State Security Courts (SSC) are specially authorized courts established in the Turkish judicial system to try crimes concerning the internal and external security of the state. First established in 1973 with Law No. 1773 during the 1961 Constitution, these courts were abolished in 1976 with the annulment decision of the Constitutional Court, but were reorganized with the 1982 Constitution and operated from 1984 to 2004.【1】 SSCs were restructured, especially in the period following the 1980 military coup, in order to try issues such as combating terrorism, military espionage and crimes against the state quickly and effectively. The presence of military judges on the court panels and the secondary importance of individual rights have led to criticism of these courts. In 2004, with the constitutional amendment made within the scope of the European Union (EU) harmonization process, the State Security Courts were abolished, and special authorized high criminal courts were established.【2】
Establishment and First Period (1973-1976)
State Security Courts were included in the Turkish judicial system with the amendment to the 1961 Constitution with Law No. 1699. The State Security Courts were established with Law No. 1773 on the “Establishment and Trial Procedures of State Security Courts” accepted on June 26, 1973.【3】 These courts were tasked with hearing crimes committed against the indivisible integrity of the state with its territory and nation, the free democratic order and the characteristics of the Republic specified in the constitution. Article 2 of Law No. 1773 stipulated that the Council of Ministers would decide in which provinces and how many State Security Courts would be established, the determination of their judicial districts and, if necessary, their abolition upon the proposal of the Minister of Justice. The court panels consisted of the president, main and substitute members to be appointed from among first-class judges and military judges, and public prosecutors.
The crimes falling within the scope of the Law No. 1773 included the crimes stipulated in Articles 125-141, 146-157, 161, 163 (first, second and third paragraphs), 168, 169, 171 and 172 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK) and the crimes in other specific articles. In addition, the crimes specified in the laws on meetings and demonstration marches, strikes and lockouts, associations and firearms, and theft crimes committed against state-owned communication devices were also given to the jurisdiction of the State Security Courts. The law stated that those who participated in these crimes would be tried in the State Security Courts regardless of their title or official position.
However, on behalf of the Republican People's Party (CHP), Secretary General Orhan Eyüboğlu filed a lawsuit for annulment with the Constitutional Court because Articles 2, 5, 9, 13, 23, and 25 of Law No. 1773 are contrary to various articles of the Constitution. CHP's justifications include that leaving the establishment and judicial circles of courts to the Council of Ministers is contrary to Articles 136/1 and 144/4 of the Constitution; making appointments only from among judges is contrary to Article 136/3; leaving subjective discretion in defining crimes is contrary to Articles 33, 79 and 136/2; granting superiority of duty to State Security Courts is contrary to Articles 32 and 136; and the procedure for rejecting judges is contrary to Articles 31, 32 and 136.
The Constitutional Court annulled Articles 1 and 6 of the Law on May 6, 1975 (E. 1974/35, K. 1975/126) and annulled the entire law since the annulment of these articles rendered the other articles inapplicable.【4】 The annulment decision was confirmed on June 24, 1975 (E. 1973/34, K. 1975/168) and the State Security Courts were abolished on October 11, 1976.
The 1982 Constitution and Re-establishment (1984-2004)
The State Security Courts were reorganized by Article 143 of the 1982 Constitution. With the Law No. 2845 on the “Establishment and Trial Procedures of State Security Courts” accepted on June 16, 1983, the State Security Courts began their duties in Ankara, Diyarbakır, Erzincan, İstanbul, İzmir, Kayseri, Konya, and Malatya on April 1, 1984.【5】 Article 143 of the 1982 Constitution stated that the State Security Courts would deal with crimes committed against the indivisible unity of the state, the free democratic order and the characteristics of the Republic; it reserved the provisions of martial law and the state of war. The court panels consisted of a president, two main and two substitute members, a prosecutor and a sufficient number of assistant prosecutors. The president, one main and one substitute member and the prosecutor were appointed from among first-class judges and prosecutors; one main and one substitute member and assistant prosecutors were appointed from among military judges. Appointments were made by the Supreme Board of Judges and Prosecutors (HSYK) for four-year terms, and those whose terms had expired could be reappointed.
The crimes falling within the scope of the jurisdiction of the DGMs were limited to the fight against terrorism, military espionage and crimes committed against the state in the period following the 1980 military coup. The courts aimed to conduct rapid and effective trials, but were criticized for the secondary importance of individual rights and freedoms. The presence of military judges on the boards led to discussions about the impartiality and independence of the courts. DGM decisions could be appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeals. In regions where martial law was declared, DGMs could be converted into Martial Law Military Courts according to the principles determined by law.
The Abolition Process and After
DGMs were abolished in 2004 with the constitutional amendment made within the scope of the European Union harmonization process. The amendment made to Article 143 of the 1982 Constitution with Law No. 4388 on June 18, 1999, ensured the removal of military judges from the State Security Court boards; it was stipulated that the president, members and prosecutors would be appointed only from first-class civilian judges and prosecutors. However, the structural problems of the State Security Courts and the allegations of human rights violations were the subject of criticism during the EU negotiations. With Law No. 5170, which was accepted on May 7, 2004, Article 143 of the 1982 Constitution was repealed and the State Security Courts were completely abolished.【6】 In place of the State Security Courts, specially authorized high criminal courts were established; these courts continued to hear crimes falling within the scope of the State Security Courts' duties.
Legal and Social Discussions
During their term of office, the State Security Courts were debated from both a legal and social perspective. In the 1973-1976 period, the CHP’s application to the Constitutional Court revealed that the establishment and functioning of the courts were contrary to constitutional principles. The Constitutional Court’s annulment decision in 1975 showed that the State Security Courts contained regulations that could harm the independence and impartiality of the judiciary. In the 1984-2004 period, the presence of military judges caused the courts to resemble martial law courts rather than civilian courts. The aim of the State Security Courts for speedy trials had negative effects on the right to a fair trial and the rights of defense; this situation was criticized especially in political cases. The EU harmonization process was decisive in the abolition of the State Security Courts; however, the fact that the specially authorized high criminal courts were also subject to similar criticisms kept the structural problems of the specially authorized judicial institutions on the agenda in Turkey.【7】
