Home > Current Affairs News > New 'National judiciary' statement from Chief Advisor to the President Uçum

New 'National judiciary' statement from Chief Advisor to the President Uçum

Chief Advisor to the President Mehmet Uçum had responded on social media to those who said, "There cannot be National Law and National Judiciary." In his statement, Uçum criticized those who argued that there could be no national judiciary and law, saying, "Do not call yourselves legal professionals." Uçum made a new post on the subject and posed two questions.

12punto

Uçum made a new statement regarding the criticisms that "There cannot be National Law and National Judiciary." Emphasizing his message by saying 'National judiciary once again,' Uçum said in his post, "It is an irrational event for those who have discomfort with judicial practices, especially legal professionals, to express their criticisms regarding the implementation by opposing the concepts of national judiciary and national law."

Chief Advisor to the President Mehmet Uçum made another post on the subject and said, "It is an irrational event for those who have discomfort with judicial practices, especially legal professionals, to express their criticisms regarding the implementation by opposing the concepts of national judiciary and national law."

Uçum used the following expressions in his post:

It is an irrational event for those who have discomfort with judicial practices, especially legal professionals, to express their criticisms regarding the implementation by opposing the concepts of national judiciary and national law.

Opposing the set of concepts accepted in both national and international legal doctrine, as included in the quoted message, must be nothing more than a serious ideological blindness or a conscious distortion.

Ultimately, the state of intellectual alienation of those who are terrified and object with extreme reaction as if they have heard the concepts of national judiciary, international judiciary, national law, and international law—which are the expressions of the order of rules and institutions—for the first time is a textbook case.

If you were to tell any citizen of a sovereign state, let alone a legal professional, that your judiciary is not a national judiciary, they would look at you as if you were insane.

Any of our citizens who are not legal professionals also accept as an ordinary fact that the judiciary is divided into national judiciary and international judiciary.

"ANSWER TWO QUESTIONS"

First, accept that these universally accepted distinctions and concepts are a reality, and then put forward how you want the national judiciary and national law to be.

If you insist on saying that there cannot be a national judiciary or national law, then answer two questions.

First, is the judiciary and law of the Western states you admire so much not national?

Second, if you do not want Turkey's judiciary and law to be national, what do you want them to be? Do you want a judiciary and law that serves the interests of global colonialists and imperialism?

If there are those who approach the subject with good intentions; one should not oppose this set of concepts due to criticisms directed at the implementation and mix everything up.

Let us first reach a consensus on this conceptual order that everyone accepts, and then we can evaluate the implementation problems more healthily."

Other News