ASSOCIATION OF ASIAN CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS AND EQUIVALENT INSTITUTIONS (AACC)
CENTER FOR TRAINING AND HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT (CTHRD)

13^TH SUMMER SCHOOL PROGRAMME

“Family Life in the Constitutional Perspective and Right to Respect for Family Life”
Opening Remarks

Ankara
6 October 2025

Distinguished Participants,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I would like extend you all my most sincere and respectful greetings.

Let me express once again my great pleasure to welcome you to our country.

The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Türkiye, in its capacity as the Center for Training and Human Resources Development of the Association of Asian Constitutional Courts and Equivalent Institutions, is organising the 13^th Summer School Programme this year. It is a source of great contentment for us to welcome participants from all around the world to this programme every year.

Today, we are honoured to have guests in this hall from Asia, Europe and Africa. We are together with 66 participants representing 31 different courts. This programme offers you, distinguished young jurists, a valuable opportunity to come together with colleagues from counterpart institutions across the world and to engage in an exchange of knowledge and experience. I am confident that you will make the most of this opportunity and establish strong professional ties and effective channels of communication among yourselves. This, in turn, will contribute to the continued strengthening of relations between our institutions in the future. On this occasion, I would like to express my gratitude to you and your respective institutions for participating in this programme.

This year, we are also honoured by the presence of distinguished Members of the Federal Supreme Court of Iraq, the Constitutional Court of Algeria, the Constitutional Court of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and the Supreme Court of the Philippines. I would like to extend a warm welcome to them as well and would like to express my sincere pleasure at having them among us.

I wish to emphasise the importance of fostering cooperation and maintaining strong relations with our colleagues across different continents and countries. As apex courts, we deal with a wide range of legal issues and render decisions that have far-reaching effects on our respective countries. Therefore, the mutual exchange of experience, views, and knowledge is of great value to all of us. In this sense, the Summer School Programme stands as an excellent example of such mutual engagement and dialogue. To date, we have received highly positive feedback on the Programme. On behalf of the Turkish Constitutional Court, I would like to reiterate our firm commitment in doing our utmost to foster cooperation among respective jurisdictions in our region and beyond.

This year marks the 13^th Summer School. The themes of previous programmes have focused on substantive rights such as freedom of expression, the presumption of innocence, the right to a fair trial, and the right to respect for private life. Last year, we addressed a different theme, namely the use of information technologies and artificial intelligence in the higher judiciary. This year, we will turn our attention to another institution of paramount constitutional significance: the family and the right to respect for family life. Indeed, President, H.E. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has declared 2025 the “Year of the Family” in Türkiye. Within the scope of the “Year of the Family,” numerous initiatives have been carried out with a view to protecting and strengthening the institution of family.

Distinguished Participants,

Family has been one of the most cherished values of humanity from past to present. It stands as the foundation of societies and nations, ensuring unity and solidarity. A stable and healthy family environment is the key to raising peaceful individuals and building a resilient society. Especially in modern times, in which individualism is on the rise and traditional family bonds are weakening, the protection and strengthening of the family have become essential for a healthy and prosperous society.

Indeed, the institution of the family is undergoing a serious erosion as a result of the increasing trends of homogenisation and gender-neutrality worldwide, as well as changing demographic structures and sociocultural perceptions. When these threats targeting the family institution are compounded by the challenges of modern life, such as problems associated with urbanisation, rising living costs and technological dependency, they give rise to significant adverse effects on family unity, well-being and structure. The weakening of the family institution, in turn, diminishes individuals’ sense of belonging to the society they live in and undermines the very character of nations as cohesive communities.

I do not intend to dwell at length on the family-related challenges of our time, as we all observe these issues closely. The longing for the strong family bonds of the past and for the family relationships we experienced in our childhood is well known to all of us. In the face of the gradual deterioration and degeneration of the family structure, it has become imperative to adopt and implement measures aimed at protecting the family. Indeed, international conventions and constitutions impose responsibilities on States with regard to the protection of family life, which is recognised as a fundamental human right.

