Programme on the “Right to Property and Right to a Fair Trial”

Istanbul
3 October 2025

Distinguished Guests,

Distinguished Colleagues,

Distinguished Participants,

I would like to begin my remarks with a saying that, in my view, conveys an undeniable truth: If a man wants to live long, he must be just. This also applies to states. Being just prolongs life.

Esteemed Participants,

Distinguished Colleagues,

On behalf of the Turkish Constitutional Court, I would like to extend my sincere greetings and heartfelt regards to you all. It is a great honour and pleasure for me to take part in the opening of this significant event, a joint initiative of the Turkish Constitutional Court and the Justice Academy of Türkiye, along with the Council of Europe and the European Union.

I would like to also extend my profound gratitude to Prof. Dr. Saadet Yüksel, Judge of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in respect of Türkiye, Ms. Lorraine Schembri Orland, Judge of the ECHR in respect of Malta, as well as Mr. Péter Paczolay, Judge of the ECHR in respect of Hungary, for their kind and distinguished participation in the event. Let me express our great appreciation and delight for the support extended by the ECHR. 

Türkiye became a party to the European Convention on Human Rights (Convention), which encompasses the rights and freedoms covered by the individual application mechanism, in 1954. It acknowledged the right to individual application to the ECHR in 1987, and recognised the binding nature of the ECHR’s decisions in 1990. Following these developments, Türkiye adopted a constitutional amendment in 2004, recognising the supremacy of the international treaties on fundamental rights and freedoms, to which it is a party, notably the Convention.

As is well-known, the individual application mechanism has assumed a crucial role in the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms in Türkiye since its introduction in 2012. Through this mechanism, the Turkish Constitutional Court has transformed from a body primarily addressing alleged violations raised by individuals into a main actor promoting the advancement of the rule of law. In this regard, individual application both provides a direct avenue for individuals to pursue justice and supports the harmonised evolution of the legal framework.

In another aspect, individual application not only offers faster and more effective protection for individuals, but also contributes to the stronger fulfilment of Türkiye’s international human rights obligations.

In this context, let me emphasise that the individual application mechanism has evolved into an accessible and effective remedy in Türkiye, which must be exhausted prior to recourse to the ECHR and is widely regarded as a model. This success is a collective achievement of the entire judiciary, encompassing the contributions of our lawyers as well. I wish to convey my sincere gratitude to all colleagues.

The Court has so far received nearly 700,000 applications through the individual application mechanism, resulting in numerous landmark judgments in the field of human rights, whereby thousands of rights violations were redressed, and constitutional principles became more tangible and functional. In this sense, individual application constitutes a dynamic and transformative mechanism that renders the Constitution a living instrument.

In this context, since the operation of individual application mechanism by 23 September 2012, the Court has found a violation in 81,481 cases, including those involving a violation of the right to a trial within a reasonable time. According to the 2024 annual statistics, the Court adjudicated nearly 67,000 applications out of approximately 70,000 applications received within that single year. In 2024, the Court found a violation in 5,551 cases. 

As of today, 75 violation judgments are still at the execution stage, which clearly illustrates the crucial role of the individual application mechanism in the protection of citizens’ fundamental rights and freedoms. Accordingly, it can be confidently said that the Court has been resolutely and successfully implementing the individual application system, which was introduced on the basis of the authority granted by the Turkish Nation in 2010.

In this sense, let me express with satisfaction that the individual application mechanism has shown a successful and consistent progress in the Court’s jurisprudence, both in quantitative and qualitative terms. The Court has assumed significant responsibility in incorporating the universal principles and standards into Turkish law. In this context, although there has been a relative increase due to conjunctural factors, I am pleased to note that the objective of reducing the number of applications lodged with, and the violation judgments rendered by, the ECHR against our country has been successfully achieved.

In addition, the Court has consistently carried out its function of constitutionality review alongside the individual application mechanism. It adjudicated 233 cases out of 236 in abstract and concrete constitutionality review in 2024, thereby contributing to the realisation of the principle of supremacy of the Constitution. It should be particularly noted that a similar statistical trend has continued in 2025 as well.

