What is an Individual Application to the Constitutional Court?
Individual application to the Constitutional Court is regulated under Article 148/3 of the Constitution. According to this article: “Everyone may apply to the Constitutional Court, claiming that any of their fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution or covered by the European Convention on Human Rights have been violated by public authority. To be able to apply, ordinary legal remedies must be exhausted.” As can be seen, an individual application can only be made regarding fundamental rights that are guaranteed by the Constitution and fall within the scope of the European Convention on Human Rights.
From Which Date Can Individual Applications Be Made for Finalized Decisions?
The Constitutional Court examines applications against final decisions and actions finalized after September 23, 2012. Decisions finalized before this date are not reviewed.
Exhaustion of Administrative and Judicial Remedies
Exhaustion of administrative and judicial remedies means that all legal administrative and judicial avenues provided by law for the act, omission, or decision alleged to constitute a violation must be fully pursued before filing an individual application. An individual application can be submitted only after the exhaustion of administrative remedies and, if applicable, the remedies available in first-instance courts, appellate courts, and the cassation process.
Individual Application Process
To submit an individual application to the Constitutional Court, all ordinary legal remedies must be exhausted. In other words, after completing all administrative and judicial remedies (such as appeal and cassation), if no other legal avenues remain, the application must be filed within 30 days from the date the alleged violation is discovered.
Force Majeure or Serious Illness
In the event that the 30-day application period is missed due to a valid excuse such as force majeure or a serious illness, the application can be submitted within 15 days from the date the excuse ceases, accompanied by the relevant supporting documents.
Who Can Submit an Individual Application?
As a general rule, anyone who claims that any of the fundamental rights and freedoms jointly guaranteed by the Constitution of the Republic of Turkey, the European Convention on Human Rights, and the protocols to which Turkey is a party, have been violated by public authority, can submit an individual application. Individual applications can be made by the applicant personally, the applicant’s legal representative, or their attorney.
Authority to Submit the Application
Individual applications can be submitted directly to the Constitutional Court or through courts or Turkey’s diplomatic missions abroad.
Documents Required in the Application Form
It is mandatory to attach the originals or certified copies of the evidence relied upon and the decisions or actions alleged to have caused the violation to the application form. In addition, the necessary documents from the following list must also be included with the individual application form:
- In applications filed through a legal representative, a document proving that the legal representative is authorized to represent the applicant (e.g., guardianship decision in applications through a guardian),
- In applications filed through a lawyer, a power of attorney showing that the lawyer is authorized to represent the applicant, with the bar association stamp and proof of payment of the power of attorney fee attached,
- Proof of payment of the fee,
- A copy of the applicant’s identity card,
- If the applicant is a foreign national, a valid identification document,
- For legal entities, a document proving the authority to represent the legal entity,
- If the final decision or action has been notified, the notification receipt,
- Originals or certified copies of the relied-upon documents,
- If claiming compensation, documents proving the incurred damages,
- If the application could not be submitted within the time limit, any documents proving the justification for the delay.
Confidentiality
The applicant may request that their identity be kept confidential in publicly accessible documents, provided that the reason for the request is also stated.
Request for Interim Measures
When filing an individual application to the Constitutional Court, a request for interim measures can be made. An interim measure is a decision issued to protect the fundamental rights of the applicant when a serious threat to their life or physical and moral integrity is identified. If such a decision is granted, the execution/enforcement of the public authority’s action is temporarily suspended as a precaution.
In Which Cases Is an Application Declared to Be Clearly Unfounded?
The Constitutional Court may declare applications that are clearly unfounded as inadmissible. The Court considers an application clearly unfounded and therefore inadmissible if it identifies the presence of any of the following four reasons:
a) The alleged violations cannot be substantiated (unsubstantiated complaint),
b) The claims relate solely to matters that should be addressed through ordinary legal remedies (ordinary remedy complaint),
c) The application consists of complex or frivolous complaints (complex or frivolous complaint),
d) There is no interference with fundamental rights, or it is clear that any interference is legitimate (obviously no violation complaint).
Duplicate Application
A duplicate application occurs when a new application is submitted based on the same event, facts, or alleged violations while an earlier application is still under review or after it has been concluded. In such cases, the individual application is rejected on the grounds that it constitutes a duplicate application.
Abuse of Right
If the applicant engages in abusive, misleading, or similar conduct, it is considered that the individual application right has been abused. When it is clearly determined that the right to individual application has been abused, the application is rejected at every stage of the review, and in addition to the litigation costs imposed against the applicant, a disciplinary fine may also be imposed.
Consequences of the Decision
In an individual application, if a violation is determined and it arises from a court decision, a retrial may be requested or compensation may be claimed. The Court will issue a decision accordingly. However, if no claim for compensation is made, the Court cannot award compensation on its own initiative.