Within this framework, family life and the right to found a family, being the cornerstone of society, are safeguarded by international conventions and constitutions. It is enshrined in both Article 16 of the United Nations (UN) Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 23, titled “Protection of the Family,” of the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that family is the natural and fundamental component of society and should be protected by the State. Both instruments further guarantee the right to found a family and include various provisions aimed at safeguarding the family institution.

Article 41 of the Constitution of the Republic of Türkiye likewise provides that the family is the foundation of Turkish society and that the peace and well-being of the family shall be protected by the State. Article 62 of the Constitution further stipulates that the State is obliged to take the necessary measures to ensure the family unity of Turkish citizens working abroad. In its judgment in the case of Sherapat Yagmyrova (no. 2017/11905, 21 July 2020, § 33), the Constitutional Court underlined the significance attributed to the family in individual and social life under Article 41 of the Constitution, emphasising that this provision imposes duties on the State to enact the necessary regulations and establish appropriate institutional structures for the protection of the family.

The right to respect for family life is safeguarded by Article 20 of the Constitution, which provides “Everyone has the right to demand respect for his/her private and family life. Privacy of private and family life shall not be violated.” As is evident, the right to respect for family life is regulated in the same provision as the right to respect for private life. This clearly demonstrates that family life is an integral part of private life and that the privacy of the family falls within the scope of the right to respect for private life.

In line with these constitutional provisions, the Twelfth Development Plan of Türkiye identifies as a main objective the strengthening of the family institution, defined as “a union formed through the bond of marriage between a man and a woman and the bearer of national and moral values, by protecting it from all kinds of harmful tendencies, ensuring the upbringing of healthy generations, and preserving a dynamic population structure and sustainable development”.¹ Within the scope of the Plan, it is envisaged that family-oriented policies will be formulated and implemented through a participatory approaches involving all relevant stakeholders, and that the quality, accessibility, and effectiveness of family-related services will be enhanced. Thus, it is aimed to preserve the values and cultural heritage of the family passed down through generations, and to safeguard unity and solidarity within the family, in accordance with constitutional responsibilities.

The protection of the family and the right to respect for family life are frequently addressed in the Court’s judgments in both the constitutionality review and individual application processes. According to the Court, the right to respect for family life safeguards individuals against interference by public authorities in their family life and ensures their ability to organise and live their family life as they see fit (see Nurcan Yolcu [Plenary], no. 2013/9880, 11 November 2015). The State’s primary obligation under this right is to refrain from arbitrary interference. As is well known, the duty to abstain from arbitrary interference constitutes the State’s negative obligation.

At the same time, the State also bears positive obligations to ensure effective respect for family life. Although these positive obligations may arise in the sphere of relations between private individuals, they nonetheless require adoption of measures aimed at securing respect for family life and enabling the continuation of family relationships. In this regard, it is essential for the State to establish an effective judicial mechanism that safeguards the right to respect for family life, and for the inferior courts to act in a manner that ensures the sustainability and effectiveness of family-related relationships. In its examination of cases concerning the State’s positive obligations, the Constitutional Court reviews the procedures followed by the inferior courts and, in particular, assesses whether they have duly taken into account the safeguards enshrined in Articles 20 and 41 of the Constitution (see, among many others, Murat Demir [Plenary], no. 2015/7216, 27 March 2019; Ayşegül Pervane, no. 2017/37155, 30 September 2020; Nurcan Yolcu [Plenary]; Semra Özel Üner, no. 2014/12009, 26 October 2016; Dilek Tsakırıdıs, no. 2018/35068, 9 June 2020; Melahat Karkin [Plenary], no. 2014/17751, 13 October 2016; and Emine Göksel [Plenary], no. 2016/10454, 12 December 2019).

Furthermore, in its judgment in the case of Murat Atılgan (no. 2013/9047, 7 May 2015, § 42), the Court emphasised that it is not possible to draw clear-cut boundaries between the negative and positive obligations arising from the right to respect for family life. The Court also underlined that, in both respects, having regard to the circumstances of the case and the nature of the interference, public authorities must strive to strike a fair balance between individual and societal interests, as well as between the interests of the child and those of the parents.