I would like to especially emphasise that the principle of interpretation in favour of universal fundamental rights and freedoms -which is inherent in the nature of individual application- has, over time, been reflected in the Court’s constitutionality review as well. The constitutional provisions, interpreted in the context of concrete complaints through individual applications, have increasingly been addressed from the same perspective in constitutionality review, which seeks to promote a harmonious and consistent application of constitutional principles in both contexts.

The Turkish Constitutional Court exerts maximum effort to efficiently and effectively fulfil its duties both in the individual application and constitutionality review processes, aiming to prevent rights violations, realise constitutional principles, and strengthen the rule of law.

It should also be noted that in rendering its rulings, the Court follows a procedure which involves the active contribution of multiple interrelated structures exercising mutual oversight that have been established within its institutional framework. During the preliminary examination and decision-making stages, the Court conducts an in-depth analysis of respective universal approaches, the principles and standards laid down in the ECHR’s judgments, comparable rulings -where available- by other constitutional courts, and the jurisprudence and consolidated expertise of Türkiye’s supreme judicial authorities. These findings, together with the opinions and assessments of the rapporteur-judges, are ultimately subject to a meticulous deliberation process in the light of the Court’s accumulated institutional knowledge and the profound experience of its distinguished members. The Court maintains close communication and cooperation with the other higher judicial bodies, the Court of Cassation and the Council of State, for ensuring a common understanding of the fundamental principles of judicial jurisprudence.

Accordingly, the Court continues to serve as a guarantor of fundamental rights and freedoms, fulfilling its constitutional duties and powers as a high judicial body that engages with both society and the legal system. This achievement is primarily rooted in the commitment of our Justices, rapporteur-judges, and all staff to the principles of justice, as well as in the harmonious and devoted efforts of a strong and dedicated team within the Court.

Esteemed Participants,

In this part of my speech, I would like to touch upon certain fundamental principles regarding the professions of judge and prosecutor, which I regard as having universal significance.

The scale of justice rests in the hands of judges and prosecutors, and it is the most delicate scale in the world. It is a spiritual scale, founded in the depths of conscience and upheld by the breath of truth. Properly bearing the scale of justice entails not only knowledge of the law, but also a sensitive conscience and a strong sense of ethics.    

Accordingly, judges and prosecutors must always act with sincerity and honesty, and serve as a model for others. They must be guided by their conscience. I define conscience as an instinctive sense inherent in individuals, allowing them to distinguish between good and evil. It is an intangible concept, which is acknowledged by everyone. I see it as a universally acknowledged concept, albeit intangible. I consider that conscience does not lie. Nor does it advise or command any wrongdoing.  It always stands on the side of truth. There is an intertwined relationship between having a conscience and being independent and impartial. Our capacity as judges is guided by our intellect, knowledge, ethics, and conscience. These qualities are directly linked to fair decisions. The concept of conscience is enshrined in the Constitution, as well as in certain laws and court rulings.

Judges and prosecutors must strive to be reliable, trustworthy, and honest individuals who pose no threat, danger, or any form of harm to others. They must refrain from doing wrong in both their professional and private lives. They must always adhere to what is legal and moral. They must endeavour to be among individuals who come to mind first when justice is at stake. That is to say, they must stand as a symbol of justice. In their capacity as decision-makers, they must always be guided by justice, regardless of whether they are dealing with a friend or an enemy, a relative or a stranger. They must always recognise and uphold rights, and adjudicate accordingly. They must not hesitate to deliver rulings in accordance with their conscience. They must not set aside what is right because of arrogance or similar motives, and must avoid acting arbitrarily.

They must strive not to cause even the slightest injustice to anyone intentionally. They must have the necessary knowledge and expertise in comprehending, analysing, and fairly resolving the disputes before them. They must avoid adjudicating cases based on incomplete or insufficient knowledge. They must constantly enhance their capacity to properly comprehend and interpret legal norms and facts of each case. They must be capable of accurately understanding what they read and hear, as well as correctly perceiving what they see. They must never neglect to apply reason and scientific knowledge. That is to say, judges and prosecutors must be wise, intellectual, accurate, reliable, dignified, and sound. 

