ERDEM-NEWSLETTER-2018-metin

380 NEWSLETTER 2018 Ministers, which were the heads of the executive body. In the new system, the President becomes the head of the executive body, by replacing the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers, and all au- thority therein is held by the President. Thus, the President is expected to be able to receive questions. However, deputies are not allowed to question the President, and questions may only be addressed to Vice- Presidents and ministers, in writing. Another manner of inspection used by Parliament had been through Parliamentary investigations. In the past, an investigation concerning the prime minister and the ministers was initiated through the proposal of 55 deputies, which corresponded to at least one-tenth of Parliament. The indictee was then sent to the Supreme Court with the secret vote of 276 deputies, which corresponded to the absolute majority of Parliament. In the new system, an investigation concern- ing the Vice-Presidents and ministers may be requested, with the proposal of the absolute majority of Parliament, which is comprised of 301 deputies. Parliament discusses the proposal within one month and decides to open an investigation by the secret vote of 360 depu- ties, which corresponds to at least three-fifths of the total number of members of Parliament. If this condition is met, the file is transferred to a commission. Upon the discussion of the report prepared by the commission, the report concerning the Vice-Presidents or ministers shall be sent to the Supreme Court only upon the secret vote of 400 deputies, which corresponds to at least two-thirds of the total number of members of Parliament. The Vice-President, or the minister, who has been condemned by the Supreme Court for a crime that prevents him/her from being elected, shall be dismissed from his/her office. Comparing these quora shows that Parliamentary investigations have become distant from being an effective inspection channel. There is a distinction between Vice-Presidents’ and the ministers’ personal offenses, and offenses related to their duties. These persons are subject to the procedure of Parliamentary investigation described, above, in the event of offenses related to their duties, as well as legisla- tive immunity in the case of personal offenses. As regards the criminal liability of the President, there is no distinction between “personal offenses” and “offenses related to duties.” Even personal and simple offenses that are not related to Presidential duties are subject to proce-