Turkish government set to reintroduce controversial bill restructuring HSYK
Justice Minister Bekir Bozdag said the new HSYK bill would be added to Parliament’s agenda after the upcoming legislation about the Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency (AFAD) institution. AA PhotoJustice Minister Bekir Bozdağ has announced that the government plans to debate a controversial bill restructuring the Supreme Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSYK) on the floor of the General Assembly, Anadolu Agency reported Feb. 11.
Bozdağ also said there would be changes to the ruling party-led draft bill and a number of articles would be removed, without giving further details.
The government froze some articles in a controversial bill reshaping the HSYK last month following criticism that the government was moving to increase its power over the justice system.
That move came after the parties at Parliament were unable to reconcile over the bill, and the government’s attempt to change the legislation through a constitutional amendment could not get support from the opposition parties. A two-thirds parliamentary majority is needed to make changes to the Constitution.
Bozdağ said the new HSYK bill would be added to Parliament’s agenda after the upcoming legislation about the Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency (AFAD) institution.
Hectic agenda at Parliament
Meanwhile, Parliament’s General Assembly was set to vote yesterday on a bill that amends the Military Law, which the opposition says will damage the promotion system in the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK).
Elsewhere at Parliament, on the same day, the Constitution Commission began debating a new government-dubbed “democratization package” on fundamental rights and freedoms. At the same time, the Justice Commission began debating another package that includes arrangements in the judicial field concerning specially authorized courts.
Last week, main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) filed a petition to the Parliament Speaker’s Office, complaining of the timing of the commission meetings and arguing that the overlapping of the meetings was deliberately aimed at “creating a collision.”
“When the link and content of each of the two bills are taken into consideration, members of the Constitution and Justice Commissions are obliged to personally follow both bills,” the CHP said, arguing that this was not possible with the current timing.