Page 254 - kdk-sempozyum-3

I had a special study conducted and published it as a book that I will
also present o you a copy. We consulted the opinions of universities,
high court members, bar associations, and friends.

Finally, except a friend, we all agreed. The related provision of the law
says that: “there was no such a provision in the law that was nullified
by the constitutional court.” Yet, there are four red lines for the
Ombudsman of Turkey that it cannot handle, according to the Law no
6328 of 29 June 2012 and thirdly, it is said that: there is a decision that
the authority of judiciary must be used.

I think that this contains limitation. “Decision that the authority of
judiciary must be used”: what does it mean? Then, the Ombudsman
institution may interfere into the process. Lutkovska opened a horizon
to us in this regard. Thank you for that. This is not intervention into
judiciary. As you can see, Ombudsman goes to the courts as an
observer. In our law, there is no observer status granted but there is
no legal limitation for us to do so. We can attend the court hearings like
an NGO. Our founding law says that Turkish ombudsman instruction
must review the attitude and behavior of civil servants. If there is a
complaint and if a judge at bench says that “ I confess because we did
this and that in the past” or a judge yells at a citizen for no reason,
or throwing an object at a citizen’s face or insults at him or her, such
manners have nothing to do with the use of judicial powers. Such
wrong manners were used in the past, so did I and after so many
years, we recognized that. Such bad manners are a few but from time
to time, we see them happening or a judge limits a person’s right
to defend himself or herself, that means violation of a fundamental
human right. I think that observation and detection of such things and
reporting them to the related ultimate organizations does not mean
intervention into judicial powers.
Let me give you another special examples. On the other hand, if court
proceedings are over, according to the procedures law, a verdict
with a reason must be written within 15 days. Recently, the Turkish
Parliament issued a law about it. For instance, though 8 months pass,
a judge does not write the verdict. Suspects are under arrest in prison.
Then ombudsman may interfere into this. I believe that failure to write
a verdict in 8 months has nothing to the with judicial powers.

rd
252 | 3 INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON OMBUDSMAN INSTITUTIONS