The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled Tuesday that Turkey had violated the right to a fair trial of 120 judges and prosecutors in three separate cases, finding that the government denied them a fair legal process after their dismissal or forced reassignment from the judiciary, the Stockholm Center for Freedom reported.
The rulings — Olcay and Others v. Turkey Benli and Others v. Turkey and Tosun and Others v. Turkey — concern judicial removals both before and after a 2016 coup attempt, highlighting ongoing concerns over judicial independence in Turkey.
In each case the ECtHR unanimously found that Turkey had violated Article 6 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees the right of access to a court, and ordered the government to pay compensation to the affected judges and prosecutors.
The Olcay case involved judges from the Supreme Administrative Court (Council of State) whose terms were terminated under Law No. 6723, passed by Turkey’s parliament on July 1, 2016, just two weeks before the July 15, 2016 coup attempt.
While the law predates the coup attempt, its implementation began on July 23, 2016 as part of a broader judicial restructuring effort. The Turkish government defended the measure as an effort to reorganize the judiciary by establishing a three-tiered court system. However, the law immediately terminated all sitting judges’ terms — except for a select group of senior officials — without individual assessments or disciplinary proceedings.
The affected judges were not provided with a legal avenue to contest their dismissal, leading them to bring their case before the ECtHR. The court ruled that the judges had a legitimate claim to challenge their dismissals and that the denial of judicial review impaired their fundamental rights, violating Article 6 § 1. The court ordered Turkey to pay each applicant €3,000 in damages.
The Benli case concerned six judges and chief inspectors from Turkey’s High Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSYK) and the Ministry of Justice, who were removed from their positions and forcibly reassigned to other cities between 2014 and 2015.
The HSYK had reassigned the judges and prosecutors without due process, rejecting their appeals and leaving no judicial avenue for them to contest the decisions. Some were transferred to positions hundreds of miles away from their homes, significantly impacting their careers.
The ECtHR found that Turkey had effectively denied these judicial officials access to a court, ruling that their forced reassignments without recourse violated their rights under Article 6 § 1. The court ordered Turkey to pay each applicant €2,500 in damages and legal costs.
The Tosun case involved 84 judges from the Supreme Court of Appeals, whose terms were abruptly terminated after the coup attempt.
Following the abortive putsch, the Turkish government declared a state of emergency and carried out a massive purge of state institutions under the pretext of an anti-coup fight. More than 130,000 public servants as well as 24,706 members of the armed forces were summarily removed from their jobs for alleged membership in or relationships with “terrorist organizations” by emergency decree-laws subject to neither judicial nor parliamentary scrutiny.
Under Law No. 6723, all members of the court lost their positions, except for a few senior figures. While some were reappointed by the HSYK, many, including the applicants, were not reinstated and were instead reassigned to lower judicial positions or removed entirely.
The court cited its earlier Sözen v. Turkey (2024) ruling, which found that Turkey’s post-coup judicial restructuring law impaired judicial independence. The ECtHR ordered Turkey to pay €3,000 in damages to each applicant, along with additional compensation for those who provided evidence of legal expenses.
Although Law No. 6723 was officially justified as a judicial restructuring measure, critics argue that it was strategically designed to remove judges en masse without due process, allowing the government to replace them with loyalists.
These rulings are the latest in a series of ECtHR decisions criticizing Turkey’s judicial independence and post-2016 legal purges. Other high-profile cases have challenged the mass dismissal and imprisonment of judicial officials, including: Kartal v. Turkey (2024), in which judges from the HSYK were dismissed without due process or an independent review.
Under Article 46 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Turkey is obligated to comply with ECtHR rulings. However, its track record on implementing controversial judgments remains questionable. The government has previously delayed, ignored or refused to enforce rulings involving judicial independence and political dissent, including those related to imprisoned journalists, academics and opposition figures.
Legal experts warn that this case underscores ongoing concerns over judicial independence in Turkey, where courts have been accused of operating under political pressure. The ruling adds to a growing list of international decisions criticizing Turkey’s handling of judicial purges and rule of law violations.