The Minister of Justice, Yılmaz Tunç, strongly reacted to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) "violation of rights" verdict in a "Bank Asya" and "Bylock" case yesterday (September 26). Such cases were among the pilot trials after the coup attempth of July 15, 2016.
The Minister criticized the ECtHR's decision in the Yüksel Yalçınkaya-Turkey case, saying the ECtHR exceeded its jurisdiction by conducting evidence examination and claimed that the decision was unacceptable.
He stated, "Regarding a case where our courts at all levels found the evidence sufficient, the ECtHR's violation decision, by exceeding its jurisdiction to examine evidence, is unacceptable."
The Minister pointed out that the ECtHR had previously emphasized that it could not review the application, interpretation, and evaluation of evidence of national courts' established jurisprudence, but in the Yalçınkaya decision announced today, it departed from this established jurisprudence.
As a result, the Minister claimed that the ECtHR, has opted for evaluating evidence when it comes to FETÖ trials, and "has shown from the outset that it will not conduct an impartial trial and has made a decision contrary to the law and the European Convention on Human Rights."
What happened?
The ECtHR had ruled that Turkey violated human rights in the case brought by teacher Yüksel Yalçınkaya, who was convicted based on the testimony of an anonymous witness for using ByLock and having an account at Bank Asya.
After the coup attempt on July 15, 2016, it was determined that coup plotters and other members of the Gülen Movement communicated through ByLock, a smartphone application that allowed anonymous users to message each other securely. ByLock software was used as evidence in trials against Gülen Movement members following the coup attempt.
Yüksel Yalçınkaya argued in his complaint to the ECtHR that his conviction based on accusations of using ByLock, having an account at Bank Asya, and being associated with FETÖ, a terrorist organization declared by the government, constituted a violation of human rights.
In the application, it was stated that the accusations of an unidentified witness were effective in the conviction and that lawyers could not access the evidence related to the alleged crimes, and the courts that rendered the conviction were not independent and impartial.
The ECtHR, in its decision on the application made in March 2020, ruled that Article 7 (no punishment without law), Article 11 (freedom of assembly and association), and Article 6, paragraph 1 (right to a fair trial) of the European Convention on Human Rights had been violated.
Yalçınkaya had been arrested in Turkey on charges of "FETÖ" membership following the coup attempt and was sentenced to 6 years and 3 months in prison. While the Court of Cassation upheld this sentence, the Constitutional Court did not accept the individual application.(AEK/PE)
