Justice Minister Tunç speaks on the tension between the Court of Cassation and the Constitutional Court

Tunç attended the deliberations on the 2024 Central Government Budget and the 2022 Final Account Law Proposal at the TBMM Planning and Budget Committee and answered questions from deputies.

Tunç stated, "The Republic of Turkey has never been an occupier to this day, and it will not be from now on. We have only one goal: to protect our borders and the safety of life and property of our citizens. Turkey has no designs on any country's territory. It only struggles against terrorist organizations in those countries," he said.

Minister Tunç responded as follows to criticisms that Turkey is lagging behind in global rankings regarding the rule of law:

“It is impossible to accept this. In the countries shown ahead of Turkey, let alone the rule of law, there is no democracy. Let us criticize and point out the shortcomings, but it is not correct to say that Turkey is behind Zambia. Could Turkey be behind Angola? It is impossible. We have 24 thousand judges and prosecutors.

Of course, there are those among them who do not perform their duties correctly. But it is not right to cast suspicion on the entire judiciary based on these mistakes. For this reason, let us not trust these indices.”

Providing information regarding FETÖ cases, Minister Tunç said, "Judicial proceedings were initiated against 696 thousand 526 people. It was decided that there was no ground for prosecution for 350 thousand of them. 123 thousand people were convicted.

There were 99 thousand acquittals, 27 thousand 748 deferments of the announcement of the verdict (HAGB), and 5 thousand 521 other decisions. While there were 4 thousand 891 convictions in actual coup cases, 2 thousand 870 acquittals and 964 decisions of no grounds for sentencing were given,” he said.

HE SPOKE ABOUT THE TENSION BETWEEN THE COURT OF CASSATION AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT

Regarding the tension between the Court of Cassation and the Constitutional Court following the Can Atalay decision, Tunç said, “When journalists asked me, I said the Court of Cassation gave this decision, the Constitutional Court gave that decision. I did not say who is right and who is wrong. Are crimes committed against the constitutional order before the election within the scope of immunity or not?

It says that crimes requiring heavy penalties are not within the scope of immunity. The Court of Cassation says, what are the crimes in Article 14 of the Constitution? When you open the article, it says, ‘None of the rights and freedoms in the Constitution can be used in the form of activities aimed at destroying the indivisible integrity of the state with its country and nation and abolishing the democratic and secular Republic based on human rights.

None of the provisions of the Constitution can be interpreted in a way that would allow the state or individuals to engage in activities aimed at destroying the fundamental rights and freedoms recognized by the Constitution or restricting them more broadly than specified in the Constitution.

The sanctions to be applied to those who engage in activities contrary to these provisions are regulated by law’. The Court of Cassation also says ‘these are clear’. It says there is no problem in terms of certainty. The Constitutional Court says this: Article 14 of the Constitution is not specific. It says, ‘The crimes need to be listed one by one there’.

I said this. I said there is a difference of opinion between the Constitutional Court and the Court of Cassation regarding Article 83 of the Constitution. The duties of the Constitutional Court and the Court of Cassation are clear; both are high courts,” he said.

Tunç noted the following:

“Article 154 of the Constitution says; the decision that binds the decision given by the trial is in the Court of Cassation. (Article 154 of the Constitution: The Court of Cassation is the final review authority for decisions and judgments given by judicial courts and not left by law to another judicial authority. It also handles certain cases shown by law as the first and last instance court) The Constitutional Court says that retrial and reopening of the case are different things.

While a discretion is given to the Court of Cassation and the first instance court in terms of the European Court of Human Rights for Judicial Courts, it says that no discretion is given to the Constitutional Court.

It is not just today's issue; it is certain that problems will arise from now on as well. We will solve it today. We will reach a consensus on the legal amendment; there is nothing that the TBMM cannot solve. The TBMM is the place we will always turn to.”