The 'scandalous' development in the sexual abuse case against a 12-year-old girl in Ankara, which was brought to the agenda by our newspaper Cumhuriyet, was brought to the agenda of the Turkish Grand National Assembly.
Ç.E., who was tried in Ankara on charges of sexual abuse against a 12-year-old child at the time of the incident, escaped on August 29, 2025 by violating the judicial control measure of not leaving the house with an electronic handcuff and was "released" after remaining on the run for more than a year.
SCANDAL DEVELOPMENT IS ON THE AGENDA OF THE ASSEMBLY
NEW Party Women's Branch Chairman and Osmaniye Deputy Asu Kaya presented a parliamentary question to the Presidency of the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye regarding the issue brought to the agenda by Cumhuriyet.
In his motion, Kaya stated that the defendant escaped by breaking the electronic handcuff, could not be caught for a long time, and was released after his statement was taken following the interim decision of the Ankara 3rd High Criminal Court dated September 16, 2026.
Our newspaper Cumhuriyet reported that the defendant's statement was taken a day later and he was released in accordance with the court decision.
"THE DUTY OF THE STATE IS TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THE CHILD"
In his parliamentary question, Kaya emphasized that the responsibility of the state in cases of sexual abuse of children is not limited to the investigation and prosecution processes.
Stating that effective measures must be taken to ensure the safety of the child, to prevent re-victimization, and to those who are deemed to be at risk of flight, Kaya pointed out that there is evidence in the file such as forensic examination reports, expert examinations and WhatsApp correspondence.
Kaya asked for an explanation as to why the defendant, who remained on the run for more than a year and had previously violated the judicial control measure with electronic handcuffs, was released after being caught.
“WHAT IS THE BASIS OF TRIAL WITHOUT ARREST WHEN ESCAPE HAS HAPPENED?”
In his parliamentary question, Kaya also emphasized the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure regarding the reasons for arrest and said, "While escape has occurred as a concrete fact and there are reasons for arrest in Article 100 of the CMK, what is the basis for issuing a decision to be tried without detention?" he asked.
Kaya also requested an explanation of the criteria by which the forensic examination, expert report and digital correspondence in the file are taken into account in evaluating the defendant's detention or judicial control status.
WERE PROTECTIVE MEASURES TAKEN FOR THE CHILD VICTIM AND HIS FAMILY?
In his parliamentary question, Kaya also asked questions about the safety of the child victim and his family.
Kaya asked whether a risk assessment was made for the child victim and his family in line with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Lanzarote Convention when the decision to release him was made, and asked for an explanation as to whether any protection measures were implemented.
Kaya also asked how long it took for the violation in the electronic handcuff system to be reported to law enforcement units and how long it took between the notification of the violation in the file in question and the actual arrest of the defendant.
HSK ASKED ABOUT THE INVESTIGATION AND THE NUMBER OF FUGITIVE DEFENDANTS
Kaya asked the Ministry to answer whether an objection was made against the release decision by the Chief Public Prosecutor's Office and, if not, the reason.
He also asked whether any review or investigation had been initiated by the Council of Judges and Prosecutors regarding the process that resulted in the release of the fugitive defendant.
Kaya's motion also included statistics on the number of defendants for whom arrest warrants were issued for sexual abuse crimes against children during the Ministry period, how many of them were on the run, and how many were arrested after being caught.
Finally, Kaya asked for an explanation as to whether there is a mechanism that monitors the consequences of judicial control decisions made in child sexual abuse files in terms of victim safety.
