Judge Arslan said in his dissenting opinion that it is not the Constitutional Court’s duty to approve different views on the Gezi protests whether it was a criticism of the government or a foreign-sponsored insurrection.
The top court last month rejected by Kavala, who has been behind bars for over 20 months for organizing the 2013 Gezi Park protests and facing a life sentence for attempted overthrow and several other offenses.
Kavala made an application to the Constitutional Court in December 2017 on the ground that he is unjustly under arrest. After rejecting the application in May, the court has announced its justified ruling, which shows the Presiding Judge Arslan was one of the five members who opposed the verdict.
His attendance in the protests alone does not indicate he committed an offense, according to Arslan.
“First of all, it is not possible to accept the fact that the applicant participated in the Gezi incidents and supported these incidents as an indication that the applicant committed an offense as everyone can hold a gathering or a demonstration on the condition of being peaceful, can participate in these and can wish these to become widespread,” Arslan said in his dissenting opinion.
The presiding judge further said that it is not the Constitutional Court’s duty to approve any of the different views on the Gezi protests.
“Some define the protests as demonstrations that began with environmental consciousness and then turned into mass demonstrations in criticism of government policies, while another part of society views them as a foreign-sponsored insurrection against the government on the pretext of replaced trees [in the Gezi Park]. It is not the duty of the Constitutional Court to approve one of these views.”