Former European Court of Human Rights judge Rıza Türmen: Judges being pressurized in Turkey

Birkan BULUT
Ankara

Istanbul Serious Crime Court No 14 ordered a retrial to be unwarranted on the grounds that the ruling passed by the Constitutional Court on Enis Berberoğlu being stripped of his parliamentary seat “remained within the realms of testing for appropriateness.” Hence the court stood by the sentence of five years and ten months’ imprisonment it had handed down to Berberoğlu. Despite the finality of the Constitutional Court ruling, its non-recognition by the local-jurisdiction court has aroused controversy. With Constitutional Court member Engin Yıldırım posting a photograph of the Constitutional Court building and saying, “The lights are on,” the Interior Ministry, too, proclaimed, “Our lights have never gone off” along with a photograph of its own building on its official social media account. On the power front, insinuations of coup mongering were made regarding Constitutional Court member Engin Yıldırım’s post.

Responding to our questions on developments, Unity for Democracy (DİB) spokesperson and former European Court of Human Rights judge Rıza Türmen said Enis Berberoğlu had been detained with his right to vote and stand for election violated. Noting that Berberoğlu had been re-elected to parliament and his immunity needed to be removed for him to be detained, Türmen indicated that the European Court of Human Rights had ruled on this matter, deeming violation of the right to vote and stand for election and detention to be unlawful.

“COURTS MUST COMPLY WITH CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULINGS”

Stressing that Constitutional Court rulings are final, Türmen had the following take: “Other courts must comply with these rulings. Otherwise, Constitutional Court rulings retain absolutely no significance. Under such circumstances, how is the Constitutional Court ruling to be implemented?” Stating that the first-instance court must embark on a retrial in line with the Constitutional Court ruling, Türmen declared the local-jurisdiction court’s rejection of the Constitutional Court ruling to be a heavy blow dealt to the rule of law.

“NOT THE FIRST TIME”

Calling this a “scandal on an unacceptable scale,” Türmen recalled the example of Mehmet Altan and Şahin Alpay, whose release was denied by the local-jurisdiction court despite a Constitutional Court rights violation judgment. Türmen said that the European Court of Human Rights issued a fresh ruling in response to this.

“RIGHTS VIOLATION, NOT ANNULMENT”

Criticizing commentary that the Constitutional Court had not annulled the first-instance court’s judgment, Türmen said, “This was simply not action for annulment; a rights violation ruling was forthcoming following an individual application to the Constitutional Court. And it was the first-instance court that was to implement this. Is Istanbul Serious Crime Court No 14 to decide on the bounds of the Constitutional Court’s competence? Is disgrace to this extent possible?”

“WHAT BUSINESS IS IT OF THE INTERIOR MINISTRY?”

Taking stock of other institutions’ reactions to the Constitutional Court, Türmen said, “What business is it of the Interior Ministry? Where has the like ever been seen? There is a wish to pressurize judges so the Constitutional Court does not pass rulings that anger the government. Soylu’s comment, “Go around without protection” and Bahçeli’s outburst … Strange talk is doing the rounds such as saying let’s close the Constitutional Court and create a court that conforms to the Presidential System of Government.”

(Translated by Tim DRAYTON)