EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 12.10.2022 SWD(2022) 333 final COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Türkiye 2022 Report Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2022 Communication on EU Enlargement policy



































{COM(2022) 528 final} - {SWD(2022) 332 final} - {SWD(2022) 334 final} - {SWD(2022) 335 final} - {SWD(2022) 336 final} - {SWD(2022) 337 final} - {SWD(2022) 338 final}



1. Introduction 1.1.Context 1.2. Summary of the report 2. CLUSTER 1: THE FUNDAMENTALS OF THE ACCESSION PROCESS 2.1. Functioning of democratic institutions and Public Administration Reform 2.1.1. Democracy 2.1.2. Public Administration Reform 2.2. Rule of law and fundamental rights 2.2.1. Chapter 23: Judiciary and fundamental rights 2.2.2.Chapter 24: Justice, freedom and security 2.3. Economic criteria 2.3.1. The existence of a functioning market economy 2.3.2. The capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union 2.4. Public procurement, Statistics, Financial control Chapter 5: Public procurement Chapter 18: Statistics Chapter 32: Financial control 3. GOOD NEIGHBOURLY RELATIONS AND REGIONAL COOPERATION

4.Ability to assume the obligations of membership Cluster 2: Internal Market Chapter 1: Free movement of goods Chapter 2: Freedom of movement for workers Chapter 3: Right of establishment and freedom to provide services Chapter 4: Free movement of capital Chapter 6: Company law Chapter 7: Intellectual property law Chapter 8: Competition policy Chapter 9: Financial services Chapter 28: Consumer and health protection Cluster 3: Competitiveness and inclusive growth Chapter 10: Digital transformation and media Chapter 16: Taxation Chapter 17: Economic and monetary policy Chapter 19: Social policy and employment Chapter 20: Enterprise and industrial policy Chapter 25: Science and research Chapter 26: Education and culture Chapter 29: Customs union

Cluster 4: The Green agenda and sustainable connectivity Chapter 14: Transport Policy Chapter 15: Energy Chapter 21: Trans-European networks Chapter 27: Environment and climate change Cluster 5: Resources, agriculture and cohesion Chapter 11: Agriculture and rural development Chapter 12: Food safety, veterinary and phytosanitary policy Chapter 13: Fisheries Chapter 22: Regional policy and the coordination of structural instruments Chapter 33: Financial and budgetary provisions Cluster 6: External relations Chapter 30: External relations Chapter 31: Foreign, security and defence policy Annex I – Relations between the EU and Türkiye



1. Introduction 1.1. Context Türkiye remains a key partner for the European Union and a candidate country. Türkiye has been linked to the EU by an Association Agreement since 1964 and a Customs Union was established in 1995. The European Council granted Türkiye the status of candidate country in December 1999 and accession negotiations were opened in October 2005. Within the framework of accession negotiations, 16 chapters have been opened and one of these was provisionally closed. The General Affairs Council conclusions of December 2021 reiterated the Council’s position of June 2018 that under the current circumstances, Türkiye’s accession negotiations have effectively come to a standstill, and no further chapters can be considered for opening or closing . Over the reporting period, the Turkish government has not reversed the negative trend in relation to reform, despite its repeated commitment to EU accession. The EU’s serious concerns on the continued deterioration of democracy, the rule of law, fundamental rights and the independence of the judiciary have not been addressed. There was further backsliding in many areas. Concerns increased over economic governance and the good functioning of the market economy.

After some positive developments in 2021, relations with the EU deteriorated in the first half of 2022, due to repeated violations of Greek airspace by Turkish fighter jets in the Aegean and threatening Turkish statements regarding the sovereignty of Greek islands, and against Cyprus. In addition, Türkiye continued to carry out military exercises in the maritime zones of Cyprus, and Turkish warships illegally obstructed survey activities in the Cypriot Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Despite international condemnation, Türkiye continued with its plan to open the fenced-off area of Varosha. Tensions in the Aegean Sea and Eastern Mediterranean were not conducive to good neighbourly relations and undermined regional stability and security. The EU, most recently at the European Council of June 2022, has repeatedly urged Türkiye to avoid making any kind of threat, creating any source of friction or carrying out any action that damages good neighbourly relations and the peaceful settlement of disputes. The EU has re-affirmed that it has a strategic interest in a stable and secure environment in the Eastern Mediterranean and in developing a cooperative and mutually beneficial relationship with Türkiye. The EU and Türkiye continued high-level engagement in areas of common interest such as climate, health or migration and security. This was in line with the EU’s offer to support a more positive dynamic in EU-Türkiye relations, expressing readiness to engage with Türkiye in a phased, proportionate and reversible manner in a number of areas of common interest, subject to the conditions set out by the European Council. On energy, Türkiye continues to be an important and reliable transit country for the EU. Türkiye continued its remarkable efforts to host one of the largest refugee populations worldwide with around 3.6 million Syrians under temporary protection and more than 330 000 non-Syrians, including those who hold or have applied for international protection status. The EU Facility for Refugees in Turkey supported this work, with over EUR 4.7 billion of the EUR 6 billion operational budget of the Facility already having been disbursed by June 2022. The Commission allocated an additional package of EUR 3.5 billion covering the 2020-2023 period to ensure the continuation of support provided to date, in particular in key areas such as basic needs, healthcare and education, and protection and socio-economic support. The March 2016 EU-Turkey Statement continued to yield results and remained the key framework governing cooperation on migration despite Türkiye’s calls to update the Statement. Although the resettlement of refugees in EU Member States resumed after a short break, due to the pandemic, Türkiye maintained the suspension of returns from the Greek islands that it put in place in March 2020. By June 2022, Türkiye had experienced over 15 million COVID-19 cases, with almost 100 000 deaths. The country saw two waves of the pandemic in 2021 and a sharp increase in case numbers was observed in February 2022, with the emergence of the Omicron variant. The number of COVID-19 cases has been decreasing since then, but started to increase again towards the end of the reporting period. The two-dose vaccination coverage is 64% of the total population. In August 2021, the Commission adopted an equivalence decision, confirming Türkiye’s participation in the EU Digital Green Certificate scheme, which connects the country’s vaccination certification scheme to the EU’s system. COVID-19 vaccination certificates issued by Türkiye are accepted in the EU under the same conditions as the EU Digital COVID Certificate. At the same time, Türkiye agreed to accept the EU Digital COVID Certificate for travel from the EU to Türkiye. 