Can Atalay's parliamentary membership revoked: It has nothing to do with law or the Constitution

Melik ÇELİK - 12punto.com.tr

Following the decisions made by the Constitutional Court (AYM) and the Court of Cassation regarding TİP MP Can Atalay, all eyes had turned to Parliament. Under the chairmanship of Bekir Bozdağ, who took over the duty from TBMM Speaker Numan Kurtulmuş, the parliamentary membership of TİP Hatay MP Can Atalay was revoked. While opposition benches rose in protest against the decision, the ruling side argued that the decision was in accordance with the law. Legal experts who evaluated the decision for 12punto emphasized that what transpired is a violation of the constitution.

Istanbul Bar Association Board Member Attorney Ali Kemal Yıldız reminded that the Constitutional Court had previously issued two rulings of rights violations regarding Can Atalay, and stated that the decision is regrettable in the name of law.

"REGRETTABLE IN THE NAME OF LAW"

"It is a very negative development for Turkey. Because the Constitutional Court issued a violation ruling twice. In a situation where the Constitutional Court has issued so many violation rulings and stated that it is contrary to the law, I see the reading of this decision in parliament as regrettable and a disappointment in the name of law.

"THE JUDICIAL DECISION IS CLOSED"

In my opinion, it seems to be closed."

"NO ONE HAS LEGAL SECURITY ANYMORE"

No one has legal security anymore. A court decision, a decision that all judicial and administrative bodies must comply with, has not been implemented. We issue a release order for a detained person. What is the result of this? Their release. But they will not be released because they will say 'we do not recognize the court decision' or they will say 'apply to the Constitutional Court, to the European Court of Human Rights' regarding the detention. There is a violation, release them. They will say 'we do not recognize this decision. Therefore, we are not releasing them.' This is the result of this. And the meaning is this; it is very regrettable for our country."

"WE WROTE A LETTER TO THE SPEAKER OF PARLIAMENT"

Former Istanbul Bar Association President Attorney Turgut Kazan emphasized that what happened has nothing to do with law or the constitution. Stating that they wrote a letter to the Speaker of Parliament 10-15 days before the decision, telling him 'do not read this decision,' Kazan said the following:

"What has been done has nothing to do with the law. The action taken has nothing to do with the constitution either. That is why this has been debated so much. We have repeated this many times in Turkey to date. In fact, I think I wrote a letter to the Speaker of Parliament 10 or 15 days ago, saying 'such a thing can never be read, do not ever do such a thing.' We can only state how one should act according to the constitution. We have said these things. Parliament has become part of an operation by following the 13th High Criminal Court and the 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation. The operation is an operation coming from above, from the one-man regime. Therefore, parliament has effectively said 'I do not recognize the Constitutional Court's decision and rulings and the constitution.' This is clearly a violation of the constitution and a great shame. It is truly an unbelievable step for deputies who have sworn to act in accordance with the constitution to implement such a decision in plain sight, and it is a state of operation that will be written in black letters in the history of the TBMM. It has nothing to do with the law. It has nothing to do with the constitution.

You already delayed it because an individual application was made to the Constitutional Court. I mean, you already had the finalized decision in your hand. Why are you waiting? Are you waiting to see if the AYM will issue a violation ruling? It issued a violation ruling. Of course, in a one-man regime, because 'the top' saw such a gap regarding the Gezi events as an unbelievable disaster, he said 'No,' otherwise the parliamentary membership of Ömer Faruk Gergerlioğlu and Enis Berberoğlu, which had been revoked, was restored because a violation ruling was issued by the Constitutional Court in the same way. Why are you revoking it now while seeing this? They say, 'it cannot be reversed after this anyway.' Who cannot reverse it? The primary courts cannot reverse it. Then we will revoke it, it was revoking it, now it cannot revoke it. Therefore, it is a show of force against the law and the constitution. What can I say? It is a major violation and a great shame for parliament.

They are deceiving the public during these news reports. This will also go to the Constitutional Court. 'Parliament will solve it when it comes!' No, parliament cannot solve it, how will parliament solve it? The AYM has solved it. The way to solve it is to send it back to the Istanbul 13th High Criminal Court. The 13th High Criminal Court and the 3rd Criminal Chamber will pass the ball to each other and they won't give this opportunity anyway! Therefore, Turkey is in a de facto situation where its judiciary and parliament are passing the ball to each other. It has nothing to do with the law or the Constitution. The public needs to show a great reaction to this. Democracy can only be protected that way. The rule of law can only be protected that way. These are what I have to say as a lawyer.

There is no side to it that aligns with the law. They have clearly trampled on the constitution. This is a constitutional violation and they have done it in plain sight. Turkey has experienced two examples of this. One is Gergerlioğlu, one is Berberoğlu. One feels ashamed at least when seeing this. This happened and these parliamentary memberships returned. But since the Istanbul 3rd High Criminal Court will continue the operation because the one-man regime does not want it otherwise, the 3rd Criminal Chamber will also put its stamp on that operation and unfortunately, this parliamentary membership will no longer be a parliamentary membership."