Turkey’s Constitutional Court has ruled that a former public servant was subjected to unlawful discrimination when he was denied a retirement payment following his firing under a state of emergency decree, marking a rare victory for dismissed civil servants in Turkey.
In a decision dated February 25, 2025, and published in the Official Gazette on August 7, the court ruled that the applicant had been unfairly discriminated against in connection with his right to property — a constitutional protection that ensures individuals can receive and keep what they are legally entitled to, such as pensions or severance pay. The ruling was passed by a majority, with one judge dissenting.
The applicant, Fikret Aslan, was dismissed by an emergency decree issued after a failed coup in July 2016 over alleged links to the faith-based Gülen movement.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has been targeting followers of the Gülen movement, inspired by the late Muslim cleric Fethullah Gülen, since corruption investigations revealed in 2013 implicated then-prime minister Erdoğan and some members of his family and inner circle.
Dismissing the investigations as a Gülenist coup and a conspiracy against his government, Erdoğan began to target the movement’s members. He designated the movement as a terrorist organization in May 2016 and intensified the crackdown on it following the abortive putsch in July of the same year that he accused Gülen of masterminding. The movement strongly denies involvement in the coup attempt or any terrorist activity.
Despite the dismissal, Aslan qualified for a state pension based on more than 25 years of service. He also applied for a lump-sum retirement payment known in Turkey as “emekli ikramiyesi” — a benefit similar to a retirement bonus, typically granted under the same conditions required for severance pay. Authorities rejected his request, arguing that because he was dismissed by a decree rather than retiring voluntarily or being laid off under qualifying conditions, he was not entitled to the payment.
Aslan challenged the decision, arguing that he was treated differently from other retirees with comparable service. The Constitutional Court agreed, ruling that Aslan was unfairly denied compensation that others in similar situations had received. The court ordered a retrial to be heard by the Ankara 7th Administrative Court to remedy the violation.
However, the court rejected Aslan’s separate claim for monetary compensation. It did, however, order the state to reimburse him 30,364.60 Turkish lira (approximately $1,100) in legal costs and fees. If the payment is delayed beyond four months from notification, interest will be applied.
Because the violation stemmed from the legal framework itself, the ruling was also referred to the Turkish Parliament for legislative review, signaling potentially wider implications for others dismissed under emergency decrees.
In the aftermath of the 2016 coup attempt, the Turkish government launched massive purges across the public sector. According to the Justice Ministry, more than 127,000 people were dismissed from public service. Fewer than 20,000 have been reinstated through a government-appointed appeals body known as the State of Emergency Procedures Investigation Commission (OHAL Commission).
Dismissed public workers were barred not only from returning to public employment but also effectively blacklisted in the private sector. Many were denied passports and flagged in the country’s social security system, preventing them from securing jobs. Thousands have faced long-term economic hardship and social exclusion without access to legal remedies.
The judiciary also saw sweeping changes, with 4,006 judges and prosecutors dismissed in the aftermath of the coup attempt, reducing judicial staffing from 12,000 to around 8,000. More than half of current judicial personnel now have fewer than five years of experience, the minister said.
The purge of judges and prosecutors following the coup attempt is seen by many as one of the main reasons for the erosion in the rule of law in the country, where even the rulings of the European Courts of Human Rights (ECtHR) are disregarded and members of the judiciary are accused of acting on orders from the government.