1.2. Summary of the report There are serious deficiencies in the functioning of Türkiye’s democratic institutions. During the reporting period, democratic backsliding continued. Structural deficiencies in the presidential system remained in place. Key recommendations from the Council of Europe and its bodies have yet to be addressed. Parliament continued to lack the necessary means to hold the government accountable. The constitutional architecture continued to centralise powers at the level of the Presidency without ensuring the sound and effective separation of powers between the executive, legislative and the judiciary. In the absence of an effective checks and balances mechanism, the democratic accountability of the executive branch continues to be limited to elections. Despite the lifting of the state of emergency in July 2018, some legal provisions granting government officials extraordinary powers and retaining several of the restrictive elements of the state of emergency remained in place. The State of Emergency Inquiry Commission has yet to complete the examination of its caseload in relation to the public employees who were dismissed by decree-laws during the period of emergency rule. In July 2021, Türkiye’s Parliament adopted a bill that extends the duration of some of the restrictive elements of the state of emergency for one more year. The judiciary continued to systematically target members of the opposition parties in Parliament, in relation to alleged terrorism-related offences. The legal framework for elections and political parties remains problematic. The electoral threshold was lowered from 10% to 7%. Türkiye has not yet addressed the remaining recommendations by the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights and the Venice Commission. Pressure on mayors from opposition parties by the ruling coalition government further weakened local democracy. Mayors from the opposition parties faced administrative and judicial investigations. Local democracy in the south-east remained severely hampered. In the south-east, the forcibly dismissed mayors continued to be replaced by government-appointed trustees. The situation in the south-east remained very worrying. In October 2021, Türkiye’s Parliament extended the military’s mandate to launch cross-border anti-terror operations in Syria and Iraq by two additional years. The Turkish government continued its domestic and cross-border security and military operations in Iraq and Syria. The security situation remained precarious in border areas with recurrent terrorist acts committed by the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), which remains on the EU list of persons, groups and entities involved in acts of terrorism. The EU unambiguously condemned the PKK’s attacks and expressed solidarity with the families of the victims. The government has a legitimate right and a responsibility to fight terrorism, but it is essential that it does so in accordance with the rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms. Anti-terror measures need to be proportionate. There were no developments on the resumption of a credible political peace process to achieve a sustainable solution. Serious backsliding regarding civil society issues continued. Civil society organisations faced increased pressure and their space to operate freely continued to reduce, limiting their freedoms of expression, association and assembly. The implementation of the law on preventing financing of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction added further restrictions on civil society organisations. Civilian oversight of the security forces has not been consolidated. Military, police and intelligence services’ accountability remained very limited. Parliamentary oversight of the security institutions needs to be strengthened. In July, the Parliament extended the retirement age of the Chief of General Staff from 67 to 72 allowing the incumbent Chief of General Staff to serve an additional year while the air and navy commanders have retired. Türkiye has some level of preparation/is moderately prepared in the field of public administration reform. No progress was made during the reporting period. The country continues to lack a comprehensive reform agenda for public administration and public financial management and the government has not started any comprehensive reform of public administration. The administration's accountability is insufficient, and its human resources management needs to be improved. Policy-making lacks evidence-based methods and participatory mechanisms. The politicisation of the administration continued. Women’s representation in civil service managerial posts remained low. Türkiye’s judicial system is at an early stage of preparation. The serious backsliding observed since 2016 continued during the reporting period. Concerns remained, in particular over the systemic lack of independence of the judiciary and undue pressure on judges and prosecutors. Particular concerns relating to the judiciary’s adherence to international and European standards increased, in particular in relation to the refusal to implement rulings by the European Court of Human Rights. Implementation of the 2021 human rights action plan and the 2019 judicial reform strategy continued. However, both documents failed to address major shortcomings in the Turkish judiciary, lacking a plan for significant improvements to the overall functioning of the country’s judicial system. Only 515 judges or prosecutors dismissed following the coup attempt were reinstated, despite several being acquitted. The lack of objective, merit-based, standardised and pre-established criteria for recruiting and promoting judges and prosecutors remains a source of concern. Regarding the fight against corruption, Türkiye remained at an early stage of preparations and made no progress in the reporting period. The country has not set up anti-corruption bodies in line with its international obligations. The legal framework and institutional architecture need to be improved to limit political and undue influence in the prosecution and adjudication of corruption cases. The accountability and transparency of public institutions need to be improved. The absence of an anti-corruption strategy and action plan indicated a lack of will to decisively fight corruption. Most of the Council of Europe’s Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) recommendations have not been implemented. Overall, corruption is widespread and remains an issue of concern. Türkiye has some level of preparation in the fight against organised crime, however there was limited progress overall. The completion of an international agreement on the exchange of personal data between Europol and the Turkish authorities responsible for fighting serious crime and terrorism is still pending, as Turkish data protection legislation is not yet in line with the EU acquis. The legal framework regulating the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing needs to be improved in line with recommendations by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and those by the Venice Commission on the law on preventing financing of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The deterioration of human and fundamental rights continued. Many of the measures introduced during the state of emergency remain in force. The legal framework includes general guarantees of respect for human and fundamental rights, but the legislation and its implementation need to be brought into line with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) case-law. The Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly continued to monitor Türkiye’s respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law. Türkiye’s continued refusal to implement certain ECtHR rulings, notably in the cases of Selahattin Demirtaş and Osman Kavala, is a source of serious concern regarding the judiciary’s adherence to international and European standards and Türkiye’s commitment to promote the rule of law and respect for fundamental rights. The infringement procedure started by the Council of Europe against Türkiye in February 2022, for non-implementation of the judgment in the Kavala case has marked yet another benchmark of Türkiye’s drifting away from the standards for human rights and fundamental freedoms that it has subscribed to as a member of the Council of Europe. In July, the Court ruled that Türkiye has failed to implement the 2019 ECtHR judgment on the Kavala case. The human rights action plan adopted in 2021 continued to be implemented, but this does not address critical issues and has not led to an improvement in the overall human rights situation.

