Türkdoğan: There is a need for a Constitutional Court to oppose national security policies  

2021-06-23 11:00:37


	 

	ANKARA - İHD Co-chair Öztürk Türkdoğan who stated that Turkey can only get over the 'decay' with a democracy alliance or gangs will get stronger otherwise and said: ""There is a need for a Constitutional Court to oppose the national security policies decided in the National Security Council."

	 

	State-affiliated gang leader Sedat Peker's disclosures over the videos and his social media accounts he has been posting for about 2 months continue to be discussed. Mehmet Ağar, who served as the Ministry of Interior and the General Directorate of Security in the 1990s, when the unsolved murders were sky-rocketing, the former Deputy Head of Security Department of the National Intelligence Organization (MIT), Korkut Eken, who was convicted in the Susurluk accident case, which revealed the state-mafia-politics relations, AKP's SADAT, headed by Adnan Tanrıverdi, the former military adviser of President Tayyip Erdoğan, Minister of Interior Süleyman Soylu, unsolved murders, and disclosures about heroin and arms trade were widely discussed. However, nothing has been done about these disclosures by the judiciary so far.

	 

	On the contrary, similar incidents and violations of rights continue to occur. Onur Gencer, who most recently attacked the Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP) İzmir Provincial Organization, murdered party employee Deniz Poyraz. Immediately afterwards, the Constitutional Court (AYM) accepted the indictment prepared by the Chief Prosecutor of the Supreme Court Bekir Şahin, demanding the HDP's closure. Speaking in the Parliament yesterday, MHP Chair Devlet Bahçeli defended the massacre by making accusations against Deniz Poyraz who was murdered.

	 

	Öztürk Türkdoğan, Co-Chair of the Human Rights Association (İHD), said, "We will also criticize the Constitutional Court; when it comes to the national security issues of the state, the Constitutional Court has never given a fundamental violation decision. However, the Constitutional Court has emerged with a very serious allegation. Individual applications. It had made some very important decisions too. It produces jurisprudence compatible with the ECHR, but when we talk about the national security policies of the state, that is, when the Kurdish issue is involved, we do not see the same reflexes here.

	 

	It's attitude regarding HDP's indictment of closure…  ECtHR has a decision for the Democratic Society Party (DTP) in 2016. In that decision, there is already an evaluation about the current HDP. The Constitutional Court could have directly justified the ECtHR's decision, directly rejected the second indictment and closed the case. The reason it didn't is the national security policies of the state.

	 

	There is a need for a Constitutional Court to oppose the national security policies decided by the National Security Council. But when you look at the appointments made to the Constitutional Court at the moment; In any case, the terms of the formerly incumbent judges will expire soon, and when new appointments are made, I'm afraid things won't get much better. There are such fundamental problems with the judiciary. The system of specially authorized courts has been extended to the whole of Turkey. The government says these are specialized courts. Come on. Those who you appointed 2 years ago, who do not know what criminal proceedings are, are now prosecuting people in criminal courts within the scope of the Anti-Terror Law. What kind of a special court is this?

	 

	We could give thousands of examples. There is no one left who was not prosecuted in the  Kurdish provinces. All of the investigations prepared by FETÖ members between 2009 and 2015 turned into lawsuits. AKP needs to respond to this. If this organization started to take action against the state, how can you turn the poisonous files prepared by them into a lawsuit? This needs to be talked about. The Democratic Society Congress files, the KCK files…. it never ends. Constitutional Court just lays back and watches. Why? Because the Kurds are the ones on trial. The issue of discrimination against Kurds is a situation that the Turkish judiciary has to face. The judiciary should be self-critical about discrimination against Kurds, socialists and Alevis and should really stand out. Why don't you make the decision you made in the Sledgehammer case in the files for the KCK? You have to do it. If you want the problems to be solved through civil politics, you have to do it."