Click to read the article in Turkish / Kurdish
The Constitutional Court has published its justified verdict in the case concerning Enis Berberoğlu, who was stripped of MP status after being convicted in a "terrorism-related" case.
Although a top court judgment in October found rights violations in the case, he has not been reinstated as a heavy penal court refused to implement the decision.
On January 21, the court ruled for the second time that Berberoğlu's right to be elected, among other rights, was violated.
"Failure to comply with the Constitutional Court decisions means a grave violation of the constitutional order," reads the justified decision.
"Enforcing the decisions is also the duty of the TBMM [parliament] and HSK [Council of Judges and Prosecutors].
"The constitution does not authorize public authorities and courts to defy or discuss the bindingness of Constitutional Court decisions.
"These arbitrary decisions, which mean withstanding the legal order stipulated by the Constitution, cannot be allowed in any legal system."
The Constitutional Court will convey the decision to the İstanbul 14th Heavy Penal Court for the elimination of the results of right violations.
Trial of Enis BerberoğluBecause of a news report on "MİT Trucks" published on Cumhuriyet newspaper, Enis Berberoğlu was sentenced to 25 years in prison on charge of "disclosing information that has to remain confidential for the security of the state or domestic or foreign political interests for purposes of political and military espionage." Following this ruling handed down by the İstanbul 14th Heavy Penal Court, Berberoğlu was arrested on June 14, 2017. The ruling of the local court was reversed by the 2nd Penal Chamber of the İstanbul Regional Court of Justice, the court of appeals, on October 9, 2017. In its related ruling, the court of appeals noted that "the elements of the crime 'disclosing confidential information for purposes of espionage' would not arise if it was admitted that the secret had been disclosed before." However, the İstanbul 14th Court of First Instance found this ruling of reversal contrary to both due procedure and the law and returned it. Reexamining the file, the court of appeals ruled that Berberoğlu should be sentenced to 5 years, 10 months in prison, but this time not for "espionage," but for "disclosing information that has to remain confidential for the security of the state or domestic or foreign political interests." With this ruling, the court also ruled that Berberoğlu should remain behind bars. The Public Prosecutor of the İstanbul Regional Court of Justice appealed against this ruling. Requesting that Berberoğlu be penalized on charge of "espionage," the prosecutor sent this request to the Court of Cassation. The petition demanded that Enis Berberoğlu, who was still behind bars at the time, be penalized on charge of "disclosing information that has to remain confidential for the security of the state or domestic or foreign political interests for purposes of political or military espionage." After Enis Berberoğlu was reelected as an MP from the main opposition Republican People's Party (CHP) on June 24 General Elections in 2018, he applied to the Court of Cassation and requested the stay of the execution of his prison sentence. This request was rejected on July 20. However, on September 20, 2018, the Court of Cassation accepted the request of stay of execution on the grounds of Berberoğlu's legislative immunity and ruled that he should be released. The finalized ruling on Berberoğlu was read out at the General Assembly of the Parliament on June 4, 2020 and he was stripped of MP status. He was detained and arrested the next day. On the same day, he was released from prison as part of novel coronavirus (COVID-19) measures. On September 17, 2020, the General Assembly of the Constitutional Court examined the application of Enis Berberoğlu and concluded that his right to be elected and engage in political activities and right to personal liberty and security had been violated. Around a month later, on October 13, the local court defied this decision and concluded that there was no ground for retrial. |
(HA/VK)