Each ruling delivered by a judge is not an ordinary text, but must be a guiding light that fosters trust and stability in society. Every allegation made by the prosecutor is not merely a criminal charge, but it should serve as a light illuminating the path to justice. That is because the greatest responsibility for sustaining or building a society governed by ethics, reason, conscience, and science -in other words, justice- rests with judges and prosecutors.

Therefore, judges and prosecutors are entrusted not only with adjudicating cases, but also with being the guardians of social peace, well-being, and trust. Justice is a light nourished by the wisdom of the past, conscience of the present, and the hope of the future. Keeping this light alive is the gravest, yet most noble, responsibility of members of the judiciary. 

Our rulings, guided by honesty and impartiality, influence not a single case, but the very sense of justice within society. That is because a ruling by a judge or court can render even the most precise law completely meaningless. Accordingly, every court ruling not only resolves disputes, but also deeply influences public trust in the judiciary, as well as the very spirit and foundation of the state.

As members of the judiciary, we are thus expected to render the most just rulings, guided by reason, science, and ethics by interpreting the Constitution and laws in accordance with human dignity and conscience. Indeed, justice is the greatest virtue living in humanity’s shared conscience, and it is beyond the mere texts of positive law. As long as we remain just, honest, and impartial, we ennoble both ourselves and the society we serve.  

Distinguished Participants,

Over the past thirteen years of the individual application system, the right to property and the right to a fair trial are among the most frequently invoked rights. The right to property is enshrined both in Article 35 of the Turkish Constitution and in the Additional Protocol no. 1 to the Convention. Through its rulings in areas including but not limited to expropriation, de facto expropriation, zoning procedures, and taxation, the Turkish Constitutional Court has consistently underlined the need to protect the right to property by ensuring a fair balance between individual rights and the public interest.

On the other hand, the right to a fair trial constitutes one of the most significant areas addressed in individual applications. The right to a trial within a reasonable time, the right of access to a court, the right to a reasoned decision, the principles of equality of arms and adversarial proceedings, and the right to a hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal constitute the core components of the right to a fair trial. Therefore, ensuring the effective protection of this right is of crucial importance not only for remedying the individual grievances, but also for fostering public trust in the judicial system.

Today’s sessions will address the scope of the rights to property and a fair trial, along with the challenges and violations arising in practice, from various perspectives. I am confident that the discussions and sharing of experiences at this event will contribute significantly to enhancing the effectiveness of the individual application mechanism and to strengthening the protection of human rights.  

Esteemed Participants,

Before concluding my speech, allow me to briefly touch upon certain issues of an international nature, as I have also referred to in my previous remarks. The recent incidents in various parts of the world, notably in Gaza, demonstrate that within the international system, human rights have been replaced by brute force, so to speak, a mindset of oppression. 

In this sense, it must be noted that wars and mass violence on one hand, and economic turmoil and migration driven by unequal wealth distribution and other causes on the other, along with the responses to these challenges, are increasingly threatening international peace and stability. As a matter of fact, the deaths of infants weighing less than their birth weight due to starvation on any ground could attract the attention of very few people and are increasingly regarded as normal.

This situation deals a heavy blow to international peace and order, as well as to fundamental principles and standards. The destructive effects of such disorder and extremism will extend far beyond the places where they occur. They will have consequences for both international relations and the future of each society. They will also give rise to a form of corruption that will have far-reaching effects on future generations. Therefore, humanity must respond with a united conscience and act collectively in the face of all these transgressions.

We should bear in mind that true and lasting peace can only be achieved in a world governed by morality and justice. The shared future of humanity and the prospect of enduring peace depend on a renewed commitment to moral values and upholding justice across the globe.

To conclude, I hope that all oppression and massacres across the world, especially in Gaza, will come to an end.

Distinguished Participants,

I would like to extend my gratitude to all distinguished speakers and esteemed participants for attending this event despite their busy schedules, as well as to everyone involved in making this event possible. Wishing a successful and fruitful event, I extend my heartfelt greetings and sincere respect to all of you.