On freedom of expression, the serious backsliding observed in recent years continued. The implementation of criminal laws relating to national security and anti-terrorism continued to contravene the ECHR and other international standards and to diverge from the case-law of the ECtHR. Restrictive measures implemented by state institutions and increasing pressure with judicial and administrative means continued to undermine the exercise of freedom of expression. There continued to be criminal cases brought against and convictions of journalists, human rights defenders, lawyers, writers, opposition politicians, students, artists and social media users. There was further backsliding in the area of freedom of assembly and association. There were recurrent bans, disproportionate use of force and interventions in peaceful demonstrations; investigations, court cases and administrative fines against demonstrators on charges of terrorism-related activities or on violating the law on demonstrations and marches. The rights of the most disadvantaged groups and people belonging to minorities need better protection. Roma people remained largely excluded from formal work and their living conditions deteriorated severely. Gender-based violence, discrimination, and hate speech against minorities (in particular against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ) persons are still a matter of serious concern. On migration and asylum policy, Türkiye made some progress. The EU-Turkey Statement remained the main framework for cooperation between the EU and Türkiye, and the EU’s engagement with Türkiye on migration intensified. Some progress was made on further strengthening capacity for surveillance and protection of the land border with Iran. The return of irregular migrants from the Greek islands under the EU-Turkey Statement continued to be suspended, as it has been since March 2020. In 2021, numbers of irregular migrants arriving increased on most routes in comparison to 2020. The increase could be partially due to the lifting of measures taken by countries in the region in 2020 to contain the COVID-19 pandemic. Although the number of irregular arrivals in Greece has decreased compared to pre-COVID figures, irregular arrivals to Italy and to the government-controlled areas of Cyprus have increased substantially in the past year and new smuggling routes have been established. Türkiye has still not implemented the provisions relating to third-country nationals in the EU-Türkiye readmission agreement, which entered into force in October 2017. Overall, the number of illegal border crossings between Türkiye and Greece remained significantly lower than it was prior to the adoption of the EU-Turkey Statement. Türkiye continued to make significant efforts to host and meet the needs of one of the largest refugee communities in the world. Out of the full operational budget of EUR 6 billion under the Facility for Refugees, over EUR 4.7 billion was disbursed by June 2022. Efficient integration measures are needed to address the extended presence of refugees in the country. Access to public health for migrants and refugees should be improved. No outstanding visa liberalisation benchmarks were fulfilled. Türkiye still needs to further align its legislation with the EU acquis on visa policy. Türkiye’s unilateral foreign policy continued to be at odds with the EU priorities under the common foreign and security policy (CFSP), notably due to its military action in Syria and Iraq and a lack of alignment with EU restrictive measures against Russia. Türkiye maintained a very low alignment rate with the EU stand on foreign and security policy of 7% (as of August 2022). Türkiye’s military support to Libya, including the deployment of foreign fighters on the ground, and its persistent criticism of and lack of cooperation with Operation IRINI are detrimental to the EU’s effective contribution to implementing the UN arms embargo, and have led to conflicting approaches on Libya. Türkiye remains a critically important actor in the Syrian crisis and shares with the EU the objective of a stable and prosperous Syria. However, its troops maintained a significant presence in the region and in other parts of northern Syria. Türkiye’s security concerns stemming from northern Syria should be addressed through political and diplomatic means, not by military action, and in full respect of international humanitarian law. The Russian war of aggression against Ukraine was recognised by Türkiye as a state of war and Türkiye condemned the Russian aggression. Türkiye enforced the Montreux Convention, whereby the passage of warships was limited to those returning to their bases. Turkish companies continued to sell military ordnance to Ukraine. Türkiye has aimed to facilitate talks between Ukraine and Russia and working on de-escalation and bringing about a cease-fire. It also undertook a diplomatic initiative to facilitate the export of Ukrainian grain; the deal agreed by Ukraine and Russia on 22 July in Istanbul, facilitated by the UN and Türkiye, would not have been possible without the constructive role of Türkiye, which is also involved in facilitating the implementation of the deal. Nevertheless, Türkiye refrained from aligning with EU sanctions against Russia. Türkiye has signed a Memorandum of Understanding for developing economic and trade relations with Russia. The improved dynamic in EU-Türkiye relations observed since December 2020, following the de-escalation in the Eastern Mediterranean, prevailed for several months before tensions in the Aegean resumed in April 2022. In November 2021, following the second review of the framework for restrictive measures, the Council extended the regime for one more year until 12 November 2022. Currently two individuals are subject to sanctions. While there were no unauthorised drilling activities by Türkiye in the Eastern Mediterranean during the reporting period, tensions have been rising. Turkish warships illegally obstructed survey activity in the Cypriot Exclusive Economic Zone. Türkiye’s military exercises in the maritime zones of Cyprus continued. Despite the international community, and the EU in particular, condemning Türkiye’s unilateral steps, Türkiye continued with its actions to further reopen the fenced-off town of Varosha in Cyprus. Türkiye needs to commit itself unequivocally to good neighbourly relations, international agreements and to the peaceful settlement of disputes in accordance with the United Nations Charter, having recourse, if necessary, to the International Court of Justice. The June 2022 European Council expressed deep concern about recent repeated actions and statements by Türkiye. It recalled its previous conclusions and the statement of March 2021 and reiterated that Türkiye must respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all EU Member States. It emphasised that the European Council expects Türkiye to fully respect international law, de-escalate tensions in the interest of regional stability in the Eastern Mediterranean, promote good neighbourly relations in a sustainable way and fully respect international law. The European Council has repeatedly recalled the EU’s strategic interest in a stable and secure environment in the Eastern Mediterranean and in the development of a cooperative and mutually beneficial relationship with Türkiye. The European Council also reaffirmed its readiness to engage with Türkiye in a phased, proportionate and reversible manner in a number of areas of common interest, subject to Türkiye meeting the established conditionalities set out in previous European Council conclusions, and