The Third Judicial Reform Package

Thomas Hammarberg

Panicked by the incessant criticism of the conduct of the judiciary and the party’s pervasive influence on the courts, AKP rushed a 100 article “Third Judicial Reform Package” to the Grand assembly. The package was greeted with disbelief by independent observers, because 80% of its concerns common misdemeanors, rather than violations of habeas corpus, due process and other severe abuses by the judiciary in cases concerning dissidents.

Regarding the long trial periods and the Press Code, the new draft law essentially instructs the judges to obey the spirit of the existing laws by documenting clearly why they deny bail in a particular case.  The new draft doesn’t change the definition of the crime, which is the main concern, but reduces some penalties.  It is still up to the prosecutors and judges to decide under which article of the Turkish Penal Code a particular defendant will be tried. The new draft, if approved in the current form, would not lead to the releases of generals, journalists or dissidents, because they are all charged with high treason (coup-plotting).  Neither are there any measures to reduce the massive and whole-sale crack down on PKK’s front organizations BDP and KCK.

Europe also unhappy with the Third Judicial Reform Package

A top official from the Council of Europe has heavily criticized Turkey’s judicial system and urged the country to stage a “radical overhaul” rather than conduct limited reforms.

“Progress is certainly possible but it will require a radical overhaul of the whole system. It will demand education and training of the judges and the prosecutors as there is an issue of eradicating old habits,” Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights Thomas Hammarberg recently told daily Hürriyet in Istanbul.

The government announced plans this week to speed up the judicial process but Hammarberg said the new laws would be insufficient on their own.

“It will take a bit of time,” said the commissioner, urging instead a complete change in mentality.
“The procedures are too lengthy and some indictments are of such low quality it is difficult for the judges to understand what is meant,” said Hammerberg.

The recent ruling in the Hrant Dink murder case was also on the official’s agenda. “When it comes to the Hrant Dink and Ergenekon cases, the energy invested in detaining people has been much more obvious in the case of Ergenekon in comparison to Dink,” said Hammarberg, who participated in a public commemoration of the late Armenian-Turkish journalist on Jan. 19, the fifth anniversary of the murder. “So few have been charged and sentenced, indicating there was a broader base for this conspiracy.”
On Jan. 17, a court sentenced one conspirator to life in prison for Dink’s murder but acquitted another. The court also failed to investigate state officials’ alleged links with the murder and ruled that no organized terror networks were behind the hit, angering people from all sides of the political spectrum.
Hammarberg said Turkey might be sentenced by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg if the Dink verdict was approved by in an appeal.

“There is still an emphasis on the role of the state. Of course the situation is particularly sensitive in a case where there is involvement of officials from the state side as well as ordinary individuals,” he said.
The need for authorities to obtain permission before putting a civil servant on trial “is a reflection that there is something wrong in the justice system which needs to be addressed.”

When asked about the arrest of former Chief of General Staff Gen. İlker Başbuğ, the commissioner said long detention periods were a major problem for the Turkish judicial system.

“The implementation of detention before sentencing should be absolutely exceptional,” Hammarberg said. “We feel the issue is not only the length of detentions but whether there should be any detention at all. Detentions before a sentence is served should only be utilized when there is an extreme risk the person will disappear or would put pressure on the witnesses if they were free, for example. But that is not the situation in majority of the cases. (The Journal of Turkish Weekly)

About CHP EU Representation

The CHP was founded on 9 September 1923, about one and half month before the proclamation of the Republic of Turkey. The first President of modern Turkey’s oldest party was M. Kemal Atatürk. Today CHP is a social-democratic party, member of the Socialist International and associate member of the Socialist Group at the European Parliament. The scope of the CHP bureau in Brussels is not limited to the bilateral framework of Turkey's EU accession process. Issues such as the information society, energy policies, social development, climate change, international trade and security are among the different focus areas. The EU-Turkey relations are about integration and need multiple, plural and horizontal channels of communication. The CHP supports and promotes Turkey's EU membership process also by being more present and active in Brussels The CHP's Representative to the EU is Ms Kader Sevinç who previously worked as an MEP advisor at the European Parliament and in the private sector.
Gallery | This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s