SPIEGEL: Turkey's highest court last week upheld the ban on wearing headscarves on university campuses. The judges ruled that Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Edogan's reforms were unconstitutional. Was it a political decision?
Mustafa Sentop: The decision is at any rate not legally correct. The court doesn't have the authority to deal with the content of this law. It is only meant to examine how the law came into being -- in other words, whether the necessary majority had existed in parliament.
SPIEGEL: So you believe the court went beyond its jurisdiction?
Sentop: Absolutely. The constitutional court itself acted unconstitutionally. The reason behind this is political pressure.
SPIEGEL: But who could now challenge the ruling? There is no higher legal authority.
Sentop: In theory parliament could annul an unconstitutional court judgement. But the Turkish parliament is paralyzed, because the party that has the decisive influence over passing laws -- the AKP of prime minister Erdogan -- is facing a court case seeking to ban it.
SPIEGEL: Do you expect a ban of the governing party?
Sentop: After this decision we can almost assume that's the case. The headscarf reform is, after all, one of the most important reasons why the AKP is facing a ban. In fact, since the establishment of the constitutional court in 1961, 26 parties have been banned. And most of them were strengthened after such interventions.
SPIEGEL: Do you think democracy is in danger if judges can override the wishes of legislators?
Sentop: I think the constitutional state is in danger as well, because a genuine separation of powers does not exist in our country anymore. We are moving towards a juris-autocracy in which the judges rule.
Post to other social networks:
Stay informed with our free news services:
| All news from SPIEGEL International | Twitter | RSS |
| All news from Europe section | RSS |
© SPIEGEL ONLINE 2008
All Rights Reserved
Reproduction only allowed with the permission of SPIEGELnet GmbH