Bahçeli's ECHR stance signals shift in Turkish judicial politics

By Ahmet Taş | Wise News Press

ANKARA, TÜRKIYE — Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) Leader Devlet Bahçeli’s recent speech has reignited debates not just on daily politics but on the fundamental interpretation of Turkey's legal system. According to an analysis by veteran journalist Taha Akyol, Bahçeli’s calls regarding the "right to hope" for PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan and the release of Selahattin Demirtaş carry historic significance as they implicitly accept the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) as the "final legal authority."

Akyol notes that this stance is not entirely new for Bahçeli, but his latest remarks place a "strong emphasis" on the necessity of implementing ECHR and Constitutional Court (AYM) rulings.

Are ECHR rulings binding?

Regarding the release of former HDP leader Selahattin Demirtaş, Bahçeli stated, "Legal paths have reached a conclusion. His release would be beneficial for Turkey." Akyol highlights this specific phrasing:

"The most important point here is that Bahçeli accepts the ECHR as a 'legal path.' According to our Constitution, he is speaking the truth. Ratifying the European Convention on Human Rights in 1954 and writing it into Article 90 of the Constitution in 2004 means accepting the ECHR as the ultimate human rights authority."

This position contrasts sharply with President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's famous 2018 statement, "The decision given by the ECHR does not bind us." Akyol argues that Bahçeli is now displaying a clearer legal stance than even the Ministry of Justice.

Will the alliance fracture?

The apparent divergence between Bahçeli and Erdoğan raises questions about the stability of the People's Alliance (Cumhur İttifakı). However, Akyol dismisses the possibility of a breakup.

"There will be no crack in the People's Alliance because such a crack means weakness for both parties and both leaders. An AK Party without MHP would lose its power in Parliament, and an MHP without AK Party would lose its influence within state institutions," Akyol assesses.

Public conscience and the "Toxic Language" warning

While Bahçeli’s reference to ECHR rulings is seen as positive, Akyol points to a contradiction regarding other political prisoners like Tayfun Kahraman. "Asking why Bahçeli does not take the same stance for Tayfun Kahraman and similar cases is the right of public conscience. Bahçeli should demand the implementation of all ECHR and AYM decisions," he writes.

Akyol also warned against the "toxic language" used in the resolution process discussions, criticizing figures like Tuncer Bakırhan for using provocative terms like "hundred years of slavery." He concluded that any solution must be realized within the unitary state through universal law and calm negotiation.

www.wisenewspress.com