The main focus of this essay is to examine criminal law and justice systems. To support this essay, a court case study and relevant references will be used. Legal systems can vary from country to country, with the most obvious difference being their constitutions. Turkey has a written constitution, while England does not. This makes England unique as most countries around the world have a set written constitution.
Secondly, this essay will discuss and describe the different types of courts in England and Turkey. The aim is to identify similarities and differences between the two legal systems, which may have slight variations. Case studies from each country will be used to highlight and assess these differences in terms of law. Additionally, this essay will touch on the historical backgrounds of both legal systems. England’s legal system has roots in Roman law, while Turkish laws derive from the Ottoman Empire where Islamic rules were incorporated into their legal system. This essay will compare and contrast the Turkish and English legal systems, including issues such as national constitutions and types of courts.
It is impractical to fully understand the nature of legal language without considering its history. There is no single answer to how legal language came to be what it is today. Much of the explanation can be found in past events that have influenced English legal language. Therefore, it is necessary to briefly examine the historical background of British legal language. Despite their influence on the English language, the rule of the British Celts had little long-term impact on English legal structure (Bhatia 1983).
The Quran, which is the sacred book of Muslims, provides definite regulations and terms. However, there are also other basis for regulations such as Prophet Mohammed’s words known as customs” or “fatwa.” These expanded and sometimes opposing terms and understandings are collectively known as “The Islamic Law,” under which the Ottoman Kingdom was ruled throughout the centuries.
Prophet Mohammed’s statements are universal codes of impartiality and fairness, characterized by a high level of neutrality and fundamental regulations required by the societal nature and arrangement of Arab society during his time. It should be noted that not only the Quran, but also other sources of Muslim jurisprudence were shaped to meet the needs of society during and after Prophet Mohammed’s era. Additionally, over the centuries, the existence of diverse and conflicting spiritual sects among Muslims in the region, as well as an increase in non-Muslim civilians following Sultan Mehmed the Defeater’s takeover of Istanbul, have created complex issues in jurisprudence. Furthermore, Islamic commandments were not always sufficient to provide logical answers to legal issues across all categories (Ayiter 1956).
Language reorganization is one of the most extensively debated cultural issues in contemporary Turkey. It is a concern openly connected to the officially authorized language used in Turkey nowadays. Kemal Atatürk, the originator of the contemporary Turkish Republic, aimed to create a nationalist, worldly, populist and radical republic. However, at that time, the Turkish language was Ottoman Turkish which was occupied by many Arabic and Persian words. These foreign constituents were looked upon as a shame because patriotism -the chief philosophy of “Kemalism”- insisted on restoring its foreign constituents with real Turkish words to maintain the pure origin of the Ottoman Language.
The common term for members of the legal profession is hukukçu”. By graduating from a law university, they can become a barrister, judge, notary, or prosecutor after completing an internship period as specified in separate laws (Altay 2002).
Private legal representatives spend 12 months interning before joining a bar association (baro) and the Union of Turkish Bars (Bowers, 1989).
The Turkish court system does not include the concept of a jury. Instead, verdicts are reached by judges or a panel of judges who base their decisions on the law and their own judgment. A judge in Turkey is typically a graduate of law school and can be one of the following:
- A criminal judge wears a red colored collar.
- A civil judge wears a green colored collar.
- An administrative judge wears a light brown colored collar. (Danet, 1985)
The foremost judge is currently assisting at a penal court. These courts are divided into three categories: assize court, punitive court of primary instance, and sulh ceza (punitive court of tranquility) (Goodrich 1987). The second type of judge serves in civil courts of primary instance or civil courts of tranquility. Lastly, the third type serves in administrative courts (idari mahkemeler). The Utmost Council of Judges and Public Prosecutors (Hâkimler ve Savcılar Yüksek Kurulu) is responsible for handling the entrance of judges and prosecutors into the profession, their engagements, reassignments to other posts, designation of temporary authorities, endorsement to the first type, allotment of posts; choices relating to those whose continuance in the vocation is found to be inappropriate; obligation for punitive penalties and elimination from workplace (Heyd 1954). The General Directorate of Personnel Affairs under the Ministry of Justice works as a secretariat for the Supreme Council on Judges and Prosecutors (Gouadec 1990).
Public accusations are carried out by prosecutors, whose complete designation is Republican Prosecutor (Cumhuriyet savcısı), and they have a principal office of trial (Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığı). Prosecutors are furthermore separated into branches concerning their part in laws, similar to that of judges.