provided that the de-escalation in the Eastern Mediterranean is sustained. Regarding the economic criteria, the Turkish economy is well advanced, but made no progress over the reporting period. Serious concerns persist over the continued proper functioning of Türkiye’s market economy as there has been backsliding on important elements, such as the conduct of monetary policy and the institutional and regulatory environment. The economy recovered strongly from the COVID-19-crisis, growing by 11.4 % in 2021, and more than 7 % in the first half of 2022 despite the fallout of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The country's overly loose monetary policy and lack of policy credibility have weakened the lira and have driven the official inflation to a two-decade high of more than 80%. Higher prices for imported commodities widened external imbalances, which remain a major vulnerability in a situation of increased uncertainty and low level of international reserves. Budget execution outperformed plans but government debt increased, and fiscal policy has come increasingly under pressure, burdened by unsuccessful attempts to curb rising inflation and underpin the domestic currency. The institutional and regulatory environment remains fragile, particularly as regards the predictability, transparency, and implementation of regulations. Some important steps were taken to improve the resolution of commercial disputes. Despite a gradual decline, the informal sector still accounts for a significant share of economic activity. State intervention in the price-setting mechanisms persists. The provision of State aid lacks proper implementation rules, enforcement and transparency. The banking sector remained largely stable and capital adequacy above the regulatory requirements. Non-performing loans decreased, and profitability improved, but dollarisation and financial stability risks increased. The labour market recovered from the pandemic but deep‑seated structural challenges, such as a very significant gender gap, a high rate of youth unemployment, and wide regional disparities remain. Türkiye has a good level of preparation and has made limited progress during the reporting period in developing its capacity to cope with the competitive pressure and market forces in the EU. Despite some progress in improving vocational training, the mismatch persists between the education system and labour market needs. Expenditure on research and development continued to increase very slowly and remained well below the government’s target. Investment activity slowed in the second half of 2021. Progress continued with regard to diversifying energy supplies and increasing the share of energy generated from renewable sources. The extension of local content requirement practices raises concerns. Türkiye removed some of the additional custom duties it had introduced in defiance of the commitments under the EU-Turkey Custom Union; however, extensive deviations from its obligations under the EU-Turkey Customs Union hinder bilateral trade. Türkiye is moderately prepared in the area of public procurement but made no progress over the reporting period and large gaps remained in its alignment with the EU acquis. Türkiye continued its discriminatory domestic price advantage and offset practices favouring local content. Türkiye is moderately prepared in the area of statistics and made limited progress during the reporting period. Frequent managerial changes within the Turkish Statistical Institute over the last few years, including during the reporting period, have significantly undermined the institution’s credibility. The reliability of key economic data has been repeatedly called into question. Türkiye has a good level of preparation on financial control, though no progress was made during the reporting period. The Public Internal Financial Control policy paper has not yet been updated and the anti-fraud coordination service (AFCOS) network has not yet been re-established. Regarding its ability to assume the obligations of membership, Türkiye’s alignment with the EU acquis continued to be very limited and pursued on a rather ad hoc basis. The internal market cluster is key to the good functioning of the EU-Turkey Customs Union and to integrating Türkiye into the EU’s single market. Preparations in the areas of freedom of movement for workers and right of establishment and freedom to provide services are at an early stage, as many professions are closed to EU nationals. Türkiye has achieved a good level of preparation for the free movement of goods. Technical barriers to trade remained in place. Türkiye is moderately prepared on free movement of capital, as limitations continue on foreign ownership and on capital movement. Türkiye needs to continue to address outstanding issues in its framework regulating the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing. Türkiye is well advanced in the area of company law and needs to make further progress in aligning with the EU acquis. Türkiye has a good level of preparation in the area of intellectual property law but needs to improve enforcement. Türkiye has some level of preparation in the area of competition policy. Serious concerns persist in relation to the legislative framework, enforcement capacity and transparency in the field of State aid. Türkiye has a good level of preparation in the area of financial services and made some progress, including with the development of new alternative financing instruments. There is a good level of preparation in terms of legislative alignment of consumer and health protection, with some progress made, notably on aligning with the EU acquis and in strengthening inter-sectoral cooperation. Within the cluster on competitiveness and inclusive growth, Türkiye has some level of preparation in the area of digital transformation and media, though it has continued to backslide. Türkiye’s preparations in the area of science and research are well advanced and Türkiye made good progress during the reporting period, notably with the conclusion of the association agreement for Horizon Europe for the 2021-2027 period. Türkiye is moderately prepared on education and culture and made some progress, in particular on vocational education, national qualifications systems and in terms of Türkiye’s participation in the EU programmes. On the economy-related chapters, backsliding continued on economic and monetary policy, reflecting inefficient policy on ensuring price stability and anchoring inflation expectations. The central bank remains under significant political pressure and its functional independence needs to be restored. Türkiye made limited progress on enterprise and industrial policy, and major challenges in relation to measures incompatible with EU industrial policy principles remain unaddressed. No progress was made during the reporting period in the area of social policy and employment, with concerns remaining over trade union rights, the lack of genuine social dialogue and persistent levels of informal economic activity. While Türkiye is moderately prepared on taxation, it made no progress during the reporting period and there remains a need for a clear strategy, avoiding frequent changes in tax rates and enabling tax information exchange with all EU Member States. Türkiye maintains a good level of preparation for the customs union but made limited progress, notably by removing some additional duties applied on imports of products originating in third countries. However, Türkiye’s deviations from its obligations under the EU-Turkey Customs Union continue, contributing to a high number of trade irritants.

