Oct 21, 2020 | News
The ICJ condemned the dismissal of eight judges and three prosecutors by Turkey’s Council of Judges and Prosecutors (CJP) on 14 October 2020, for alleged membership of or connections with the Gülenist movement as a violation their right to a fair trial.
The ICJ calls on the CJP to revoke its order. In case any further is to be taken, the cases should be re-examined under the ordinary dismissal procedures. The ICJ also urges the Turkish Government and Parliament to modify the constitutional rules on the CJP to ensure its full independence.
“This decision not only affects the rights of the judges and prosecutors at stake, but also the Turkish population as whole, which damages the functioning of a fair and independent justice system bound by the rule of law,” said Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser with the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme.
The decision by the Council of Judges and Prosecutors (CJP) is particularly problematic because it was not accompanied by any reasoning on the individual situation of each judge and prosecutor.
International law provides that judges may be dismissed only through a fair hearing before an independent authority. The lack of individual reasoning in dismissal decisions strikes at the heart of the right to a fair hearing.
As the ICJ demonstrated in the 2018 report Justice Suspended, within the current constitutional framework, the Council of Judges and Prosecutors (CJP) is itself not provided with the guarantees necessary to ensure its institutional independence.
Despite the state of emergency having been lifted since July 2018, extraordinary powers given to the Council of Judges and Prosecutors to dismiss judges and prosecutors during the State of Emergency still apply, having been extended for three years by Law no. 7145.
“It is unacceptable in a State governed by the rule of law that judges and prosecutors – whatever charges may be against them – be dismissed without a fair procedure, in disregard of international law,” added Massimo Frigo.
Background
On 14 October the Council of Judges and Prosecutors made use of special powers to dismiss judges and prosecutors without complying with the ordinary procedure, invoking extraordinary powers enacted by Law No 7145 of 31.07.2018. The decision was issued in the Official Gazette on 30 October 2020. This legislation inserted into ordinary law several powers that had previously applied under the state of emergency legislation. More than 30 judges have so far been dismissed under this procedure since the end of the state of emergency.
One of the amendments made by Law No 7145 of 31.07.2018 was to the Decree Law No 375 dated 1989. A Temporary Article (Article 35) was added to the Decree. On the basis of this article, the General Assembly of the Constitutional Court, the Presidency Councils of Court of Appeal, the Council of State, the General Assembly of the Council of Judges and Prosecutors, a Commission set up by the Ministry of National Security, and the Presidency of the Court of Audit, were each authorized to take dismissal decisions for public officials/judges and prosecutors under their mandate for three years from the date of the endorsement of the law No 7145
The decision to dismiss the nine judges and two prosecutors was made on 14 October 2020 and published in the Official Gazette on 20 October 2020. After recalling Law no 7145 that enables the dismissal of judges and prosecutors by the Board, the decision states that all defendants have asked to submit their written defences. The decision also indicates that this is not a criminal conviction. The decision is based on complaints received and refers to investigations on their social environment, criminal investigations and prosecutors conducted by judicial authorities in general on the Gülenist organisation/FETÖ, minutes of hearings, contents of the communication app Bylock, statements by witnesses and suspects. However, the decision does not include any reasoning relating to the individual situation of each judge or prosecutor.
International law and standards provide that disciplinary proceedings should be conducted by an independent authority or a court with all the guarantees of a fair trial and provide the judge with the right to challenge the decision and sanction. Disciplinary sanctions should be proportionate.
The UN Basic Principles on the independence of the judiciary set out international standards for discipline, suspension and removal of judges, including in order to ensure impartiality and independence of courts and tribunals as required by international law, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights. The Basic Principles state that a “charge or complaint made against a judge in his/her judicial and professional capacity shall be processed expeditiously and fairly under an appropriate procedure. The judge shall have the right to a fair hearing. The examination of the matter at its initial stage shall be kept confidential, unless otherwise requested by the judge.”
The Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE) adds that “a Head of State, Minister of Justice or any other representative of political authorities cannot take part in the disciplinary body.”
