The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled on Tuesday that Turkey had violated the right to a fair trial of 10 judges and prosecutors.
The court found that Turkey’s Supreme Board of Judges and Prosecutors (HSYK) failed to provide sufficient procedural safeguards, such as formal hearings, rules for evidence and detailed reasoning in its decisions regarding the 10 applicants, undermining the applicants’ right to a fair hearing.
The case, Şişman and Others v. Turkey, involved 10 judges and prosecutors who were involuntarily transferred to other cities or, in one instance, demoted in the same city. These transfers occurred between 2014 and 2015 through a series of decisions by the HSYK.
In one instance, applicant İlker Çetin was transferred without his consent from the office of the chief public prosecutor in Diyarbakır to a deputy role in Uşak and later demoted to a public prosecutor position in the same city. Another applicant, Ahmet Karaca, had requested a transfer to a location closer to his sick mother. While his request was partially granted, the applicants claimed the process lacked transparency and fairness, highlighting broader procedural issues in the HSYK’s handling of transfers.
The Turkish government contested the ECtHR’s jurisdiction, arguing that the applicants did not explicitly request access to a court during the domestic proceedings and that the decisions were administrative matters outside the purview of Article 6. It also claimed that following an attempted coup in 2016, the applicants were dismissed due to alleged affiliation with the Gülen movement, considered responsible for the coup attempt by the Turkish government, justifying the exclusion of judicial review on national security grounds.
The ECtHR rejected these arguments, emphasizing that the HSYK could not be considered a “tribunal” due to the procedural shortcomings in its process. The court referenced its own precedents, including the Bilgen and Eminağaoğlu cases, to support the view that the absence of a fair procedure rendered the HSYK’s decisions invalid under the European Convention on Human Rights’ (ECHR) standards.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has been targeting followers of the Gülen movement, inspired by the late Muslim cleric Fethullah Gülen, since the corruption investigations of 2013, which implicated then-prime minister Erdoğan, his family members and his inner circle.
Dismissing the investigations as a Gülenist coup and conspiracy against his government, Erdoğan designated the movement as a terrorist organization and began targeting its members. He intensified the crackdown on the movement following an abortive putsch in 2016, which he accused Gülen of masterminding. Gülen and the movement strongly deny involvement in the coup attempt or any terrorist activity.
Following the abortive putsch, the Turkish government declared a state of emergency and carried out a massive purge of state institutions on the pretext of an anti-coup fight. Over 130,000 public servants, including 4,156 judges and prosecutors, as well as 29,444 members of the armed forces were summarily removed from their jobs for alleged membership in or relationships with “terrorist organizations” by emergency decree-laws subject to neither judicial nor parliamentary scrutiny.
Former public servants were not only fired from their jobs; they were also banned from working again in the public sector and getting a passport. The government also made it difficult for them to work formally in the private sector. Notes were put on the social security database about dismissed public servants to deter potential employers.
Since the 2016 coup attempt, the ECtHR has ruled against the Turkish government in numerous cases, many of which involve the treatment of judges, prosecutors and other public officials. These cases often center on rights violations tied to dismissals, detentions and transfers carried out during widespread purges in the judiciary and civil service.
A significant number of the cases before the ECtHR have involved individuals accused of affiliation with the Gülen movement. The ECtHR has consistently emphasized the importance of fair trial guarantees, procedural safeguards and the right to an independent tribunal, even in situations where national security concerns are invoked. In these cases the court has ruled that Turkey’s actions fell short of the standards set by the ECHR, reinforcing the need for adherence to due process.
