Is the Supreme Election Council (YSK) a scarecrow?

This has also happened… In the last two weeks, we have seen both that the Constitutional Court's decision was not implemented by a lower court and that the Supreme Election Council (YSK), whose "decisions are indisputable," has been ignored…

So, have you heard of the institution that "disregards" the YSK, which is all-powerful according to Article 79 of the Constitution?

If you haven't, let me tell you:

The Court of Cassation…

The Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor at the Court of Cassation issued such an opinion yesterday that it essentially crumpled up the Supreme Election Council, a constitutional institution, and threw it in the trash…

***

You know the incident:

The Constitutional Court ruled that there was a 'violation of rights' regarding Workers' Party of Turkey (TİP) MP Can Atalay.

In this situation, the Istanbul 13th High Criminal Court, which should have released Atalay, passed the buck and sent the file to the 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation.

The Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor at the Court of Cassation also submitted its opinion to the Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation yesterday.

It requested that Atalay's detention continue.

The reason given for this was that 'the investigation and prosecution began before he was elected as a member of parliament.'

For this reason, it claimed that Atalay could not benefit from legislative immunity.

***

Even what I learned in the 12 law courses I took over four years at the School of Press and Broadcasting tells me that this opinion is contrary to the law!

As an ordinary citizen, I have two objections to this opinion:

One: According to Article 79 of our Constitution, the decisions of the YSK are final. That is, they cannot be debated, challenged, or requested to be overturned. Wasn't even a ridiculous decision like the YSK's "counting of unstamped ballots" implemented for this very reason?

If that decision hadn't been made, perhaps the fate of our political life would have changed. So, how is it that now the Court of Cassation is ignoring the decision of the YSK, whose members mostly consist of judges who came from its own ranks?

It claims that Can Atalay, whom the YSK "found no objection to running in the elections and nominated as a candidate," cannot "be cloaked in the armor of immunity," meaning he cannot be considered an elected official?

This is, to put it mildly, an insult to the YSK.

This is treating a constitutional institution like a "scarecrow."

It is ignoring decisions that are said to be indisputable.

In other words, it is overstepping its bounds.

It is a legal institution like the Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor at the Court of Cassation murdering another legal institution.

***

Two: Even an average citizen who has never stepped foot inside a law school knows that a person is considered innocent until found guilty by a court.

This is called the "presumption of innocence."

While this fundamental rule of law is so clearly in place, the Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor at the Court of Cassation, as if committing a legal murder, says, "Atalay's detention must continue. Because the investigation and prosecution began before he was elected as a member of parliament!"

Wait a minute…

The presumption of innocence is clear!

The punishment process can only begin after the accusation against the defendant is finalized…

However, the Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor at the Court of Cassation, at the very top of our judicial system, is pulling this back to the day the investigation began…

***

No one should take offense, but after all these scandalous developments, I feel like shouting these words:

I want to trust the law, but the legal professionals are preventing it!