President Recep Tayyip Erdogan signals potential adjustment in Turkey’s Constitutional Court

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, addressing the crisis between the Constitutional Court (AYM) and the Court of Cassation following the Can Atalay decision, signaled a potential change in the Constitutional Court, stating that making amendments to individual applications is easy but that “the Constitutional Court must first be ready for this, as many legal regulations go to the Constitutional Court.”

Responding to journalists’ questions upon his return to Turkey after the Islamic Cooperation Organization summit in Saudi Arabia, President Erdoğan made statements regarding the crisis between the Constitutional Court and the Court of Cassation. He suggested a potential adjustment in the Constitutional Court, stating:

“In other words, making a legal regulation regarding individual applications is not a difficult matter. It all depends on the decision of the People’s Alliance and the steps it takes. However, even after resolving individual applications, the matter does not end. What will be the door that this individual application relies on afterward? It will still be the Constitutional Court. The Constitutional Court must first be ready for this. Because many legal regulations go to the Constitutional Court and are overturned there. If a decision is taken by the parliament, but this decision is overturned by the Constitutional Court, it will be of no use except for wasting time. Therefore, while the parliament is currently continuing its work on the budget, they enacted this regarding individual applications, saying it would accelerate the work of the Constitutional Court in a timely manner.

I just learned something now. I said, how many individual applications are there? The answer is 130,000. This means that the goal of speeding up the work of the Constitutional Court has unfortunately not been achieved. We should not dwell on these things, and we should not act imaginarily. Of course, the last statement made by the President of the Court of Cassation is significant. In my last trip, I used an expression. I said that members of the Court of Cassation consist only of jurists. But among the members of the Constitutional Court, in addition to jurists, there are also governors, economists, sociologists, and so on. In fact, there should be such a variety. But where is the emphasis in terms of mission? It is at the Court of Cassation. There, everything from the Constitution to Commercial Law, Labor Law, etc., is covered. I don’t have a role in taking sides in this fight. But when it comes to arbitration, it may be our duty to perform this arbitration. That is again a duty assigned to us by the Constitution as the President. Our wish is that there would not have been such tension if possible.

Regarding the issue of meeting with the heads of the two judiciary institutions, if necessary, I will meet with both of them. We have already met with the President of the Court of Cassation. If necessary, we will meet with the President of the Constitutional Court as well. There is no such thing as not meeting.”