Advanced search
1 file | 111.90 KB Add to list

The discovery in flagrante delicto, the Kafkaesque fate of a Supreme judge and the Turkish Constitutional Court : the Alparslan Altan case in Strasbourg

Emre Turkut (UGent)
Author
Organization
Abstract
On 16 April 2019, the Second Section Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (the ECtHR) delivered a long-awaited decision in the case of Alparslan Altan v. Turkey, an application lodged by a former judge serving on the Turkish Constitutional Court (TCC) to challenge his arbitrary placement in pre-trial detention in the aftermath of the 15 July 2016 attempted coup. The application was pending in Strasbourg since 16 January 2017. In its judgment, the ECtHR found that the applicant’s initial pre-trial detention was not lawful within the meaning of Article 5/1 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and was not based on reasonable suspicion that he had committed an offence under Article 5/1 (c) ECHR. Some background information to the case and the key findings of the ECtHR will be pointed out and discussed below. However, in the comment section, I shall limit myself to focus on two points that I take as crucial in order to understand the significance of the judgment. The first point, as expected, deals with the content of the decision i.e. what the Court has said or not, and why this judgment matters. This is a relatively easy task as there is arguably only one aspect of the judgment that is open to criticism- that is the fact that the Court refrained from reviewing the prolonged nature of Altan’s pre-trial detention. The second point concerns a broader question that perhaps goes beyond the particularities of the case and rekindles an old debate on whether the TCC is still an effective legal body domestically.

Downloads

  • (...).pdf
    • full text (Published version)
    • |
    • UGent only
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 111.90 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Turkut, Emre. “The Discovery in Flagrante Delicto, the Kafkaesque Fate of a Supreme Judge and the Turkish Constitutional Court : The Alparslan Altan Case in Strasbourg.” STRASBOURG OBSERVERS, no. 06/05/2019, Human Rights Centre, 2019.
APA
Turkut, E. (2019). The discovery in flagrante delicto, the Kafkaesque fate of a Supreme judge and the Turkish Constitutional Court : the Alparslan Altan case in Strasbourg. STRASBOURG OBSERVERS. Ghent: Human Rights Centre.
Chicago author-date
Turkut, Emre. 2019. “The Discovery in Flagrante Delicto, the Kafkaesque Fate of a Supreme Judge and the Turkish Constitutional Court : The Alparslan Altan Case in Strasbourg.” STRASBOURG OBSERVERS. Ghent: Human Rights Centre.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Turkut, Emre. 2019. “The Discovery in Flagrante Delicto, the Kafkaesque Fate of a Supreme Judge and the Turkish Constitutional Court : The Alparslan Altan Case in Strasbourg.” STRASBOURG OBSERVERS. Ghent: Human Rights Centre.
Vancouver
1.
Turkut E. The discovery in flagrante delicto, the Kafkaesque fate of a Supreme judge and the Turkish Constitutional Court : the Alparslan Altan case in Strasbourg. STRASBOURG OBSERVERS. Ghent: Human Rights Centre; 2019.
IEEE
[1]
E. Turkut, “The discovery in flagrante delicto, the Kafkaesque fate of a Supreme judge and the Turkish Constitutional Court : the Alparslan Altan case in Strasbourg,” STRASBOURG OBSERVERS, no. 06/05/2019. Human Rights Centre, Ghent, 2019.
@misc{8615396,
  abstract     = {On 16 April 2019, the Second Section Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (the ECtHR) delivered a long-awaited decision in the case of Alparslan Altan v. Turkey, an application lodged by a former judge serving on the Turkish Constitutional Court (TCC) to challenge his arbitrary placement in pre-trial detention in the aftermath of the 15 July 2016 attempted coup. The application was pending in Strasbourg since 16 January 2017. In its judgment, the ECtHR found that the applicant’s initial pre-trial detention was not lawful within the meaning of Article 5/1 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and was not based on reasonable suspicion that he had committed an offence under Article 5/1 (c) ECHR.

Some background information to the case and the key findings of the ECtHR will be pointed out and discussed below. However, in the comment section, I shall limit myself to focus on two points that I take as crucial in order to understand the significance of the judgment. The first point, as expected, deals with the content of the decision i.e. what the Court has said or not, and why this judgment matters. This is a relatively easy task as there is arguably only one aspect of the judgment that is open to criticism- that is the fact that the Court refrained from reviewing the prolonged nature of Altan’s pre-trial detention. The second point concerns a broader question that perhaps goes beyond the particularities of the case and rekindles an old debate on whether the TCC is still an effective legal body domestically.},
  author       = {Turkut, Emre},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {06/05/2019},
  publisher    = {Human Rights Centre},
  series       = {STRASBOURG OBSERVERS},
  title        = {The discovery in flagrante delicto, the Kafkaesque fate of a Supreme judge and the Turkish Constitutional Court : the Alparslan Altan case in Strasbourg},
  url          = {https://strasbourgobservers.com/2019/05/06/the-discovery-in-flagrante-delicto-the-kafkaesque-fate-of-a-supreme-judge-and-the-turkish-constitutional-court-the-alparslan-altan-case-in-strasbourg/},
  year         = {2019},
}