Constitutional Court Issues Diverging Rulings in KHK Dismissal Cases

The Turkish Constitutional Court has delivered two contrasting judgments in separate applications filed by former police officers dismissed from public service over alleged links to the FETÖ/PDY network. The court ruled that a dismissal based solely on digital coding records violated constitutional rights in one case, while finding no violation in another case where additional corroborating evidence was presented.

According to the court’s press release dated June 23, 2026, the applications of former police officer Mehmet Emin Okyay and former deputy district police chief Doğan Doğan were examined separately. Both applicants had been removed from public office following allegations of affiliation or connection with FETÖ/PDY, with their dismissals later upheld by the State of Emergency Commission and administrative courts.

In its legal assessment, the Constitutional Court acknowledged that digital evidence obtained from materials provided by the confidential informant known as “Garson” could serve as an important source of information. However, the court stressed that coding data extracted from these materials cannot automatically be treated as conclusive proof. It emphasized that such findings must either be supported by additional evidence or verified through a thorough judicial examination.

In Mehmet Emin Okyay’s case, the court found that the dismissal decision relied exclusively on coding entries contained in a digital analysis report. It noted that the applicant’s objections were not adequately investigated and that no independent evidence was produced to confirm the coding information. As a result, the court concluded that his right to respect for private life had been violated.

In contrast, the Constitutional Court reached a different conclusion in Doğan Doğan’s application. It observed that the coding information had been evaluated together with witness testimony, which the lower courts considered sufficient to reinforce the allegations. The Constitutional Court determined that the reasoning provided by the administrative and judicial authorities met the required constitutional standards and therefore found no violation of the applicant’s right to respect for private life.

The rulings are regarded as significant because they clarify the Constitutional Court’s position that digital coding records alone are not sufficient to justify dismissal from public office. Instead, such records must be corroborated by additional, verifiable evidence before they can serve as the basis for a lawful decision.

Kaynak: Constitutional Court