ANKARA - The Constitutional Court, which accepted the additional time demanded by the HDP in the closure case, will notify 451 politicians against whom a political ban is requested, and it will request their defenses within 30 days.

 

The request for additional time to the Constitutional Court within the scope of the closure case brought against the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) was accepted. The General Board of the Constitutional Court, convened yesterday, discussed the HDP’s request for a period of four months. According to the news from the Mesopotamia Agency, the Constitutional Court gave the HDP a 60 days additional time to prepare its defense.

 

Defense will be given within 30 days

 

In addition to the additional two-month period confirmed by the party officials, an indictment will be notified to the 451 people against whom a political ban is requested in the closure case. Politicians will defend within 30 days.

 

HDP’s demands

 

In party closure cases, the party was accepted as a legal entity and the indictment was notified only to the party which wants to be closed. Upon the HDP's application, the Constitutional Court will notify 451 politicians of the indictment of closure and ask them to defend themselves within 30 days.

 

HDP submitted an application with a request for additional time on August 11. Included in 843 pages of indictment, 68 folders and 8 flash memories; up-to-date information on all investigation, prosecution and summary of proceedings, witness, secret witness and confessors, and the decisions made about them. Again, HDP demanded that the decisions regarding the documents obtained regarding the searches conducted in the provincial, district buildings were not included, and that the decisions taken regarding these should be notified to them.

In addition, HDP requested the Constitutional Court to ask the Venice Commission for the opinion of the ‘’Amicus Curiae’’.

 

What is Amicus Curiae?

 

Amicus Curiae, a Latin legal term, means a person or organization that presents information to the court to form a basis of a decision without being a party to a lawsuit. Amicus Curiae conveys to the court the broad legal, social and economic effects of the decision and raises concerns. It functions as an intervention tool through which people who may be affected by the decision can have their voices heard. It encourages the court to decide within a broader, more comprehensive and more accurate legal framework. It aims to develop precedent presenting alternative legal arguments.

There is no information yet on whether the HDP Law Commission’s other demands have been accepted. After the decision taken by the Constitutional Court is notified to the HDP, information about whether other requests have been accepted or not will be obtained.

 

How will the process work?

 

After the additional time for the defense is completed, HDP will give its preliminary defense to the Constitutional Court. Then, Supreme Court of Appeals Prosecutor Bekir Şahin will present his opinion on the merits. This opinion will also be sent to HDP. Later, on the dates to be determined by the Constitutional Court, Supreme Court of Appeals Prosecutor Şahin will make a verbal statement, and HDP officials will make a verbal defense.

 

After the whole process, the rapporteur, who will gather the information and documents related to the case, will prepare his/her report on the merits. While these proceedings are in progress, both the Supreme Court of Appeals Prosecutor’s Office and the defendant HDP will be able to submit additional evidence or additional written defense.

 

15 members will decide

 

After the report is distributed to the members of the Supreme Court, President Zühtü Arslan will set a date for the meeting, and the members will come together on the designated day and begin to discuss the closure request. The Constitutional Court committee consisting of 15 people will decide on the closure case against the HDP. It can be decided by two-thirds majority of the members attending the meeting, that is, by the votes of 10 of the 15 members, that the party be dissolved due to the situations listed in Article 69 of the Constitution or that the party be partially or completely deprived of state aid depending on the gravity of the acts in question.

 

The decision made as a result of the lawsuit for political party closure case, it will be notified to the Supreme Court of Appeals Prosecutor and the relevant political party and will be published in the Official Gazette.

 

If it is determined that the party members whose political ban is requested have caused the closure of the party with their statements and actions, they will not be able to be the founder, member, executive and supervisor of another party for five years, starting from the publication of the final decision as justification in the Official Gazette.