Constitutional Court Head: No authority to enforce ECHR rulings

By Ahmet Taş | Wise News Press

ANKARA, TURKIYE — Constitutional Court (AYM) President Kadir Özkaya stated that the court does not possess the authority to ensure the implementation of European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) violation rulings regarding former HDP Co-Chair Selahattin Demirtaş.

Speaking at a press event in Ankara, Özkaya addressed several high-profile legal issues, including the closure case against the Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP) and the parliamentary status of Can Atalay. He emphasized that while the AYM examines cases where ECHR rulings are not followed to determine if a new violation has occurred, it cannot directly act as an enforcement body for those international decisions.

Closure Case Against HDP Nears Final Stage

Özkaya provided a detailed update on the long-running closure case against the HDP, describing it as a comprehensive and unprecedented file. The case involves 520 individuals whose actions are cited as grounds for the closure, with 451 of them facing potential political bans.

The President highlighted the technical scale of the investigation:

• The indictment consists of 840 pages supported by 60 folders and approximately 200 GB of digital material.

  
  

• Nearly 3,000 separate court cases and roughly 4,000 individual actions are being evaluated.

• Individual defense opportunities were provided to all 520 people involved, regardless of their location in Turkiye or abroad.

"Technically, we can say the file has reached the end," Özkaya remarked, adding that the court is moving toward the substantive review stage and a final evaluation could be made without much further delay.

Judicial Opinions on Can Atalay

Regarding the status of Can Atalay, whose parliamentary seat was stripped despite AYM rulings, Özkaya reiterated his personal judicial stance. He noted that he signed two previous AYM decisions asserting that as long as a person holds the status of a deputy, judicial proceedings must be halted.

However, he explained that he issued a dissenting opinion on a third technical ruling because he believed the court could not examine the merits of the case based on specific constitutional articles. Despite his dissent, the court majority proceeded to issue a decision based on previous violations.

Modernization and Artificial Intelligence Integration

In a move toward modernization, the Constitutional Court aims to integrate artificial intelligence (AI) into its workflow by September 2026. Özkaya clarified that AI will be used primarily for the initial screening, summarizing, and categorization of individual application forms to assist rapporteurs.

He stressed that AI outputs will carry no legal weight on their own and will be strictly controlled and tested by human rapporteurs for accuracy. The court also plans to revisit the mechanism of "stay of execution" orders, a practice that has been largely dormant since 2014 but remains preserved for future use if deemed necessary.

www.wisenewspress.com