Oktay Eksi: The Olli Rehns

But he says he is against the closure of AKP because of this. He says he was supporting "democracy" not the AKP. That's why he was defending the Venetian criteria which say parties who didn't support violent acts shouldn't be closed. The top prosecutor's lawsuit against AKP has been violating this criteria, he says.

Moreover he says they are going to analyze the 1982 Constitution whether it's in line with "EU principles" or not and they will express their views. And he has said they, as the EU, "believe in the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and Council of Europe's Venice Commission."

Great!
We say this is great because we also believe in ECHR, just as Mr. Rehn does. But we want to remind that we don't have trust Venedic Commission because it can't take any binding decisions either for us or for member states, as it can only make "recommendations."

Moroever if Mr. Rehn respects the ECHR as much as he says, then he should admit that the court and its Grand Chamber concluded tha the Welfare Party is violating democracy. As you can see the Welfare Party has nothing to do with supporting violent actions. That's why Mr. Rehn should say whether he agrees with that ruling or not.

The reason of ECHR's ruling is the Welfare Party's approach to secularism.

So now the indictment of AKP lawsuit includes the same things and I wonder does Mr. Olli Rehn say "The thing which is correct for Welfare Party is wrong for AKP?"

They sometimes drive people crazy.

You say rule of law? That's exactly what has been doing here. What do you want more?

You say the independency of judiciary? Here is the Constitutional Court! If you think it's not independent then you should frankly say so. If you don't then you better shut up and respect to the judiciary.