BANK ASIA
HARUN UNIVERSE APPLICATION
(Application Number: 2020/17037§35)
The Constitutional Court accepts that the applicant's account at Bank Asya can be considered as an organizational activity only if it is revealed that this is in accordance with an instruction from the terrorist organization (İ.C., App. No: 2016/41492, 13/2/2020, § 62)
For precedent decision click here.
SABAN APAK APPLICATION
(Application Number: 2017/36028)
In the concrete case, the applicant; He claimed that he had an account with Bank Asya since 2001 and that he had saved money in this account for his daughter's wedding. It is seen that the applicant's accounts were active in the form of banking activities in the form of both depositing and withdrawing money. When the account activities after the leader or executives of FETÖ/PDY made calls to support Bank Asya, it was understood that depositing and withdrawing money from the account continued, and that there was no large amount of money transfer to the aforementioned accounts. According to the above, when the applicant's account movements at the Bank are examined, it does not seem possible to say that these deposit/withdrawal actions were carried out in accordance with an organizational instruction.
(51-52)
For precedent decision click here.
RAZİYE AKÇAY APPLICATION
(Application Number: 2019/1665)
In the reasoned decision, the date when the applicant's account at Bank Asya was opened, the nature and volume of the banking transactions related to this account before the instruction of FETÖ/PDY leader and managers to support Bank Asya, how the said account was used after this instruction, what was the volume of transactions considered as active use. No explanation has been made about whether there has been a serious increase in the account after the instructions of the organization leader and managers. In other words, no evaluation has been made about why the said banking transactions cannot be considered as customary. Therefore, it has not been revealed that the banking transactions following the order of the applicant's organization leader and managers to support Bank Asya were not in line with the period before this instruction or that they were in the nature of an unusual account activity. In the decisions of the Regional Court of Justice and the 16th Penal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, no statement was made regarding the consideration of the issues mentioned. (§45)
For precedent decision click here.
