The Right to be Informed of Accusation under the Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights
Akif YıldırımThe right to be informed of the accusation is not explicitly stated in the Turkish Constitution. According to the Turkish Constitutional Court, the right to be informed of the accusation derives from Article 36 of the Constitution. However, in Article 6 (3) (a) of the European Convention on Human Rights (Convention), it is clearly regulated as a right for the suspect/ accused to be informed of accusation. According to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), the guarantees set out in Article 6 paragraph 3 of the Convention are specific aspects of the right to a fair trial referred to in paragraph 1. For this reason, a trial in which the suspect/defendant is not informed of the accusation cannot be said to be fair. The Turkish Constitutional Court took into consideration the Convention and the relevant ECtHR decisions in determining the constitutional foundations of the right to be informed of the accusation and the constitutional guarantees it provides. In this sense, the right to be informed of the accusation as a constitutional guarantee, and as an element of the right to a fair trial, has been embodied in Turkish law by the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court. This article will evaluate the right to be informed of the accusation within the framework of the guarantees provided by the Turkish Constitution and the Convention in light of the decisions and judgments of the Constitutional Court and the ECHR. It concludes that the right to be informed of the accusation as a constitutional guarantee provides minimum guarantees, and suggests the implementation of the Turkish Code of Criminal Procedure, which provides far more guarantees in this regard.
Anayasa ve Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi Çerçevesinde İsnadı (Suçlamayı) Öğrenme Hakkı
Akif YıldırımŞüphelinin/sanığın hakkındaki suçlamadan haberdar edilmesi, bir hak olarak Anayasa’da açıkça düzenlenmemiştir. Anayasa Mahkemesine göre suçlamayı öğrenme hakkının anayasal dayanağı Anayasa’nın 36. maddesidir. Bununla birlikte Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi’nin (Sözleşme) 6. maddesinin (3) numaralı fıkrasının (a) bendinde, şüphelinin/sanığın suçlamadan haberdar edilmesini istemesi bir hak olarak açıkça öngörülmüştür. Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesine göre (AİHM) Sözleşme’nin 6. maddesinin (3) numaralı fıkrasında düzenlenen güvenceler, aynı maddenin (1) numaralı fıkrasında güvence altına alınan hakkaniyete uygun yargılanma hakkının birer özel görünüm biçimidir. Bu sebeple şüphelinin/ sanığın suçlamadan haberdar edilmediği bir yargılamanın hakkaniyete uygun olduğu söylenemez. Anayasa Mahkemesi suçlamayı öğrenme hakkının anayasal temellerini ve sağladığı anayasal teminatları belirlerken Sözleşme’yi ve ilgili AİHM kararlarını gözetmektedir. Bu bağlamda Türk hukukunda anayasal düzeyde bir güvence olarak suçlamayı öğrenme hakkı, adil yargılanma hakkının bir unsuru olarak Anayasa Mahkemesi içtihatlarıyla ete kemiğe bürünmüştür. Asgari güvenceler sağlayan anayasal düzeyde bu hakkın birer yansıması olarak ilgili usul kanununda daha ileri düzeyde hükümler de mevcuttur. Ancak çalışmada, suçlamayı (isnadı) öğrenme hakkı -Anayasa Mahkemesi ve AİHM kararları ışığında- Anayasa ve Sözleşme’nin sağladığı güvenceler çerçevesinde değerlendirilecektir. Bu değerlendirme, suçlamayı öğrenme hakkının 4/12/2004 tarihli ve 5271 sayılı Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu’ndaki (CMK) yansımaları da gözetilerek yapılacaktır.
The right to be informed of the accusation is not explicitly regulated in the Turkish Constitution. According to the Constitutional Court, the right to be informed of the accusation derives from Article 36 of the Constitution. Besides guaranteeing the general right to a fair trial, Article 6 protects specific rights, such the right to be informed of the accusation. Article 6 (3) (a) of the Convention enacts a right for the suspect/accused to be informed of the accusation. Article 6 § 3 (a) of the Convention guarantees the right for everyone charged with criminal offence “to be informed promptly, in a language which he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusation against him.” The scope of Article 6 § 3 (a) of the Convention must be assessed in light of the more general right to a fair hearing guaranteed by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. The aim of this provision seems clear: the right to defend oneself can only be exercised effectively if the accused knows what he/she is accused of. Furthermore, the right to be informed of the accusation is related to the principle of equality of arms. It is not possible for a defendant who does not know the accusation against them to defend themselves.
Within this article, we analyze the right to be informed of the accusation in the framework of the guarantees provided by the Constitution and the Convention in light of the decisions and judgments of the Constitutional Court and the ECHR. The case law of ECHR is also consistent in holding that information must include both the cause and nature of the accusation. The cause of accusation means the material facts alleged against the accused, while the nature of the accusation refers to the legal qualification of these material facts. While the extent of the “detailed” information depends on the particular circumstances of each case, who the victim is, where, when, how and why the crime was committed should be understood from the accusation.
From the words “in a language which he understands” it follows that if a defendant is not familiar with the language used by the court, the information must be translated for him. The provision does not specify if the relevant information should be given in writing or translated in written form for a foreign defendant. Also, the information must be submitted to the accused in due time to prepare their defense. Whether the required information has been furnished “promptly” has to be assessed in the conditions of each individual case.
During the course of the proceedings, the judge can give a new legal characterization to the acts on which the accusation is based. However, the accused must be duly and fully informed of any changes in the accusation and must be provided with adequate time and facilities to organize his defense based on any new information or allegations.
The most important problem regarding the right to be informed of the accusation in Turkish law is that, at least, indictments are not prepared in accordance with the standards set by the Constitution. This problem is the main source of many problems related to the basic principles of criminal procedure law. Failure to prepare an indictment with the required standards causes people to be accused arbitrarily. However, The Turkish Code of Criminal Procedure includes provisions regarding this right far beyond the standards set by the Constitution and the Convention. These provisions should be implemented not only to reduce violations of rights, but also as a requirement of being a state that respects human rights.