Contact
Massimo Frigo, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser for the Europe and Central Asia Programme, t: +41 22 979 3805, e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org
Sep 29, 2020 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ and IHOP today put the spotlight the lack of independence of the judiciary and the abuse of criminal and anti-terrorism laws in Turkey, speaking at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.
The statement, made during the consideration of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of Turkey, reads as follows:
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and the Human Rights Joint Platform (IHOP) welcome the acceptance by Turkey of recommendations to ensure the independence of the judiciary (recommendations 45.112, 45.113, 45.114, 45.115, 45.118, 45.120, 45.121, 45.124, 45.125, 45.126, 45.127, 45.128, 45.129, 45.132, 45.133).
The ICJ and IHOP however regret to report that, based on their research and experience, the statements by the Turkish Government that the recommendations on the independence of the judiciary have already been implemented is simply not correct.
On the contrary, during the state of emergency more than 4000 judges and prosecutors were dismissed, more than 2000 judges and prosecutors were detained, through arbitrary processes that did not meet international standards.
The judiciary in Turkey does not enjoy basic guarantees of institutional independence because its Council of Judges and Prosecutors is fully appointed by the Legislative and Executive powers contrary to international standards on judicial independence.
The ICJ and IHOP further regret that Turkey only noted and did not explicitly support the recommendations to reform its penal and counter-terrorism legislation in line with international standards on freedom of expression (recommendations 45.90, 45.91, 45.92, 45.93, 45.94, 45.95, 45.96, 45.97, 45.98, 45.99, 45.100, 45.101, 45.102, 45.103, 45.104, 45.148, 45.158).
The statement by the Government that “legal amendments have already been adopted” and that these laws are in line with international standards is also fundamentally incorrect.
Anti-terrorism laws and other criminal offences continue to be abused to unjustifiably prosecute political opposition members, judges, lawyers, prosecutors and human rights defenders.
To actually implement the recommendations accepted by Turkey, ICJ calls on Turkish authorities to
- radically reform the governance of the judiciary to restore its independence in line with international standards;
- promptly finalize all criminal and administrative cases concerning former judges and prosecutors, respecting international standards of judicial independence;
- truly reform the country’s anti-terrorism law, and
- stop all arbitrary prosecution of human rights defenders, lawyers, judges, prosecutors and academics.
Contact:
Massimo Frigo, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser, e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org, t: +41797499949
Sep 23, 2020 | News
The ICJ called today on the Public Prosecutor Office of Istanbul to drop criminal charges and investigations against the President and Board Members of the Istanbul Bar Association for having publicly displayed a photograph of lawyer Ebru Timtik, who died following a hunger strike while in detention.
“These charges have been brought as a direct result of the lawyers’ exercise of their freedom of expression,” said Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser with the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme. “ They should be dropped immediately.”
On 21 September, the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office of Istanbul notified to the 11 members of the board of the Istanbul Bar Association, including its President Mehmet Durakoğlu, that they were under criminal investigation.
The charges are not yet known but it is confirmed that the investigation concerns their hanging of a large picture of lawyer Ebru Timtik out of the window of the Istanbul Bar Association’s headquarters.
Lawyer Ebru Timtik died last 27 August on the 238th day of her hunger strike, while in detention on remand. She was a lawyer in the Progressive Lawyers Association and was under trialto answer to the unfounded accusation of being a member of a terrorist organisation. She undertook the hunger strike to protest against these accusations, which are often used in Turkey to silence political opposition and human rights defenders.
Following the bar association’s display of Ebru Timtik’s photograph, Minister of Interior Süleyman Soylu targeted the İstanbul Bar, saying, “I strongly condemn the ones who hung the photograph of a terrorist organization member on the İstanbul Bar Association.” Minister of Justice Abdulhamit Gül also said, “It is unacceptable that the bar association has become a backyard for illegal and marginal structures.” President Erdoğan also stated in the opening speech of the new legal year that “In the next period, we will do what is necessary to cut the bloody road extending from being attorneys to terrorists.”