Regarding the cluster on the Green Agenda and sustainable connectivity, Türkiye is moderately prepared in transport policy. It made limited progress during the reporting period, mainly linked to the adoption of a plan to significantly increase the use of railway transport. Türkiye is moderately prepared in the area of energy and made limited progress overall. Progress continued on renewable energy deployment, on reforms in the natural gas sector and in legislative alignment on nuclear safety. Türkiye is well advanced on trans-European networks and made some progress, mainly on energy networks, thanks to the smooth operation of the trans-Anatolian pipeline. The construction of the Halkali-Kapikule railway line connecting the Bulgarian border to Istanbul continued. Türkiye has some level of preparation in the area of environment and climate change, but made no progress overall during the reporting period. Türkiye faces critical environmental and climate challenges, both in relation to mitigation and adaptation. More ambitious and better coordinated environment and climate policies need to be drawn up and implemented. Türkiye still needs to increase and implement its contribution to the Paris Agreement on climate change and complete its alignment with the acquis on climate action. On the cluster covering resources, agriculture and cohesion, Türkiye reached some level of preparation in the area of agriculture and rural development. Backsliding continued during the reporting period, as its agricultural policy keeps moving away from the main principles of the EU common agricultural policy and Türkiye continued to restrict imports of agricultural products from the EU. Türkiye is a major exporter of food products to the EU and made limited progress during the reporting period in the area of food safety, veterinary and phytosanitary policy. Full implementation of the EU acquis in this area requires significant further work. Türkiye is moderately prepared in the area of fisheries and continued to make good progress, notably as regards the implementation of the new fisheries law, resources and fleet management, and inspection and control. Türkiye is moderately prepared in the area of regional policy and the coordination of structural instruments and continued to make some progress on accelerating the absorption of IPA II funds. Türkiye has some level of preparation in the area of financial and budgetary provisions, but made no progress during the reporting period. In the external relations cluster, Türkiye is moderately prepared in the area of external relations and made limited progress in the reporting period, notably due to continued deviation from the Common Customs Tariff. Divergence from the EU Generalised Scheme of Preferences persisted, in violation of the EU-Turkey Customs Union. Türkiye’s official development assistance was largely directed towards humanitarian support for the Syria-related activities on Türkiye’s own territory. Türkiye has some level of preparation in the area of foreign, security and defence policy. Overall, Türkiye’s foreign policy continued to be at odds with the EU priorities under the common foreign and security policy (CFSP). Türkiye’s non-alignment with EU restrictive measures against Russia is of particular concern due to the free circulation of products, including dual use goods, within the EU-Turkey Customs Union. This creates a risk of undermining EU restrictive measures. For the Customs Union to continue functioning the parties must fully respect existing rules and avoid undermining mutual trust. Overall, in many areas, significant further work is needed on legislative alignment with the EU acquis. In all areas, implementation and enforcement needs substantial improvement. Ensuring the independence of regulatory authorities and developing administrative capacity are key for Türkiye to achieve further progress. 2. CLUSTER 1: THE FUNDAMENTALS OF THE ACCESSION PROCESS 2.1. Functioning of democratic institutions and Public Administration Reform 2.1.1. Democracy The functioning of Türkiye’s democratic institutions continued to be severely hampered. During the reporting period, democratic backsliding and deep political polarisation continued. The presidential system’s structural defects remained in place. Despite the lifting of the state of emergency in July 2018, several legal provisions granting government officials extraordinary powers and retaining several of the restrictive elements of the state of emergency remained in place. In addition, the emergency decree-laws were used to reform other legislations. The State of Emergency Inquiry Commission has yet to complete its investigation into the cases of public employees who were dismissed by decree-laws during the period of emergency rule. In July 2021, Türkiye's Parliament adopted a bill that extends the duration of some restrictive elements of the state of emergency for one more year. Elections During the reporting period, no elections took place. In April 2022, the Turkish Parliament adopted a joint AKP (Justice and Development Party) and MHP (Nationalist Movement Party) proposal overhauling the rules for parliamentary elections. The law notably reduced the electoral threshold from 10 % to 7 % and changed the formula to calculate the distribution of parliamentary seats. The law also changed the procedures for selecting the chair and members of the provincial election boards, who, inter alia, oversee the vote count and appeals after the elections. They will be elected on a random basis, which may endanger election security. Several amendments to electoral legislation were adopted in March 2022. The Venice Commission of the Council of Europe and the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) issued a joint opinion in June. It criticised the hasty adoption of these amendments and the absence of an inclusive consultation process with the opposition parties and civil society. The joint opinion noted the reduction of the election threshold from 10 % to 7 % of the valid votes cast throughout Türkiye in general elections as a positive development, but underlined that the threshold, which still remains high, impedes political representation. The opinion also noted that some provisions of the new election law hinder smaller political parties’ political representation in Parliament. The new legislation envisaged selecting the chairs and members of the provincial and district election boards through a lottery instead of based on their experience. The Venice Commission argued that this random selection of judges, who will preside the district and provincial electoral boards, endangers election security. Türkiye needs to address the remaining recommendations, such as guaranteeing democratic media plurality, and ensuring the fair treatment of all political parties and candidates. The changes to the electoral law regarding the calculation for allocating parliamentary seats and the composition of the provincial and district election boards are a matter of concern. Any further amendments Türkiye makes to its electoral framework, including its legislation on political parties, should be made after thorough consultation, in line with international standards. In the southeast, the 48 mayors who were forcibly replaced by government-appointed trustees after the local elections in 2019 have not been reinstated. This is a source of serious concern, as it undermines local democracy and denies voters their chosen representation. No action was taken to address the