DEM Party objects to 12th Judicial Package: Does not solve justice crisis

The DEM Party has prepared a dissenting opinion regarding the 12th Judicial Package, which is expected to be debated in the Turkish Grand National Assembly this week. In the opinion, it is argued that the proposal does not provide a solution to Turkey's justice crisis. The party stated that the root of the legal crisis lies in the incorrect establishment of the relationship between law and democracy. It was also noted that the use of law as a tool of power is one of the main causes of justice crises. The opinion emphasized that law can only gain legitimacy to the extent that it emerges from a broad participatory public opinion and will formation process.

The DEM Party claimed that the judicial reform packages and justice strategy documents prepared by the current government were drafted with the same understanding. It was stated that the 12th Judicial Package, framed with the phrase 'effective and efficient functioning of the judiciary,' does not foresee a solution to the current justice crisis. The opinion noted that the proposal envisages amendments to many fundamental laws, including the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law, the Code of Civil Procedure, the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the Administrative Procedure Act, but these regulations are insufficient.

The opinion argued that Turkey's legal crisis cannot be resolved through technical regulations and that the crisis stems from deep-rooted, intertwined problems. It was stated that the lack of trust in the judiciary arises from structural issues, and this distrust is fueled by the judiciary's failure to adequately fulfill its function of protecting freedoms and dispensing justice. The opinion emphasized that the use of law as a tool of domination by political power lies at the root of this loss of function.

The DEM Party also criticized the government's discourse of 'uninterrupted reform.' It was stated that the judicial packages prepared so far are not regulations that grant new rights or strengthen judicial guarantees. The opinion indicated that this situation points to a fragmented legislative order that tries to repair the problems created by previous judicial packages, rewrites provisions annulled by the Constitutional Court, and leaves other legal gaps to the future.

The opinion noted that 10 of the 30 articles of the 12th Judicial Package were prepared directly following the annulment decisions of the Constitutional Court. This situation reveals the true nature of the package. Furthermore, it was stated that no impact analysis was conducted during the preparation of the proposal, and deputies were given only two days to review it. The opinion emphasized that the package was not subjected to an institutional constitutionality review before parliamentary discussions. It was stated that what is being done under these conditions is not a qualified reform but a periodic maintenance of the constitutional defects accumulated by the executive through the parliament.