“It is particularly worrying that these investigations were triggered after statements by the Minister of the Interior and the President, besmirching the legitimate work of lawyers and bar associations as linked to ‘terrorism,” added Massimo Frigo.
International standards
The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers state:
18. Lawyers shall not be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes as a result of discharging their functions.
23. Lawyers like other citizens are entitled to freedom of expression, belief, association and assembly. In particular, they shall have the right to take part in public discussion of matters concerning the law, the administration of justice and the promotion and protection of human rights and to join or form local, national or international organizations and attend their meetings, without suffering professional restrictions by reason of their lawful action or their membership in a lawful organization. In exercising these rights, lawyers shall always conduct themselves in accordance with the law and the recognized standards and ethics of the legal profession.
24. Lawyers shall be entitled to form and join self-governing professional associations to represent their interests, promote their continuing education and training and protect their professional integrity. The executive body of the professional associations shall be elected by its members and shall exercise its functions without external interference.
Contact
Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser, e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org, t: +41797499949; twitter: @maxfrigo
Sep 21, 2020 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
At the interactive dialogue with the Working Group on Enforced and Involunatary Disapparances during the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, the ICJ has called on Tajikistan and Turkey to comply with the recommendations by the Working Group and to end practices of abduction and forced return.
The Chair of the Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disapperances in his replies to the questions pressed Turkey to implement the recommendations of the Working Group’s report.
The oral statement read as follows:
Mr Vice-President
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) welcomes the report by the Working Group on the follow up of its recommendations on its visit to Turkey (A/HRC/45/13/Add.4) and shares its concerns at the lack of implementation by the Turkish authorities and at the State-sponsored practice of “abductions and forced returns” (para 8). The ICJ agrees with the Working Group that a critical factor that fosters impunity in Turkey is “the lack of judicial independence and impartiality” (para 17).
The ICJ also welcomes the Working Group’s report on Tajikistan (A/HRC/45/13/Add.1). The ICJ shares its concern at the forcible return of Tajikistan nationals to the country, involving enforced disappearances (para 53), the harassment of lawyers (para 9) including the lengthy imprisonment of Buzurgmehr Yorov and Nuriddin Makhkamov, the obstruction of lawyers’ access to detainees, and inadequate judicial review of detention (para 47).
The ICJ urges both countries to fully implement the recommendations of the Working Group and particularly:
- on Tajikistan, to end forced return of their nationals, and to ensure prompt and confidential access to lawyers for detainees and prompt and independent judicial review of detention.
- on Turkey, to stop all practices of abduction and forced return from other countries and to restore the independence of its judiciary.
Sep 14, 2020 | News
The ICJ expressed today its deep concern at the arrest order of some 60 lawyers in Turkey on grounds allegedly linked to the representation of their clients, in breach of Turkey’s international law obligations.
The ICJ understands that around 47 lawyers have been arrested on 11 September in Turkey while 13 others are being searched by police for allegedly acting on behalf of clients accused of participation in the Gülenist movement, called by Turkish authorities the “Fetullahist Terrorist Organisation” (FETO). It has been reported that lawyers were interrogated about their professional activities.
“Lawyers should never be arrested or sanctioned for representing their clients, or identified with their clients causes,” said Roisin Pillay, Director of the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme,
“This is a basic principle of the independence of the legal profession and international law and its respect is essential to ensure that everyone has the right to a fair trial.”
The ICJ will follow the case closely to ensure that international law and standards are respected concerning any action against the lawyers arrested.
“If the sole charges against the lawyers arrested are related to their work as lawyers representing their clients, they should be immediately released,” added Roisin Pillay.
The ICJ stressed that they should not be subject to arrest for the legitimate exercise of any human rights and fundamental freedoms. In the event that any of them are subject to charges for cognizable crime consistent with Turkish and international law, they must be brought immediately before a court to consider whether any continued detention is lawful. If charged, they must be in ensured all rights of fair trial by independent and impartial courts.
The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers say that “lawyers shall not be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes as a result of discharging their functions” (article 18).
Contact:
Roisin Pillay, e: roisin.pillay(a)icj.org
Massimo Frigo, e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org – t: +41797499949