Venice Commission’s June 2020 opinion, which questioned the decisions to deny mayoral mandates to the Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP) candidates who received the highest number of votes in the March 2019 municipal elections in six municipalities, and to give these mandates to second-placed AKP candidates. As underlined by the Venice Commission, while the removal of elected officials may be exceptionally justified by the need to prevent officials from abusing their office to favour terrorist activities, replacing elected officials by candidates who lost the election, without holding new elections, cannot be justified. Parliament The presidential system has largely weakened Parliament’s legislative and oversight functions. The President has been granted extensive legislative powers and can make decisions across a wide range of policy areas, which limits the Parliament’s legislative role. Policy discussions that resulted in bipartisan agreement were uncommon during the reporting period. Parliament lacked the tools needed to hold the government accountable. Targeting of the political opposition continued. The closure case of Türkiye’s second largest opposition party (HDP) is ongoing and in the course of the last year, an increasing number of opposition parliamentary immunities were lifted. Parliament’s legislative role has been hampered by the presidential system, due to the widespread use of Presidential decrees and decisions. Between January and December 2021, out of the 732 proposed bills, Parliament adopted 87 pieces of legislation. As of April 2022, there have been 98 presidential decrees issued on a wide range of policy issues, including on socio-economic issues, which traditionally are not covered by presidential decrees. Inter-party electoral alliances remained in place in Parliament. Parliament’s legislative and agenda-setting duties were largely influenced by the parliamentary majority of the ruling AKP-led alliance, and opposition parties were de facto unable to influence parliamentary debates. Within Parliament, key public policy inter-party debates that resulted in cross-party compromises were rare. Parliamentary oversight of the executive remained very weak. Parliament does not have the means needed to hold the government accountable. Members of Parliament can only submit written questions to the Vice President and ministers and are not allowed by law to formally question the President. Presidential decrees were not subject to parliamentary scrutiny. Parliamentary oversight of public spending needs to be significantly improved. The judiciary continued to systematically target members of the opposition parties in Parliament, particularly the People's Democratic Party (HDP), for alleged terrorism-related offenses, which undermined political pluralism. The parliamentary immunity system did not provide adequate legal protection to allow the opposition parliamentarians to express their opinions within the boundaries of freedom of speech. Currently, some 5 000 HDP members and officials remain in prison. The Justice Ministry’s request to remove the parliamentary immunity of 20 opposition Members of Parliament from six different parties is pending. An HDP politician regained his status as an MP in July 2021 after the Constitutional Court ruled that his rights had been violated. However, the immunity of another HDP parliamentarian was removed by Parliament in March 2022. Four additional opposition deputies have had their parliamentary immunity removed and have been detained on terrorism-related accusations during the current parliamentary term. Two former HDP co-chairs, and several former HDP legislators are still in prison despite a European Court of Human Rights ruling in their favour.

The closure case against the HDP on terrorism charges is pending before the Constitutional Court. The prosecution has demanded that 451 HDP members be banned from politics and that the party’s bank account be frozen. In April, the HDP submitted its defence to the Constitutional Court in the ongoing closure case , arguing that the case was politically motivated, as it seeks to exclude the HDP from Türkiye’s political landscape. The legal framework for elections and political parties remains problematic despite the recent lowering of the electoral threshold from 10 % to 7 %. Türkiye has yet to address the remaining recommendations of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights and the Venice Commission. In Parliament, women continued to be underrepresented (17.32 %). Governance The presidential system continues to be characterised by a lack of checks and balances, as well as the politicisation of the public administration. Most regulatory authorities remain directly linked to the Presidency. The recommendations by the Council of Europe’s Venice Commission on the presidential regime still need to be addressed. The government’s pressure on mayors from opposition parties continued to weaken local democracy. The presidential system continues to lack the necessary checks and balances to prevent the undue concentration of power in one office and to protect the independence of the judiciary, as highlighted in the Venice Convention’s 2017 opinion and the European Commission’s previous country reports. The presidential system continues to have a harmful impact on the functioning of the executive and legislative arms of government, as well as on public administration. Due to a lack of effective checks and balances, and Parliament’s inability to effectively oversee the office of the President, the latter’s political accountability is restricted to elections. The use of traditional instruments of oversight of the executive by Parliament, such as a vote of confidence and the ability to ask the executive oral questions, is still not possible and has not been since the entry into force of the presidential system in 2018; only written questions to the Vice President and ministers are permitted. The administration, courts, and security sector are all heavily politicised. The Presidency has direct control over the vast majority of key institutions. The civil service has become politicised, particularly at the highest levels of management. The legal framework has enabled undue political influence over regulatory authorities. The President has the power to appoint the heads of the vast majority of the regulatory agencies, which are still directly linked to the Presidency. During the reporting period, two deputy governors and one monetary policy board member of the central bank were dismissed. The Ombudsman remained silent on politically critical issues concerning fundamental rights. The Ombudsman still lacks ex officio powers to initiate investigations and to intervene in cases with legal remedies. Local government The government’s pressure on opposition mayors and opposition politicians remained strong. Administrative and judicial probes continued against mayors from the opposition parties. The CHP Istanbul Chair, whose conviction was upheld by the Court of Cassation, was given a political ban. The Court of Cassation’s Public Prosecutor cancelled her political party membership. The trial continued against the Istanbul Metropolitan Mayor on the allegations of insulting the members of the Supreme Election Council in 2019. An administrative investigation was also launched against the mayor for allegedly hiring terrorists in his office. Local democracy in the south-east remained severely hampered. Since the local elections in 2019, 