Distinguished Participants,

Within the scope of the right to respect for family life, the Constitutional Court has rendered numerous violation judgments and laid down fundamental principles in a wide range of areas, including child custody and contact arrangements, the child’s first name and surname, child protection and foster care measures, appointments and transfers for the purpose of maintaining family unity, deportation and entry bans, practices in penitentiary institutions, child adoption, and family residence. Owing to time constraints, it is not possible in this address to cover the entirety of the Court’s case-law in the relevant areas. In any event, during the academic sessions scheduled for today and tomorrow, you will have the opportunity to examine these matters in depth, share the case-law of your respective institutions, and benefit from one another’s experience. Nevertheless, given the importance and international dimension of the subject matter, I would like to briefly touch upon disputes arising under the Hague Convention and our corresponding case-law.

Undoubtedly, one of the most essential elements of the family institution is the child. Children growing up within a family environment and being raised in a mentally and physically healthy manner provide a strong foundation for the development of healthy family structures in future generations. Indeed, applications lodged within the scope of the right to respect for family life frequently focus on the relationship between the child and the parent. In this regard, it must be emphasised at the outset that the best interests of the child constitute a guiding principle that must be observed in all actions concerning children, and that a fair balance must be struck between the interests of the parents and those of the child in light of this principle.

Disputes arising under the Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (also known as the “Hague Convention”), to which Türkiye is a party, are brought before the Court through the individual application procedure. The Hague Convention seeks to secure the prompt return of children who have been wrongfully removed or retained to the country of their habitual residence. To this end, judicial and administrative authorities of the Contracting States are under an obligation to take the necessary measures without delay in order to ensure the return of the child. In this process, judicial authorities must determine the child’s habitual residence with due regard to the best interests of the child. The child’s interests, on the one hand, point to the need to maintain ties with his or her family, and on the other hand, encompass the child’s development in a healthy and secure environment.

The Convention further empowers judicial authorities to refuse the return of the child where it is established that such return would expose the child to a grave risk of physical or psychological harm or would otherwise place the child in an intolerable situation. However, for this exception to be applicable in a given case, the first instance courts are required to conduct a thorough examination and provide sufficient reasoning (see Marcus Frank Cerny [Plenary], no. 2013/5126, 2 July 2015; and Levent Aşıklar, no. 2014/13936, 8 March 2018). In its judgment in the case of Ayşegül Pervane, the Constitutional Court underlined the importance of examining specific circumstances in light of the principle of the best interests of the child, and found a violation of the right to respect for family life where a decision ordering the child’s return to the habitual residence was rendered without obtaining expert opinions on the potential effects of such return on the child and without hearing the child, despite the child being of an age capable of forming and expressing views. While the Court noted that young age alone does not constitute a decisive criterion in determining the best interests of the child (see Marcus Frank Cerny [Plenary]; and Dilek Tsakırıdıs, cited above), it nevertheless stressed that particular consideration must be given to the potential adverse effects on children of being separated from their mother and from the environment to which they are accustomed and being sent to another country, especially in cases involving children who are at an age of dependency on the mother and who have been cared for by the mother since birth.

Distinguished Guests,

In view of today’s economic challenges and housing difficulties, the family residence likewise assumes particular importance in terms of family life. In this regard, Article 194 of the Turkish Civil Code contains specific provisions stipulating that no disposition may be made over the family residence unless the other spouse gives consent. In one of its judgments, the Constitutional Court stated that these provisions intend to protect family life and family unity and to ensure the adoption of measures enabling spouses to live together, which constitute a manifestation of the State’s positive obligations arising from Articles 20 and 41 of the Constitution to secure the respect for family life (see Melahat Karkin [Plenary], no. 2014/17751, 13 October 2016). In the said judgment, the Court emphasised that the loss of the physical place determined by family members through their shared will and intention to live together, where all vital relationships are developed, would severely undermine the sustainability of family relations, and that the relevant regulations concerning the family residence essentially aim to protect family life through safeguarding housing. In its judgment in the case of Emine Göksel [Plenary], the Court further held that the restrictive interpretation adopted by the courts of first instance, according to which any claim of residential immunity against the attachment of a property qualifying as a family residence due to the debt of the owing spouse could only be raised by the debtor spouse, could not be regarded as compatible with the right to respect for family life. Accordingly, where it is established that the attached family residence also constitutes suitable housing for the debtor and his or her family, allowing the non-debtor spouse to raise a claim of residential immunity before the first instance courts complies with the State’s positive obligations.

