16.07.2026 10:31
The Constitutional Court annulled the legal provision stipulating that the working hours and holidays of notaries would be regulated by a bylaw, finding it unconstitutional.
According to the decision published in the Official Gazette, the CHP applied to the Constitutional Court for the annulment of certain provisions of the Notary Law No. 7532 and the Law on Amendments to Some Laws, claiming they are unconstitutional.
ANNULMENT DECISION TO TAKE EFFECT AFTER 9 MONTHS
The High Court, as a result of its review, annulled the provision added to Article 52 of the Notary Law regarding the regulation of notaries' work during holidays and hours by bylaw. The annulment decision was set to take effect after 9 months.
CONSTITUTIONAL COURT: ARRANGEMENTS MUST BE MADE BY LAW
In the Constitutional Court's decision, it was noted that Article 50 of the Constitution grants employees the right to rest, and within this scope, regulations concerning weekly holidays and leave rights must be made by law.
The decision emphasized that notary practice is a liberal profession but also a public duty, and regulating their work on leave days through a bylaw would impose restrictions on the right to rest.
The decision stated that limitations on fundamental rights and freedoms cannot be unconstitutional, and the basic principles, general framework regarding notaries working on leave days were not included in the relevant regulation.
PROVISION ON NOTIFICATION TO THE DEFENDANT'S LAWYER BEING SUFFICIENT ALSO ANNULLED
Additionally, the Constitutional Court annulled the provision added to Article 226 of the Criminal Procedure Code No. 5271, which stated, "If notification to the defendant's last known address in the file is not possible or the defendant does not appear despite notification, notifications made to the defense lawyer shall be deemed sufficient."
The decision emphasized that the right to defense must be personally provided to the individual to ensure a fair trial in criminal proceedings. It was pointed out that granting the defendant the right to personally defend themselves is a requirement of fairness.