 in the case of an opposition lawmaker who remains jailed despite a previous ruling by the top court in his favor.){kind=link}
A criminal complaint has been filed against judges of the İstanbul 13th High Criminal Court for their refusal to comply with a decision of the Constitutional Court (AYM) in the case of an opposition lawmaker who remains jailed despite a previous ruling by the top court in his favor.
Counsel for Can Atalay, a lawyer and rights activist who was elected to parliament in May from the Workers Party of Turkey (TİP), petitioned the top court to once again rule that Atalay’s right to a fair trial, the right to elect, stand for election and engage in political activities as well as his right to liberty and security are being violated. The lawyers asked the court to put an end to the violations suffered by Atalay, which would mean his release from prison.
The AYM had ruled that Atalay’s rights were violated due to his continued incarceration, despite acquiring parliamentary immunity. The 13th High Criminal Court, however, sent the case back to the Supreme Court of Appeals, defying the Constitutional Court’s rulings.
The İstanbul Bar Association initiated the complaint, criticizing the court for its failure to adhere to the top court’s decision.
İstanbul court’s decision has been met with harsh criticism from various legal and political circles.
The İstanbul Bar Association asserts that the court’s decision not to release Atalay, who remains detained in Silivri Prison, constitutes a crime. They have accused the court of neglecting its duty and depriving an individual of liberty without legal grounds.
The criminal complaint filed with the Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSK) alleges that the judges of the İstanbul court failed to execute a constitutional mandate.
The AYM had already announced its ruling in Atalay’s case on Oct. 25 and said Turkey violated Article 67 of the Turkish Constitution, which concerns the right to elect, stand for election and engage in political activities, as well as Article 19, involving the right to liberty and security. Atalay would also be paid TL 50,000 in non-pecuniary damages in line with the court’s ruling.
But the Supreme Court of Appeals, which upheld an 18-year conviction for Atalay in the Gezi Park trial in September, defied this decision, sparking widespread criticism and accusations of a judicial coup.
The Supreme Court of Appeals also filed criminal complaints against the members of the AYM due to their ruling for Atalay, which was a first in Turkey for the members of a top court to take legal action against their colleagues in another top court.
The Turkish judiciary faces widespread criticism for its perceived lack of independence. Critics accuse President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan of exerting control over the judiciary and establishing one-man rule in the country, particularly after a coup attempt in 2016, following which he launched a massive crackdown on non-loyalist citizens and the country’s subsequent transition to a presidential system of governance, which granted him vast powers.
Many say there is no longer a separation of powers in the country and that members of the judiciary are under the control of the government and cannot make judgments based on law.
In a development that validated the critics, Turkey was ranked 117th among 142 countries in the rule of law index published by the World Justice Project (WJP) in October, dropping one rank in comparison to last year.
