New debate following 'absolute nullity' ruling: Feti Yıldız speaks out on jurisdictional confusion

Discussions continue following the 'absolute nullity' ruling regarding the CHP's 38th Ordinary Congress. As new legal assessments are made regarding the party administration, the evacuation of the Headquarters, and the notification process following the decision, the scope of duties and authority of election boards and civil courts has once again become a subject of debate.

While discussions regarding which judicial authority has jurisdiction over decisions concerning political party congresses have drawn attention during this process, a statement on the matter also came from the MHP front.

FETİ YILDIZ EMPHASIZES THE LAW ON POLITICAL PARTIES

MHP Deputy Chairman Feti Yıldız pointed to Article 121 of the Law on Political Parties in a post on his social media account.

In his statement, Yıldız noted that the jurisdictional disputes arising in disputes concerning political parties stem from the current legal regulation.

"WE CANNOT END THE JURISDICTIONAL CONFUSION"

Reminding of the regulation in Article 121/1 of the Law on Political Parties, Yıldız used the following expressions:

"As long as the provision stating that 'the provisions of the Turkish Civil Code, the Law on Associations, and other laws applied to associations that are not contrary to this law shall also apply to political parties' is not repealed, we cannot end the jurisdictional confusion that arises between election boards (election judiciary) and civil courts."

DEBATES REIGNITED BY CONGRESS RULING

In the process that began after the 'absolute nullity' ruling regarding the CHP's 38th Ordinary Congress, debates regarding election law have been brought back to the agenda.

Assessments regarding which judicial authority oversees congress decisions, and whether election boards or civil courts are authorized, have been at the center of political and legal debates.