Mehmet Altan: State of Emergency Commission's Decision is a Constitutional Scandal

Click to read the article in Turkish

"The articles 153 and 90 of the Constitution are de facto violated by the seven people in the Inquiry Commission on the State of Emergency. The seven-people administrative delegation ignoring the verdict of the Constitutional Court is a constitutional scandal anywhere in the world."

Discharged academic and writer Mehmet Altan said these words to bianet, commenting on the decision of the Commission, which refused his appeal to return to his post at the İstanbul University.

Reasons for the refusal were "Altan's ongoing trial" and "the administrative report regarding Altan," Gökçer Tahincioğlu from the T24 reported.

The Inquiry Commission on the State of Emergency did not consider the verdicts by the Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), which stated that the arrest of Altan and the evidence regarding him were against freedoms of press and expression, mean violation of rights and that he cannot be taken into custody.

Altan, through his attorney Figen Çalıkuşu, filed a complaint against the Commission's chair and members Salih Tanrıkulu, Mehmet Karagöz, Hakim Esat Işık, Murat Aytaç, Mustafa İkbal, Osman Çal and Mahmut Çuhadar.

"Constitutional Court said I cannot even be detained"

Speaking on the Commission's decision to bianet, Altan said the following:

"The 26th Heavy Penal Court, the court I am being tried at, ended the hearings before announcing its verdict and had a break. In the meantime, the Constitutional Court evaluated the file and said "With this file, you cannot even take this person into custody."

"I am not arrested at the moment because the Constitutional Court said I cannot even be detained.

"At the same time, because they detained and arrested me, it ruled that my basic rights and freedoms, my freedoms of thought, expression and press are violated and an innocent person is charged.

"I am the only person whose unjust suffering is confirmed"

"The ECtHR, by upholding the Constitutional Court's verdict, recorded that all the state institutions should abide by this decision and the allegations against me are my freedoms of thought and expression.

"In other words, the highest courts of Turkey and Europe said that I was treated unjustly and subjected to violation of rights.

"Among the people treated unjustly in Turkey, I am the only one whose unjust suffering is confirmed by the highest courts of Turkey and Europe.

"A commission, all the decisions of which are very controversial, at the end, made a decision which proves that they do not take the Constitution into consideration. This totally destroys their legitimacy.

"The terrifying thing is that: Let's say, the Supreme Court of Appeals sentenced me over the case it is reviewing now. The same case will go to the Constitutional Court, then to the ECtHR. However, both the Constitutional Court and the ECtHR have already given their verdicts on the same case.

"Normally, the State of Emergency Commission should rule for my returning to the university and the 26th Heavy Penal Court should rule for my acquittal. But both insisted on unlawfulness by ignoring the Constitution.

"The Constitution determines the legitimacy of this state. The Constitutional Court checks the execution of the Constitution. The article 153 states that the verdicts of the Constitutional Court are binding for everyone. For this reason, this verdict is legally unacceptable."

(TP/VK)