Constitutional Court delivers HSK shock to CHP: Rejection decision issued

The Constitutional Court has issued its ruling on the application filed by the CHP for the annulment of the election of members of the Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSK) held in the General Assembly of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM). The High Court rejected the application by a majority vote on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction.

In its application filed on May 21, 2024, the CHP argued that the process of determining HSK members was conducted in violation of the Constitution and requested the annulment of the election.

During the initial examination at the Constitutional Court General Assembly, 11 members voted for rejection, while 4 members cast dissenting votes. The reasoning behind the rejection decision is noteworthy.

EMPHASIS ON “EXCLUSIVE AUTHORITY OF THE TBMM”

The court's decision text emphasized that the election of HSK members is exclusively within the authority of the TBMM. Although the action could be considered a "de facto amendment to the rules of procedure," the Constitutional Court stated that such decisions do not fall within its scope of review.

According to a report by Habertürk, it was stated that the application therefore "falls outside the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court in terms of subject matter." Thus, the court ruled to reject the application on procedural grounds without examining the merits.

WHAT HAPPENED?

An election was held in the TBMM General Assembly for 5 HSK memberships, and as a result of the election, Fuzuli Aydoğdu, Hakan Yüksel, Seyfi Han, Cengiz Aydemir, and Alişan Tiryaki were elected as HSK members.

Arguing that the elections held in the TBMM General Assembly were contrary to both procedure and substance, the CHP took the elections to the Constitutional Court, requesting the annulment and stay of execution of the TBMM General Assembly's action regarding the election of the 5 board members.

The People's Alliance (Cumhur İttifakı) determined candidates through majority votes instead of drawing lots among the members determined in accordance with the Constitution. The candidates were voted on in the TBMM General Assembly. Since there was no sufficient majority, lots were drawn for the two candidates who received the most votes for the HSK chambers. The candidates who received the most votes from the People's Alliance were this time selected by lot. With one exception, the candidates who received the most votes from the ruling party deputies were elected as HSK members through the draw.

The CHP took the candidate determination process to the Constitutional Court (AYM) on May 21.

CHP Chairman Özgür Özel had used the following expressions in his speech reacting to the HSK member determination process:

"This matter is a complete example of lawlessness. The Constitution clearly states that a qualified majority is required in the first round, a lower qualified majority is required in the second round, and if this cannot be achieved, lots are drawn between the two candidates who received the most votes. However, the AKP, by inventing a non-existent third round of voting, is trying to determine both candidates with its own 30 votes (including the MHP) and take them to a draw. This is an 'audacity,' even a 'condescension,' an attempt at pickpocketing against the Constitution," he said. CHP Chairman Özgür Özel stated, "This matter is a complete example of lawlessness. The Constitution clearly states that a qualified majority is required in the first round, a lower qualified majority is required in the second round, and if this cannot be achieved, lots are drawn between the two candidates who received the most votes. However, the AKP, by inventing a non-existent third round of voting, is trying to determine both candidates with its own 30 votes (including the MHP) and take them to a draw. This is an 'audacity,' even a 'condescension,' an attempt at pickpocketing against the Constitution."

News Source: 12punto