The judicial structure consists of various courts including common law courts, serious punitive courts, military courts, the legitimate Court, the high court and three other high courts. The Court of Cassation hears appeals for unlawful cases while the committee of state listens to appeals related to administrative cases or disputes between government bodies. The audit court inspects state organizations. Common law courts handle most cases including civil, administrative and criminal cases (Izveren 1956).
The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Turkey (T.C. Anayasa Mahkemesi) was established under the 1961 Constitution with the primary objective of examining laws and verdicts for their constitutionality, both in form and substance, in accordance with the authority of law and the Rules of Practice of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (GNAT) (Melinkoff 1963). The Court also performs other functions as outlined below:
- The Constitutional Court, acting as the High Tribunal, has the power to judge the following individuals for offenses related to their positions: the President, members of the Council of Ministers, members of supreme courts, the Chairman and members of the Supreme Council of Judges and Public Prosecutors, as well as Chief Republic Prosecutors and Deputy Republic Chief Prosecutors. (Newmark 1988).
- In addition, it is responsible for auditing and inspecting political party funds.
- The Constitutional Court also reviews GNAT verdicts that involve revoking immunities from second-in-commands or dismissing associates of parliament.
- Furthermore, it selects both the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the Court of Jurisdictional Conflicts. (Morris 1995).
The Constitutional Court is composed of eleven standard associates and four alternate associates. Verdicts are only given when all eleven associates are present. The verdicts of the Constitutional Court are final and cannot be altered in any way, nor can their application be deferred (Weston 1983).
English law is the legal system of England and Wales, serving as the foundation for the general legal structure used in nearly all Commonwealth countries and the US (Yalçinkaya 1981).
Similar to everything else in Britain, British legal attire is synchronized according to numerous ancient traditions, cultures, and laws. Many of these regulations date back to at least the 14th century, making the contemporary British judicial structure one of the oldest in the world. The British legal system is extremely complex and consists of several different courts with grand names such as Queen’s Bench,” “Chancery Division,” and “Crown Court” (Özdemir 1969). Depending on which court the judge presides over, they may wear one of many different sets of clothing. This contrasts with other nations that restrict their judges to wearing only black or red; in Britain, judges dress in almost every color (Kenny 2004).
Every upper court justice in Britain wears the eminent full-bottomed” crushed wig, while subordinate court judges wear the shorter “barrister” wig. This is a relic from the time when judges were associates of the aristocracy and it was assumed that it was stylish for important people to show off their societal status by wearing elongated elegant wigs. Once a year, there is a unique ritual in Westminster Abbey where all of the state’s judges meet to honor the start of the legal year. On official events such as this, all judges wear “full-bottomed” wigs (Judges around the world n.d.).
The majority of British judges wear a stiff white lapel known as the cross.” The origin of this lapel is unclear, but some speculate that it symbolizes the twin tablets of the Ten Commandments passed down by Moses (Sarcevic 1997). This same collar is worn by high-level clergy in the Anglican Church, suggesting a possible sacred origin.
The Lord Chancellor is Britain’s highest-ranking judicial bureaucrat and de facto Chief Justice. He wears an exceptional gold and black dressing gown (Tiersma, 1989).
As fundamentalist Muslim nations tend to be highly anti-Western, judges in these countries often wear very simplistic dress and condemn modern courtroom outfits as unfamiliar practices (Timur, 1956).
Bibliography:
- Altay, A. (2002). Difficulties Encountered in the Translation of Legal Texts: The Case of Turkey. Translation Journal, Volume 6, No. 4, July 4th, 2009. Retrieved from: http://accurapid.com/Journal/22legal.htm
- Ayiter, F. (1956). The Interpretations of a National System of Laws Received from Abroad. Annales de la faculté de droit d’Istanbul. Istanbul: Fakülteler Matbaası.
- Bhatia, V.K. (1983). Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. London: Longman.
- Bowers, F. (1989). Linguistic Aspects of Legislative Expressions. Vancouver; University of Columbia Press.
- Danet, B. (1985). Legal Discourse Handbook of Discourse Analysis Vol.1 New York: Academic Press.
- Goodrich P., ed., Legal Discourse Hong Kong: Mac Millan; and Goodrich P., ed., Law as Language Philadelphia : University of Pennsylvania Press.
