Strong Reaction from Opposition to Can Atalay's Decision in the Turkish Parliament

16.08.2024 23:21

The motion submitted by the opposition for a general debate on TİP member Can Atalay in the Turkish Grand National Assembly was rejected by majority vote. Political figures reacted to the decision and the fistfight that followed. CHP leader Özgür Özel said, "I have seen many things in this chamber, but I had never seen blood before, I am deeply ashamed." İYİ Party leader Müsavat Dervişoğlu, on the other hand, expressed his reaction to the decision regarding Can Atalay by saying, "This decision is null and void, it will either be remembered as a bad memory or it will be declared to the whole world that the law has abandoned this country."

The general discussion request of the opposition regarding Can Atalay was rejected by majority vote in the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM). Politicians reacted to the decision without delay.

In the TBMM, the extraordinary session held for Can Atalay, who was elected as a deputy from Hatay and later had his deputyship revoked, started off tense. The session, which resumed after the second break, turned chaotic when Alpay Özalan intervened while Ahmet Şık was speaking at the podium, and punches were thrown. The session was then adjourned. After the tense sessions, the opposition's general discussion request regarding Can Atalay was rejected by majority vote in the final session.

"I HAVE SEEN MANY THINGS IN THIS HALL, BUT I HAD NEVER SEEN BLOOD"

Some political figures expressed their reactions to the decision of the TBMM. CHP Chairman Özgür Özel spoke about the decision and the fistfight in his speech at the Parliament. Özel, who served as the deputy group leader in the TBMM for 9 years, recalled the many debates that took place. However, sometimes the tension reaches a point where a will needs to be imposed. Otherwise, a situation like today arises. I have seen many things in this hall, but I had never seen blood, I was very ashamed. I had never seen violence against women, I was very ashamed. I think it is important for you to preside over the meeting behind the Parliament's Presidium, to take over the presidency of the meeting, and the attitude you have shown. As the CHP, we will support the initiative to ensure that there is no bad language or insults in the Parliament and that there is absolutely no violence. The strongest reaction should be shown to this issue."

"ALL PARTIES SHOULD SELF-CRITICIZE"

CHP leader Özgür Özel, who found the decision taken after the brawl in the General Assembly valuable, stated that all parties should make their own self-criticisms.

REACTION FROM THE GOOD PARTY LEADER

The leader of the Good Party, Müsavat Dervişoğlu, stated that they gathered in the General Assembly to discuss the anatomy of a disgrace. Dervişoğlu stated that the first cause of the problems dealt with today is the lack of justice, and the reason for the lack of justice is the lack of a sense of justice in the government.

"GAZI MECLIS ALSO SHOWED A STICK TO THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY"

Recalling the decisions regarding Can Atalay made by the judiciary, Dervişoğlu stated that the 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation decided not to comply with the Constitutional Court's decision regarding Can Atalay, stating that it had no legal value. Dervişoğlu said, "Not only that, but they also showed a stick to the National Assembly, where the will of the people is embodied, which says 'sovereignty unconditionally belongs to the people'. As a constitutional obligation, it decided to send it back to the Presidency of the TBMM for appreciation and execution. Mr. Numan Kurtulmuş, the President of the TBMM, must have considered this decision as an order, as he brought it to the agenda and read it during a session while he was abroad."

"A DECISION THAT IS NULL AND VOID"

Referring to the recent decision of the Constitutional Court regarding Can Atalay, Dervişoğlu stated that the Constitutional Court stated in its decision that "there is no practice of not complying with a violation of rights decision" and that Atalay's "deputyship being revoked is essentially and legally null and void". Dervişoğlu said, "Today, the TBMM will either shatter and destroy this disgraceful scene or it will assume the responsibility as the architect of this scene being etched in history. A decision that is null and void will either be remembered as a bad memory or it will be declared to the whole world that the law has left this country."

"THE MOST IMPORTANT LINK IN THE PROCESS OF MISTAKES IS THE READING OF THE WRONG DECISION IN THE PARLIAMENT"

Dervişoğlu stated that all jurists agree that a wrong decision regarding Can Atalay was read in the TBMM, and addressed TBMM President Kurtulmuş. Dervişoğlu said, "Mr. President, did you not want to read this decision yourself and had someone else read it? Were you under pressure? Did you intend to create a different parenthesis by causing this complicated situation? Did you want to say 'Look, I'm fine, but what can I do, after all, I am a servant and we had to read it'?" Leadership is not about avoiding responsibility, but about assuming it properly. Otherwise, it is cheap politics and does not befit the occupied seat. Now we are here as a result of a process intertwined with mistakes. However, the most important link in this process of mistakes is the reading of the wrong decision in the Parliament. After the wrong decision is read, the importance of other debates is lost. Considering that such a mistake has never happened in the history of the Parliament, the intention and competence of the Parliament Speaker is the most important issue that needs to be discussed."

"THE LAW MUST BE ENFORCED"

Dervişoğlu stated that what needs to be done today is to fulfill the Constitutional Court's decision, to ensure that any consequences based on Can Atalay's deputyship take place. "Can Atalay should take an oath from the podium of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey and start working as a deputy. If Can Atalay has a legal problem, the law must be enforced. The method, procedure, and protocol are clear," said Dervişoğlu. Dervişoğlu stated that there is no need for the Parliament to make a decision. "Whatever has been done is already null and void," he said.

Dervişoğlu continued, "You can criticize the decisions of the Constitutional Court, you may not like them, but you cannot have the luxury of not complying with these decisions, let alone ignoring them. Like it or not, if the Constitutional Court says 'since I have made a violation decision, the final judgment has been lifted, and since the wrong decision was read in the TBMM, the action of the deputy's dismissal is null and void', the only thing the Presidency of the TBMM should do is to read the decision of the Constitutional Court and state that the deputy's deputyship has never ended according to this and act accordingly.

"NOT A PRE-PLANNED DECISION"

After Dervişoğlu completed his speech, TBMM President Kurtulmuş made a statement, saying, "My visit to two countries on January 30, 2024, was planned 4 months in advance. Whichever of our colleagues who were members of the Parliament that week would have read that decision. It is not a pre-planned decision. I am saying these to clarify."

REACTION FROM THE FELICITY PARTY WAS IMMEDIATE

Bülent Kaya, the Deputy Group Leader of the Felicity Party, said that they had a special meeting regarding the decisions of the Constitutional Court. Expressing their expectations from Speaker Kurtulmuş, Kaya said, "Since you presented the decision of the Constitutional Court as a delaying matter, you waited until the finalization of the court decision, the decision of the Constitutional Court. What has changed that you felt the need to read a provision that you did not read while waiting for the decision of the Constitutional Court? You read this decision here, and the Constitutional Court also accepted the decision as 'null and void'."

Kaya emphasized that there are different things between making a decision based on legal grounds and inventing a reason for another decision, saying, "Defending the reasoning of the decision because it should be so, and giving a punishment because the will that keeps you here wants it, and inventing a reason for that punishment are different things. Let's not defend the reasoning of the decisions just because they should be so, but if we can truly defend these reasons by believing in them."

Criticizing the statement "The Constitutional Court is not a supreme court of appeal, but a court of super appeal" made by Kaya, he stated that such "legal lies" should not be trusted and that the Constitutional Court does not conduct an appellate review.