Dynamics of Judicial Reforms in Turkey: Interplay Between EU and Domestic Factors

Year 2016, Volume: 8 Issue: 14, 77 - 96, 15.03.2016

İkboljon Goraboyev

Abstract

This paper aims to present an overview of judicial reforms in Turkey and un-derline some external and internal dynamics that have caused these reforms. Until now, comprehensive accounts of reform were mainly concentrated on political and human rights advancements. This article will focus in detail on judicial reforms undertaken since the recognition of Turkey as an official can-didate to EU. Most of these reforms correspond also to the first two terms of current ruling party (AKP) which cover years 2002-2011. The paper tries to underline EU and domestic dynamics of legislative policies on judiciary in Turkey by utilizing Putnam’s “two-level games” approach and how they ac-count for changes in legislative attitude of Turkish government.

Keywords

Turkey, Judicial Reforms, Criminal Justice, Reform Packages

References

• Akyol, Mustafa. “Can a New Premier Save Turkey?,” New York Times, August 24, 2014.
• Akyol, Mustafa. “New threats to democracy in Turkey,” New York Times, Au- gust 18, 2014.
• Arican, Mehmet. “4. Yargı paketi ne getiriyor(What will 4th Judicial package bring about)?,” Ankara Stratej,i February 25, 2013.
• Aşık, Özgür. “Legal reforms in Turkey: Ambitious and Controversial,” Tur- kish Policy, Volume 11-1 (2012): 145-153.
• Aydın, Senem and Çarkoğlu, Ali. “EU Conditionality and Democratic Rule of Law in Turkey,” Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law Working Paper (Stanford University, 2006), accessed on December 12, 2015http://cddrl.fsi.stanford.edu/publications/eu_conditionality_and_democ- ratic_rule_of_law_in_turkey.
• Aydın, Senem and Keyman, Fuat. “European Integration and Transformation of Turkish Democracy,” Centre for European Policy Studies EU-Turkey Wor- king Papers, No.2, (August 2004).
• Cowell, Alan. “Turkey turns its back on the EU,” New York Times, 3 April, 2014.
• Çam,Ali Riza. “Turkish IT project UYAP,” European e-Justice Conference,accessed July 4, 2014,http://www.ccbe.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/ document/E-Justice_Portal/17-18_02_2009/Abstracts/13_Abstract_-_Tur- kish_IT_project_UYAP-_Ali_Rza_Cam.pdf.
• Duman, Özgür. “Information note on new modifications introduced by law no-6352,” accessed July 4, 2014, http://www.ozcan-ozcan.av.tr/makale/54/3- yargi-paketi-6352-s-yasa-bilgi-notu.html.
• EU General Directorate of Ministry of Justice, “The impact and contribution of the adoption of EU acquis on the domestice law of Turkey as an EU candi- date country,” (26 December 2008).
• Gürbüz, Mustafa. “The Long Winter: Turkish Politics after Corruption Scan- dal,” Rethink Paper no-15, (May 2014).
• Hale, William. “Human Rights and Turkey’s EU Accession Process: Internal and External Dynamics, 2005-2010,” South European Society and Politics, 16:2 ( 2011): 323-333.
• Dynamics of Judicial Reforms in Turkey: Interplay between EU and Domestic Factors
• James, Rosenau. Linkage Politics: Essays on the Covergence of National and International Systems (New york: Free Press, 1969).
• Jones, Drian. “Turkey’s plan to reform judiciary draws rebuke,” Voice of Ame- ricaaccessed December 11, 2014, http://www.voanews.com/content/turkeys- plan-to-reform-judiciary-draws-rebuke/1853223.html.
• Kalaycioglu, Ersin. “Kulturkampf in Turkey: The Constitutional Referendum of 12 September 2010,” South European Society and Politics, Vol. 17, no-1 (March 2012): 1-22.
