14/10/2024 | Writer: Kaos GL
“In the judicial system, especially in cases involving crimes against women, children, LGBTI+ individuals, and other marginalized groups, a troubling pattern of cooperation between judges and perpetrators persists.”
Democratic People’s Party (DEM Party) Istanbul MP Kezban Konukçu submitted a parliamentary question addressing the issue of impunity in crimes committed against women, children, LGBTI+ persons, and other disadvantaged groups. In her submission, Konukçu highlighted the role of the judiciary in perpetuating these injustices, pointing out that “impunity, unjust provocation reductions, and sexist judicial practices” make the judicial system complicit in these crimes.
In her parliamentary question, DEM Party Istanbul MP Kezban Konukçu provided a detailed summary of the systemic issues plaguing the judicial system, particularly in cases involving crimes against women, children, LGBTI+ individuals, and other marginalized groups. She highlighted the following critical problems:
“In the judicial system, especially in cases involving crimes against women, children, LGBTI+ individuals, and other marginalized groups, a troubling pattern of cooperation between judges and perpetrators persists. The judiciary often scrutinizes and blames victims while showing leniency toward offenders. For instance, when women fall from heights, these cases are prematurely dismissed as ‘suicides,’ with prosecutors failing to properly investigate. This negligence fosters a culture of impunity, turning inadequate responses to femicide and violence into a systematic policy.
Legal protections guaranteed by law are often not enforced, and victims’ rights are sidelined. Confidentiality orders are used to isolate victims, keeping cases hidden from public scrutiny and women’s organizations. Courts frequently reject intervention requests from advocacy groups and fail to enforce sentences, with prison terms either reduced or converted into alternative sanctions that lose their deterrent effect. Offenders benefit from lenient practices, such as reduced sentences for ‘good condition’ or ‘unjust provocation’ claims. These patterns of impunity embolden perpetrators, leading to a continuous rise in violence and femicide.”
The following questions were addressed to the Minister of Justice:
- What is the reason for the absence of criminal sanctions and deterrents in the courts’ practices regarding femicides and discrimination?
- While it is clear that “unjust provocation” or “good condition” sentence reductions in femicide cases deeply disturb public conscience, does the ongoing reduction of sentences for women’s murderers indicate a sexist judiciary?
- How is it possible for femicide perpetrators to receive unjust provocation and good behavior discounts, be given symbolic sentences that violate the law, or even be released? Is there an unspoken, shadow law guiding the courts?
- Are the “confidentiality” decisions and publication bans imposed on femicide case files by institutions under your Ministry aimed at covering up violence against women and silencing public outrage over impunity policies?
- Does your Ministry have any ongoing research on sexism and discrimination in the judiciary, particularly in the inconsistent application of laws across different courts?
- Does your Ministry plan to undertake efforts to restore trust in the judiciary and address the disconnect between legal rights and justice that appears in the courts’ practices?
- Considering that male violence against women is treated more as a “flaw” than as a crime by the judiciary, is there a plan within your Ministry to address the rise in femicide cases?
- What actions does your Ministry plan to take to address the judicial practices of judges who reinforce male dominance?
- Is your Ministry considering creating more effective laws to punish violence against women, children, LGBTI+ persons, and other disadvantaged groups?
Tags: human rights, women