48 HDP mayors have been dismissed from office due to terrorism-related charges. Furthermore, due to alleged ties to the Gülen movement, one CHP mayor was replaced. Governors remained in the positions of the deposed mayors as trustees. Municipal assemblies have been halted in the majority of cases by the new trustees. Hundreds of municipal lawmakers and elected officials have been detained on terrorism-related allegations. Such actions deny the public their right to be ruled by their chosen representatives. According to the Venice Commission, the voters’ choice must be restored by either reinstating suspended mayors, elected municipal assemblies appointing acting mayors, or holding new elections. The legal framework regulating the Ministry of Interior’s tutelary powers over elected local office holders was not revised in line with Türkiye’s commitments under the European Charter of Local Self-Government. The municipal law envisages local administrations' engagement with the public and civil society. Citizens’ assemblies, which aim to bring together professional and civil society organisations and other local stakeholders, continued to be inactive in most provinces. Some municipalities increased their level of transparency and accountability through innovative solutions, such as the live broadcasting of municipal tenders. Women's representation at the local level remained low. Only two out of 30 (6.6 %) urban mayors and 42 out of 1 389 (3 %) mayors are women. Civil Society Serious backsliding regarding the civil society environment continued. Civil society faced continuous pressure and their space to operate freely continued to reduce, limiting their freedom of expression, association and assembly. A prominent human rights defender, Osman Kavala, was sentenced to life imprisonment without parole (‘aggravated life imprisonment’) and seven co-defendants were sentenced to 18 years of imprisonment. This judgement is contrary to a ruling by the ECtHR. Human rights organisations, which were closed under the state of emergency, were not offered any legal remedy in relation to confiscations. The implementation of the law on preventing financing of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction added further restrictions and pressure on civil society organisations, including with regard to restrictions on the activities of human rights defenders and civil society. Despite all these negative developments, civil society continued to be vocal and involved in civic life, and reported on developments as much as possible. Systematic and inclusive mechanisms for the effective consultation of independent civil society organisations on new legislation and policies need to be put in place. A powerful and diverse civil society, which is a crucial part of a democratic system, should not be targeted and restricted in its functioning by the government and state institutions. Civil society organisations in Türkiye continued to make crucial contributions on key issues of the country, notably in the areas of education, women’s rights, rights for LGBTIQ persons, rights of persons belonging to minorities, freedom of religion and belief, anti-discrimination, and awareness-raising regarding ethnic and social tolerance, monitoring hate crimes and support for refugees. Human rights organisations faced increased judicial and administrative pressures, including arrests and detention of activists and human rights defenders. Frequent judicial investigations and court cases resulting in heavy sentences, led to an increasingly hostile environment for civil society. The overly broad definition of terrorism and its interpretation by the judiciary has a worrying deterrent effect on civil society.

In April 2022, Osman Kavala, a prominent human rights defender, was sentenced to life in prison without parole, under charges of attempting to overthrow the government (a charge of which he had been previously acquitted). Seven other co-defendants, prominent human rights defenders, were sentenced to 18 years in prison under the same charges. The judgement has provoked strong reactions by the international community and many EU Member States. In February 2022, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe decided to launch an infringement procedure against Türkiye for its refusal to implement the ECtHR’s 2019 judgment and to immediately release Osman Kavala. The launching of the infringement procedure. Türkiye’s refusal to implement the Court’s ruling in the Kavala case has raised doubts about Türkiye’s commitment to its obligations as member of the Council of Europe. In the context of the infringement procedure, the ECtHR ruled in July 2022 that Türkiye has indeed failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 46 § 1 of the Convention to comply with the Chamber judgment delivered by the Court in the case of Kavala v. Türkiye on 10 December 2019. Another landmark case against human rights defenders, the Büyükada case, is still pending before the Court of Cassation. The portrayal, in some media outlets close to the government, of human rights defenders as criminals, notably for accepting funds from international donors, including the EU, remains a matter of serious concern. Defamatory rhetoric during court proceedings by high-level public officials, including the President and ministers, casts serious doubt on the respect of the principle of the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial. The pressure faced by female politicians and women’s organisations characterised by frequent detentions, investigations, and arrests created a serious hurdle for the exercise of freedom of association, freedom of expression, assembly and for participation in political life. A closure case was launched against the ‘We Will Stop Femicides Platform’, and the executives of the Rosa Women’s Association based in Diyarbakır faced regular detentions, arrests, and were subjected to repetitive audits, including by the Financial Crimes Investigation Board (MASAK). A closure case has been launched against the Tarlabaşı Community Centre in Istanbul, following administrative audits and fines and an intense smear campaign against the centre, for alleging that they promote LGBTIQ and PKK propaganda to children. Stigmatisation, hate speech and discriminatory discourse targeting LGBTIQ civil society organisations and persons remained very strong. International non-governmental organisations, including those providing humanitarian aid to refugees, continued to face difficulties in their work in Türkiye. No effective domestic remedy was provided for the confiscation of assets from civil society organisations closed by emergency decrees. The legal framework regulating the work of civil society organisations lacks clarity and carries the risk of arbitrariness during implementation. Despite a 2021 Council of State judgement, it is compulsory for all associations to register their members in the Ministry of Interior’s information system of the. This legal obligation is not in line with the OSCE/Council of Europe guidelines on freedom of association. The 2020 law on preventing financing of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, which requires risk analysis, was used repeatedly by the authorities to profile and target independent human rights organisations. This created a climate of fear and intimidation and reinforced a chilling effect on NGOs that inhibit them from carrying out their legitimate activities. The July 2021 Venice Commission and the February 2021 