• Kalaycioglu, Ersin. “The Turkish-EU Odyssey and Political Regime Change in Turkey,” South European Society and Politics, 16:2 (2011): 265-278.
• Keyman, Fuat and Öniş, Ziya. “Helsinki, Copenhagen and Beyond: Challen- ges to the New Europe and the Turkish State”, in Turkey and European Integ- ration: Accession Prospects and Issues, Mehmet Uğur and Nergis Canefe, eds. (London: Routledge, 2004).
• Ministry of European Union, “The Chapter of Judiciary and Fundamental Rights in the process of EU negotiations,” (February 2013).
• Ministry of Justice, “Yargıda reformun neresindeyiz (Where are we in the pro- cess of judicial reforms)?,” accessed February 15, 2016, http://sgb.adalet.gov. tr/ekler/yayin/yreform.pdf.
• Moravcsik, Andrew. “Introduction: Integrating International and Domestic Theories of International Bargaining,” in Double-Edged Diplomacy: Interna- tional Bargaining and
• Domestic Politics , eds. Peter Evans, Harold Jacobson and Robert Putnam (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993).
• Öniş, Ziya. “Sharing Power: Turkey’s Democratization Challenge in the Age of the AKP Hegemony,” Insight Turkey,(Spring 2013): 103-122.
• Özbudun, Ergün. “AKP at the crossroads: Erdoğan’s majoritarian drift,” South European Society and Politics, 19:2 (2014): 155-167.
• Özbudun, Ergün. “Democratization reforms in Turkey, 1993-2004,” Turkish Studies, 8:2 (2007): 179-196.
• Özcan, Bayram. “4. Yargı paketi,18 aya kadar hapis cezasına kısmi,örtülü, sı- nırlı bir af geldi,infaz yasası değişti (4th Judicial package, limited amnesty to sentences under 18 months, law on criminal execution changes),” accessed September 15, 2014, http://www.ozcan-ozcan.av.tr.
• Pierini, Marc. “How far backward is Turkey sliding?,” Carnegie Europe, ac- cessed December 11, 2014, http://carnegieeurope.eu/publications/?fa=54732 &reloadFlag=1#.
• “Probation to be submitted to the Constitutional Court,”Ankara Strateji,accessed September 15, 2014, www.ankarastateji.org. Putnam, Robert. “Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-level Games,” International Organizati- on, Volume 42, Issue 03 (Summer 1988): 427-460.
• Şen, Ersan. “New procedures of execution of penalties brought about by Law no-6411,” accessed September 15, 2014, www.haber7.com.
• “Yargı Paketleri: Hak ve Özgürlükler Açısından Bir Değerlendirme Geniş Kapsamlı Rapor (Judicial packages: An Evaluation from the Perspective of Rights and Liberties, Comprehensive Report),” TESEV, (2013).
• Turhan,Faruk and Altikat, Abdürrahim. “Yeni bir ceza usulü olarak denetimli serbestilik ve bu usulden yararlanma şartları (Probation as a new method of criminal procedure and conditions of benefiting from it),” S.D.Ü. Hukuk Fa- kültesi Dergisi, 2:2 (2012): 1-38.
• “Turkey is reforming ‘at full speed’ for EU accession.” Agence France- Press, accessed December 22, 2015, http://www.globalpost.com/artic- le/6705748/2015/12/15/turkey-reforming-full-speed-eu-accession.
• Türkmen, Fusun and Özbudun, Ergün. “The impact of the ECHR rulings on Turkey’s Democratization: an Evaluation,” (Paper presented at the 21st IPSA World Congress, 8-12 July 2012, Madrid).
• Ulusoy, Kıvanç, “Turkey’s fight against corruption: Critical assessment,” Glo- bal Turkey in Europe Paper no-19, Istituto Affari Internazionali accessed De- cember 11, 2014, http://www.iai.it/pdf/GTE/GTE_C_19.pdf.
• Yazici, Serap. “Turkey’s Constitutional Amendments: Between the status quo and limited democratic reforms,” Insight Turkey, Vol. 12, no-2 (2010): 1-10.
• Yeginsu, Ceylan. “Turkish Police to get more search Powers,” New York Ti- mes, December 3, 2014.