Expert examination for Canal İstanbul: Plaintiffs request recusal

Click to read the article in Turkish

Before the expert examination of the Canal İstanbul project was held today (March 24), strict security measures were taken. The plaintiffs requested that their objections be taken down in the minutes. They decided to not attend the examination and requested recusal.

As part of the lawsuit filed at the İstanbul 10th Administrative Court against the "Positive Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIA)" given for the Canal İstanbul project, it was ruled in February 2022 that an expert examination should be conducted in the area today.

While the EIA report was prepared by the Ministry of Environment, Urbanization and Climate Change, the plaintiffs have been requesting the stay of execution and cancellation of the positive EIA report.

Before the expert examination began, environmental activists and rights defenders gathered at the Regional Administrative Court in Mahmutbey. While citizens were waiting, chanting the slogans of "We will not let you build the canal", they also protested the tight security measures.

Request for recusal

Before the examination of the Canal İstanbul project, which foresees an artificial sea-level waterway that would connect the Black Sea to the Sea of Marmara, the plaintiffs wanted their objections to be taken down in the minutes. After the court said that the statements would be written down after the examination, the court board recessed the meeting amid dispute.

Seeing that the attitude of the court board did not change after the recess, the plaintiffs stated that "they would not be a party to the unlawfulness" and announced that they would not take part in the expert examination. The plaintiffs also requested recusal. Afterwards, the lawyers of the complainant institutions and citizens submitted their written petitions of recusal to the front office of the Administrative Court.

'Not an examination, but a touristic trip'

Making a statement after submitting the petitions, Mehmet Horuş, a lawyer from the Union of Chambers of Turkish Engineers and Architects (TMMOB), indicated that the court committed a crime and said, "We will not be a party to this crime". Noting that none of the plaintiffs participated in the expert examination, lawyer Mehmet Horuş briefly said the following:

"İstanbulites submitted petitions for days, they presented their objections. A decision was given with İstanbulites' will disregarded.

"The court is doing the same thing now. None of the plaintiffs are here. The representatives of the İstanbul Metropolitan Municipality, TMMOB and its affiliated chambers, İstanbulites and plaintiffs are not in the examination. The court is now organizing a touristic trip with the bureaucrats of the Ministry of Environment and its technical team. This is not an examination.

"In the lawsuit that we filed against an action disregarding the public will, the court is disregarding the will of the plaintiffs. We lodged an appeal against the judiciary being instrumentalized in this crime and the legalization of the EIA. We said that we would not be a party to this crime.

"We say it again: We demand that the Canal İstanbul project be halted. Each passing day means that the right to the environment, fair trial and legal remedies of all plaintiffs and İstanbulites is violated".

Objection to police blockade

In the meanwhile, police officers surrounded the area where the press statement was taking place and urged citizens to disperse.

Citizens denounced the police blockade. Koray Türkay from the Either Canal or İstanbul Coordination platform said, "A hearing is attempted to be held in the hall amid counterrorism police presence. This is not called a court, but pressure and intimidation. But we are here".

Judicial process

People's Liberation Party (HKP) lawyers made two separate applications to the Administrative Court on January 27, 2020, demanding the stay of execution and annulment of the EIA report of the Canal İstanbul.

In the petition submitted to the İstanbul Administrative Court within this context, there was a reference to the Montreux Convention as well as the European Convention on Human Rights and the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) on environment. Accordingly, it was argued that the Canal İstanbul project was against these rulings and conventions.

Examining the application, the İstanbul 10th Administrative Court unanimously ruled on February 16, 2022 that the opinions of experts should be asked in order to clarify the technical matters and resolve the dispute.

(TP/SD)