Dismissal Decision
A dismissal decision is issued in the following cases:
- The applicant clearly waives the case,
- It is understood that the applicant has abandoned the case,
- The violation and its consequences have ceased to exist,
- There is no reason, as determined by the Chambers or Commissions, justifying the continuation of the examination of the application.
Precedent Decisions
“In the present case, the applicant became aware of the alleged violation on 30/10/2012, the date on which the final decision was notified. Approximately eight months later, on 4/7/2013, a notification was made at the Court registry at the request of the applicant’s representative (defense counsel); however, this has no effect on the starting date of the 30-day period for individual application. For the reasons explained, the application submitted more than 30 days after the applicant became aware of the alleged violation must be declared inadmissible due to “time-bar,” without examining other admissibility requirements.” (Constitutional Court Individual Application, Application No: 2013/5504, Decision Date: 28.05.2014)
“It has been stated that in individual applications made through a representative or lawyer, if valid excuses exist, applications submitted within fifteen days from the date the excuse ceases should be considered timely under Article 47(5) of Law No. 6216 and Article 64(2) of the Internal Regulations. However, there is no provision specifying the period within which deficiencies must be completed once a valid excuse exists. In such cases, the provisions of Article 47(5) of Law No. 6216 and Article 64(2) of the Internal Regulations must be applied analogously. In other words, deficiencies must be completed within fifteen days from the date the excuse ceases.”
In the case at hand, the deficiency notice dated 4/11/2014 informed the applicant’s attorney, in accordance with Article 66(3) of the Internal Regulations, that if the identified deficiencies were not remedied within a strict fifteen-day period without a valid excuse, the application would be rejected. This notice was duly served to the applicant’s attorney on 17/11/2014. The deficiencies should have been completed and submitted by 2/12/2014 at the latest; however, they were sent to the Constitutional Court on 5/2/2015, after the fifteen-day deadline. The applicant’s attorney submitted an excuse supported by a medical report.
According to the report submitted to the Constitutional Court by the applicant’s attorney, he underwent hip fracture surgery between 31/10/2014 and 4/11/2014, and it was stated that a follow-up would be appropriate at the end of a ninety-day rest period after discharge. Considering that the applicant’s attorney had undergone hip surgery and was advised a ninety-day rest period, his illness should be regarded as a serious medical condition within the scope of Article 64(2) of the Internal Regulations. The date the excuse ceased is 4/2/2015, marking the end of the ninety-day rest period. The applicant’s attorney completed the deficiencies within fifteen days from the date the excuse ceased, on 5/2/2015.
“Even though the applicant’s attorney did not complete the deficiencies within the prescribed period, considering the medical reports submitted, the excuse is deemed valid; therefore, the excuse must be accepted.” (Constitutional Court Individual Application, Application Number: 2014/16516, Decision Date: 08.03.2018)
“Under the Constitution and the provisions of Law No. 6216, the Constitutional Court’s temporal jurisdiction begins on 23/9/2012. The Court can only examine individual applications filed against final decisions and acts that became final after this date. These provisions regarding the Court’s temporal jurisdiction pertain to public order, and it is not possible to extend the scope of jurisdiction to include final acts and decisions that became final before this date.
Determining a specific date for the Constitutional Court’s temporal jurisdiction and ensuring that the Court’s jurisdiction is not applied retroactively is a requirement of the principle of legal certainty.”
In the case at hand, the applicant was punished by the disciplinary officer with six days of room confinement on 30/5/2012 pursuant to Article 171 of Law No. 1632, and the objection filed by the applicant on the same day under Article 188 of the same Law was rejected by the senior disciplinary officer on 15/6/2012. The penalty imposed on the applicant became final before the Constitutional Court’s temporal jurisdiction for individual applications commenced.
Although the room confinement penalty imposed on the applicant was executed between 30/10/2012 and 5/11/2012, after the start of the Constitutional Court’s temporal jurisdiction, the execution of the penalty has no effect on the finality of the imposed penalty.
For the reasons stated, since it is understood that the contested act became final before 23/9/2012, the application must be deemed inadmissible due to “lack of temporal jurisdiction,” without examining other admissibility criteria. (Constitutional Court Individual Application, Application Number: 2012/832, Decision Date: 12.02.2013)
Lawyer. Gökhan AKGÜL & Lawyer. Züleyha APAYDIN
Individual Application to the Constitutional Court and Antalya Lawyer Support
In cases where individual rights and freedoms are violated, filing an individual application to the Constitutional Court is a fundamental legal remedy. However, since this process requires legal knowledge and experience, it is crucial that applications are prepared in full compliance with procedural rules.
Our law firm in Antalya provides professional support through experienced attorneys during the individual application process to the Constitutional Court. To prevent loss of rights and increase the likelihood of the application being accepted, working with an Antalya-based lawyer specializing in individual applications will contribute significantly to the successful handling of the process.