Distinguished Participants,

Finally, the right to respect for family life is also frequently discussed in the context of practices in penitentiary institutions. In this regard, in its judgment in the case of Mahmut Mumcu (no. 2017/24655, 9 July 2020), the Constitutional Court held that unless deemed necessary on reasonable grounds, the failure to allow detained spouses held in different penitentiary institutions within the same campus to meet face-to-face or to communicate by telephone through contact and non-contact visits constituted a violation of the right to respect for family life. Similarly, in its judgment in the case of Murat Aydın (no. 2016/58533, 3 July 2019), the Court concluded that the inability of spouses held in different penitentiary institutions to maintain adequate communication with one another violated the right to respect for family life. Furthermore, in its judgment in the case of Eşref Köse (no. 2017/38098, 3 June 2020), which concerns the monitoring and recording of the content of visits, the Court found that the absence of a statutory framework regulating the conditions under which non-contact visits could be monitored and recorded through technical means violated the right to freedom of communication as well as the right to respect for private and family life. Likewise, enabling children to visit their parents in penitentiary institutions without disrupting their education is a requirement of the right to respect for family life.

In its judgment in the case of Rasul Kocatürk ([Plenary], no. 2016/8080, 26 December 2019), the Court examined prisoners’ attendance at the funerals of deceased relatives within the scope of the right to respect for private and family life and held that the failure of public authorities to decide expeditiously on requests for permission to attend such funerals amounted to a violation of the said right. In its judgment in the case of Şükran İrge (no. 2016/8660, 7 November 2019), which concerns childcare in penitentiary institutions, the Constitutional Court held that the failure to strike a balance between the detention of the prisoner and the best interests of the child, and the absence of measures such as providing an appropriate environment for the child or transferring the prisoner to a more suitable institution, violated the right to respect for family life.

Distinguished Participants,

Many further examples could be drawn from the Court’s case-law concerning the right to respect for family life. You will have the opportunity today and tomorrow to examine in detail the judgments I have summarised, as well as other related issues. I have no doubt that through the exchange of knowledge and experience during this Summer School Programme, you will open new horizons on the subject and gain a comprehensive perspective.

I would like to extend my deepest gratitude to you and your respective institutions for participating in the Summer School Programme. Your contributions here are of great value to us, both in terms of the exchange of knowledge and the strengthening of our mutual relations. I sincerely wish that this programme will be equally beneficial and successful for each and every participant.

Following an intensive academic programme, a social programme will be organised, during which you will have the opportunity to experience the historical and cultural heritage of our country. I hope that these visits will also be both enjoyable and rewarding for you.

Distinguished Participants,

In concluding my remarks, I would also like to draw attention to the events currently unfolding in Gaza. Today, in Gaza, families, and even entire generations, are being destroyed. Children are being burned alive in tents, while civilians, without distinction between women and the elderly, are being massacred collectively and condemned to starvation. With deep sorrow, we are witnessing infants who die weighing less than their birth weight. This horrific massacre, which has been ongoing for nearly two years, constitutes a grave violation of all fundamental rights and freedoms, including the right to family life. As a human being and a jurist, I condemn and denounce this oppression, and I sincerely hope that it will come to an end as soon as possible.

Thank you all for your participation and attention. I wish you a successful and rewarding programme.

¹ https://www.sbb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Twelfth-Development-Plan_2024-2028.pdf