Today's Date: Add To Favorites
Turkish PM slams court ruling, then backs down
International | 2007/05/03 01:28

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Wednesday slammed a Constitutional Court decision to annul the first-round vote in the presidential election as "a bullet fired at democracy," but then backed down saying his remarks were not aimed at the court.

"We respect the decision of the Constitutional Court, (but) it will be much debated from the legal point of view," Erdogan told members of his Justice and Development Party in parliament.

"The election of a president in parliament has been blocked, the election of presidents has been made almost impossible in future parliaments from now on.

"And you know what is it at the same time? It is a bullet fired at democracy," he said.

His remarks prompted a strong response from the Constitutional Court, which warned that the prime minister was committing a crime by criticising court rulings.

Erdogan's remarks are "irresponsible, go beyond their original intent and turn the institution into a target," the court statement said.

The court Tuesday cancelled the first-round vote in Turkey's turbulent presidential elections on the grounds that the 550-member parliament started voting without the required quorum of a two-thirds majority.

Questioned by reporters about the court's reaction, Erdogan said his words were aimed not at the tribunal, but at Deniz Baykal. Baykal is the chairman of the main opposition Republican People's Party (CHP), which had petitioned the court to annul the vote.

Baykal had said ahead of the ruling that Turkey would plunge into conflict if the court did not cancel the vote.

"My words were directed completely at Mr. Baykal," the Anatolia news agency quoted Erdogan as saying. "Why would I otherwise say that I respect the ruling? ... The ruling has been made, we must respect it."

In its statement Wednesday, the court also criticised Baykal's remarks.

Both statements violated the independence of the judiciary and were crimes under the penal code, it said.

The CHP had petitioned the court with the intention of blocking the election of the sole presidential candidate, Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul, and forcing early elections. They object to Gul because of his Islamist background.

Erdogan's Justice and Development Party (AKP), the moderate offshoot of a now-banned Islamist movement, holds the majority in parliament with 351 members. But it does not have the two-thirds majority of 367 that the court said was required for voting to begin in Friday's session.

The opposition had boycotted the vote.

Following Tuesday's ruling, the AKP called for early general elections in June and said it would also submit a package of constitutional amendments, including a far-reaching reform for a popular vote to elect the president.



[PREV] [1] ..[6968][6969][6970][6971][6972][6973][6974][6975][6976].. [8241] [NEXT]
All
Class Action
Bankruptcy
Biotech
Breaking Legal News
Business
Corporate Governance
Court Watch
Criminal Law
Health Care
Human Rights
Insurance
Intellectual Property
Labor & Employment
Law Center
Law Promo News
Legal Business
Legal Marketing
Litigation
Medical Malpractice
Mergers & Acquisitions
Political and Legal
Politics
Practice Focuses
Securities
Elite Lawyers
Tax
Featured Law Firms
Tort Reform
Venture Business News
World Business News
Law Firm News
Attorneys in the News
Events and Seminars
Environmental
Legal Careers News
Patent Law
Consumer Rights
International
Legal Spotlight
Current Cases
State Class Actions
Federal Class Actions
Abortion consumes US politic..
Trump faces prospect of addi..
Retrial of Harvey Weinstein ..
Starbucks appears likely to ..
Supreme Court will weigh ban..
Judge in Trump case orders m..
Court makes it easier to sue..
Top Europe rights court cond..
Elon Musk will be investigat..
Retired Supreme Court Justic..
The Man Charged in an Illino..
Texas’ migrant arrest law w..
Former Georgia insurance com..
Alabama woman who faked kidn..
A Supreme Court ruling in a ..


Class action or a representative action is a form of lawsuit in which a large group of people collectively bring a claim to court and/or in which a class of defendants is being sued. This form of collective lawsuit originated in the United States and is still predominantly a U.S. phenomenon, at least the U.S. variant of it. In the United States federal courts, class actions are governed by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule. Since 1938, many states have adopted rules similar to the FRCP. However, some states like California have civil procedure systems which deviate significantly from the federal rules; the California Codes provide for four separate types of class actions. As a result, there are two separate treatises devoted solely to the complex topic of California class actions. Some states, such as Virginia, do not provide for any class actions, while others, such as New York, limit the types of claims that may be brought as class actions. They can construct your law firm a brand new website, lawyer website templates and help you redesign your existing law firm site to secure your place in the internet.
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Lorain Elyria Divorce Lawyer
www.loraindivorceattorney.com
Legal Document Services in Los Angeles, CA
Best Legal Document Preparation
www.tllsg.com
Car Accident Lawyers
Sunnyvale, CA Personal Injury Attorney
www.esrajunglaw.com
East Greenwich Family Law Attorney
Divorce Lawyer - Erica S. Janton
www.jantonfamilylaw.com/about
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
  Law Firm Directory
 
 
 
© ClassActionTimes.com. All rights reserved.

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Class Action Times as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. Affordable Law Firm Web Design