrorist organisations, hence giving rise to apprehensions about the autonomy and security of the court.
According to Professor Dr. Osman Can, an expert in constitutional law, he asserts that the feasibility of conducting such a trial is legally questionable. He highlights that the Constitution bestows immunity to members of the Constitutional Court, and any inquiry against them should be begun by the Constitutional Court General Assembly.
The current constitutional issue being faced by the country has raised significant concerns over the potential consequences arising from the ongoing disagreement between the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. The implications of this situation are yet undetermined. The aforementioned occurrences highlight the intricate equilibrium of powers and emphasise the need of a prompt settlement in order to safeguard the principles of the rule of law and constitutional order inside Turkey.
Source: BBC Turkiye