29.06.2026 20:30
MHP Deputy Chairman Feti Yıldız stated that appeals courts' decisions to finalize sentences of less than five years in prison and judicial fines violate the right to a fair trial, and called for related cases still under review at the Court of Cassation to be treated as a "preliminary issue" by appellate courts in line with Constitutional Court rulings, and for finalization procedures to be withheld until all verdicts are clarified.
MHP Deputy Chairman Feti Yıldız drew attention to a structural problem in the criminal justice system that victimizes thousands and blocks legal remedies, and proposed a solution.
“WHEN APPEALS AGAINST PRISON SENTENCES OF 5 YEARS AND BELOW ARE REJECTED ON THE MERITS, THE POSSIBILITY OF APPEAL DISAPPEARS”
Stating that the right to a fair trial is undermined due to the current Criminal Procedure Code (CMK) rules, Yıldız emphasized that the lack of synchronization between the Court of Cassation and appellate courts must be resolved.
Yıldız reminded that according to the current legislation, when appeals against prison sentences of 5 years and below imposed by local courts, as well as judicial fines regardless of their amount, are rejected on the merits, the possibility of appealing the cases disappears.
He underlined that the loss of rights caused by the finalization of judgments through this means cannot be compensated even with extraordinary steps such as the objection mechanism under CMK Article 308/A or reversal in the interest of the law.
REFERENCE TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT'S “VIOLATION” DECISION
To support the legal dimension of this flaw, Yıldız referred to the Constitutional Court's jurisprudence, citing the Court's ruling with application number 2020/39936. He recalled that in this decision, the Constitutional Court considered the finalization of other crimes at the appellate stage while the appeal review of one file in a directly linked chain of crimes continues as a “violation of the right to a fair and equitable trial” under Article 36 of the Constitution.
“DECISIONS SHOULD NOT BE FINALIZED UNTIL ALL VERDICTS ARE CLEAR”
Offering a concrete formula to prevent this chain of grievances, Feti Yıldız stated that rejection decisions on the merits at the appellate stage should not be finalized until all verdicts imposed on the defendant are fully clarified.
Yıldız, from MHP, called for ongoing cases and issues under review at the Court of Cassation to be considered a “preliminary issue” (meselai müstehire) with regard to finalization processes in appellate courts.
Yıldız's statement on social media is as follows;