Constitutional Court finds dismissed co-mayors’ applications ‘inadmissible’

Click to read the article in Turkish

The Constitutional Court has finalized the applications of Azize Değer Kutlu, the dismissed Diyarbakır Sur Deputy Co-Mayor, and Abdurrahman Zorlu, the dismissed Co-Mayor of Diyarbakır's Hani.

In their separate applications, the dismissed co-mayors argued that their "right to a fair trial", "presumption of innocence", "respect for privacy" and "right to elect and to be elected" were violated.

In her application, Değer Kutlu said that "after she came into office, no administrative or penal investigation was launched against her and all of her actions when she was in office complied with the law".

Kutlu noted that she was removed from office without even her defense being taken and without any justification. Accordingly, she argued that it "violated the principle of legality of crimes and punishments".

The file also contained the defense of former Hani Co-Mayor Abdurrahman Zorlu, who was arrested after he had been replaced by a trustee. Zorlu wrote in his defense that "after he came into office, no administrative or penal investigation was launched against him".

Noting that his removal from the office where he came with an election in this way was against the right to elect and to be elected, he also underlined that the principle of presumption of innocence was violated.

'Manifestly ill-founded'

The ruling of the Constitutional Court was published in the Official Gazette yesterday (March 30). Citing the opinion of the Interior Ministry as well as a series of legal provisions, the top court has rejected the applications of dismissed co-mayors Zorlu and Kutlu.

The Constitutional Court has unanimously concluded that the applications of the politicians are "unacceptable".

According to the top court, the allegation of a violation of the right to a fair trial has been rejected as it is "manifestly ill-founded".

Examining the allegation of violation of their presumption of innocence, the Constitutional Court has found "lack of jurisdiction as to the matter" on the part of Kutlu and concluded that "it is manifestly ill-founded" on the part of Zorlu. It has also concluded that the alleged violation of respect for privacy is "manifestly ill-founded" while the allegation about the right to free election is rejected due to "lack of jurisdiction as to the matter".

The top court has ruled that the court expenses shall be incurred by the applicants. (RT/SD)