Constitutional Foundations and Court Structure
Lithuania is a parliamentary republic where the court system is based on the 1992 Constitution. General jurisdiction courts are divided into district, regional, appellate, and Supreme Courts. In addition, there is an independent system of administrative courts.
Turkey is a presidential republic operating under the 1982 Constitution. The judicial system consists of first-instance courts, regional appellate courts, and the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay). The constitutional review is performed by the Constitutional Court (Anayasa Mahkemesi). Administrative appeals are handled by the Council of State (Danıştay).
Sources of Law and Judicial Practice
Both countries belong to the civil (continental) law tradition, so the main sources of law are the Constitution, codes, laws, and international treaties.
In Lithuania, the principle of precedent is not officially established, but the decisions of the Supreme Court of Lithuania in cassation cases shape judicial practice that other courts must follow to ensure uniform interpretation of the law.
In Turkey, judges also rely on written laws, but the interpretations of Yargıtay in practice serve as guiding precedents, ensuring a certain consistency in the application of the law.
Independence of the Judiciary and Disciplinary Accountability
In Lithuania, the independence of the judiciary is enshrined in the Constitution. The process of disciplinary accountability for judges is carried out by the Judges' Ethics and Discipline Commission (TEDK), which investigates violations and may refer cases to the Judges' Honor Court, which decides on the imposition of penalties. The President or the Seimas do not participate in these procedures. Judicial self-governance operates through the Judicial Council, which plays an advisory role.
In Turkey, the activities of judges are regulated by the High Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSK), whose composition depends on the decisions of the President and the Ministry of Justice. This raises questions about judicial independence. The publicity of court processes is often restricted, especially in cases related to national security or terrorism.
Criminal Procedure: CPC and Reality
In Lithuania, criminal procedure is based on the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC). The main principles established include the right to defense, presumption of innocence, publicity of the process, admissibility of evidence, and equality of the parties. The suspect has the right to an attorney from the very first interrogation, and the judicial process is usually public.
In Turkey, criminal procedure is also based on written laws, but in practice, the right to defense is often restricted, especially when the case involves terrorism, national security, or organized crime. The possibilities for the attorney's actions during the pre-trial investigation phase are often limited, and publicity is frequently restricted.
International Context and Practical Differences
Lithuania, as an EU member, applies European legal principles and utilizes the European Arrest Warrant, LTR, and other legal assistance instruments.
Turkey, although not an EU member, is a member of the Council of Europe and participates in major international legal cooperation schemes, but their application often depends on the internal political or legal context.
The JURICA law firm team – Goda Avižienė and Algirdas Tomas Parulis – is currently involved in international cases being examined in Turkey. This experience allows for a better understanding of the peculiarities of Turkish legal practice and effectively representing clients' interests in an international context.
Conclusions
Although the legal systems of Turkey and Lithuania formally belong to the same – continental law – tradition, in practice, they operate differently. In Lithuania, strong institutional independence of the judiciary, a clear disciplinary accountability procedure, and consistent implementation of human rights form the basis of trust. Meanwhile, in Turkey, the activities of the judiciary often depend on the influence of the executive branch, and the publicity of processes and the right to defense are sometimes restricted.
The experience of the JURICA team allows not only to understand these systems theoretically but also to operate within them practically – ensuring quality representation for clients even in the most complex international cases.