The opposition and bar associations frequently claimed that the newly appointed judges and prosecutors were not adequately trained and that their professional competencies were questionable. The employment of judges and prosecutors, based not on competence but rather their affiliations with the governing party, was criticised by many politicians and related civil society actors also emphasizing the danger this poses to fair trials.65 The most serious allegation was that some of the newly appointed judges and prosecutors were drawn from the cadres of the AKP. The leading opposition party Republican People’s Party (CHP) applied to the judiciary for the annulment of the employments.66 Barış Yarkadaş, a journalist and at the time the CHP Istanbul deputy, published a list of those who were appointed as judges and prosecutors while actively working in the AKP.67 He noted that they had been disproportionately appointed to the most important cities, namely Ankara and Istanbul. According to Yarkadaş, this violated the impartiality of the newly appointed judges. Claiming that the newly appointed judges passed the exam after only a 45 second-interview, Yarkadaş remarked, “The judiciary and the justice institutions have never seen such great damage. First, they lifted the 70-points threshold so that the AKP’s lawyers could pass the written exam, because many of them had previously failed to achieve the 70 points required to become a judge or prosecutor. Candidates who achieved 92 points in the exam were eliminated at the interview stage. However, those who had received 60-65 points successfully passed the interviews, which lasted only 45 seconds. Those who could show references from the AKP were appointed as judges and prosecutors. Can we expect justice from such injustice? These judges and prosecutors cannot become members of a fair court, but merely of an ‘AKP court.’”68 65 Ankara’nın yargı reformu hazırlıklarına eleştiri (07.11.2018; Deutsche Welle): https://www.dw.com/tr/ankaranın-yargıreformu-hazırlıklarına-eleştiri/a-46178560 This novel state of the judiciary has been a constant cause of complaint, especially by lawyers representing the defence. The allegation of politicising the judiciary in favour of the governing parties serves as a basis for the debates on judicial independence. While hundreds of journalists and ordinary citizens were investigated and convicted for insulting the President and government officials because of their news articles or Tweets, insults and threats against the government critics were considered protected under freedom of speech. One example is the case of Sedat Peker, known as a mafia leader who threatened Academics for Peace with “we will shed your blood and take shower in your blood,’’ for which he was acquited.69 69 Sedat Peker Acquitted of Trial of Threatening Academics (16.07.2018; Bianet): https://bianet.org/english/law/199221-sedat-peker-acquitted-of-trial-of-threatening-academics THE OPERATION AGAINST THE LAW BUREAU OF THE OPPRESSED In an operation mounted on October 19, 2017, two lawyers of the Law Bureau of the Oppressed (Ezilenlerin Hukuk Bürosu), Sezin Uçar and Özlem Gümüştaş, and a large number of other persons, including journalists and politicians, were taken into custody and arrested.70 In addition to the two arrested lawyers, two additional lawyers, Gülhan Kaya and Ali Haydar Doğan, who were not arrested, were also tried. The trial began in July 2018. At the first hearing, it was decided to continue the pre-trial detention of Uçar and Gümüştaş. They were released after a total of one year in pre-trial detention.71 In the case, the actions taken by the lawyers on behalf of their clients within the scope of their professional activities and press releases they attended 66 CHP’li Tanal’dan hakimlik mülakatı için iptal başvurusu (28.04.2017; Hürriyet): https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/chpli70 ‘Bureaus Raided, Although Attorneys Voluntarily Suggested to Give Deposition’ (19.10.2017; Bianet): tanaldan-hakimlik-mulakati-icin-iptal-b-40441159 https://bianet.org/english/print/190765-bureaus-raided-although-attorneys-voluntarily-suggested-to-give-deposition 67 Ibid. 71 2 Lawyers from Law Bureau Of Oppressed Released (05.10.2018; Bianet): https://m.bianet.org/english/law/201426-268 AKP’nin yargı teşkilatı (21.03.2018; Birgün): https://www.birgun.net/haber/akp-nin-yargi-teskilati-208799 lawyers-from-law-bureau-of-oppressed-released 36 T H E O P E R AT I O N A G A I N S T T H E L AW B U R E A U O F T H E O P P R E S S E D A DEFENSELESS DEFENSE 37