UN Special Rapporteurs’ recommendations concluded that the government should reconsider certain aspects of the legislation to ensure compliance with Türkiye’s human rights obligations. The law should not be used to hinder civil society’s freedom of association and assembly, including their fundraising activities. As the Venice Commission underlined, while fully recognising Türkiye’s difficult security situation, the measures introduced should not go beyond what is necessary and should be proportional. The law on collection of aid continues to impose burdensome requirements for permits that discourage fundraising activities by civil society organisations. These include prior notification for each fundraising activity and lengthy authorisation processes. Public funds are not distributed in a transparent way and the distribution process does not allow for the full involvement of civil society organisations and other stakeholders at every stage. The existing tax system impedes the functioning and development of foundations and associations. The status of ‘public benefit’ for associations and ‘tax exemption’ for foundations is vaguely defined and granted by the President. The space for foreign donors, who provide financial support to civil society in Türkiye under current Turkish legislation is increasingly shrinking. Both donors and the civil society are often faced with slander and the risk of having their activities funded by international donors being criminalised. There is still neither a comprehensive government strategy nor any mechanisms in place for cooperation with civil society or for improving the legal framework. There is no legal framework or transparent and consistent practice for public consultations with the independent civil society organisations who are largely excluded from the consultations that are part of policy-making processes and monitoring. It is crucial that a full participatory approach is ensured as it is a constitutive element of a functioning democracy. Overall, the legal, financial and administrative environment needs to be more conducive to developing civil society in Türkiye. Civilian oversight of the security forces The presidential system grants broad powers to the executive branch over the security forces. However, civilian oversight of the security forces has not been consolidated. The accountability of the military, the police and the intelligence services remained very limited. Parliamentary oversight of the security institutions needs to be strengthened. The legal framework for overseeing military expenditure was not improved. The culture of impunity remained prevalent. Security personnel continued to enjoy overreaching judicial and administrative protection in cases of alleged human right violations and disproportionate use of force. Legal privileges continued in relation to the prosecution of military personnel and top echelons of command. The investigation of alleged military offences committed by military personnel requires prior authorisation from either military or civilian superiors. Situation in the east and south-east The situation in the south-east remained very worrying. In October 2021, Türkiye’s Parliament extended the military’s mandate to launch cross-border anti-terror operations in Syria and Iraq by two additional years. The Turkish government continued its domestic and cross-border security and military operations in Iraq and Syria. The security situation remained precarious in border areas with recurrent terrorist acts led by the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), which remains on the EU list of persons, groups and entities involved in acts of terrorism. The EU unambiguously condemned the PKK’s attacks and expressed solidarity with the families of the victims. While the government has a legitimate right to fight terrorism, it is essential that it does so in accordance with the rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms. Anti-terror measures need to be proportionate. There were no developments on the resumption of a credible political peace process to achieve a sustainable solution. PKK leader Öcalan was not allowed to receive visits from his family nor his lawyers. In December 2021, the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers issued a resolution on the ‘Gurban’ group of cases, including PKK leader Öcalan, in which it noted that Türkiye has to adopt general measures, and invited the authorities to submit information on the progress achieved in adopting them by the end of September 2022. In February 2022, the Constitutional Court rejected the application by Öcalan’s lawyers who asked to meet their client, being held in İmralı Prison. This decision was appealed before the ECtHR. The curfew in six districts of Diyarbakir’s Sur municipality was lifted. However, provincial governorates declared recurrent military security zones in several rural settlements. Human rights organisations and opposition parties continued to report serious violations of human rights by security forces, including alleged instances of torture, ill-treatment, arbitrary arrests and procedural rights violations in prisons and in police and gendarmerie establishments. There was no progress in investigations into the deaths of civilians during security operations under curfews in 2015-2016 in towns of the Southeast such as Cizre. According to independent sources, 67 children in Kurdish-majority provinces lost their lives due to armoured vehicle crashes and remnants of war in Türkiye in the last 10 years. There are concerns about impunity in these cases. Eastern and south-eastern provincial governors declared frequent blanket bans on all meetings, demonstrations and events in their provinces, The longest of these has been in force in Van since 2016. The broad interpretation of the fight against terrorism, judicial and administrative difficulties imposed on the rights of journalists, political opponents, bar associations and human rights defenders working on the Kurdish issue raised repeated concerns. Associations, Kurdish-language media outlets, and cultural rights institutions mostly remained closed. Legal procedures were launched against 20 Kurdish journalists, whereas 16 were arrested in Diyarbakir in June 2022. The 2021 Constitutional Court judgement annulling a provision of the emergency decree regarding the closure in 2016 of media outlets on the grounds of ‘posing a threat to national security’ and also reverting a provision that paved the way for the seizure of the properties of those that were shut down, was not implemented. There were a number of hate crimes committed against Kurdish students and other members of the public. The court case in relation to the killing of HDP staff member in Izmir, continued. There were also several hate attacks against HDP buildings. Fifteen bar associations in south-eastern and eastern provinces condemned the escalating violence against Kurds across Türkiye in July 2021 and asked for an end to the language of violence and discrimination. The Kurdish Newroz celebrations took place despite a heavy police presence and numerous detentions, including HDP executives and members. The HDP closure case continued before the Constitutional Court. The trial known as ‘Kobane case’ against 108 members and executives of the HDP (of whom 20 remain in prison) also continued. There were hundreds of new detentions and arrests of elected representatives and mayors, municipal council members and municipal executives on terrorism-related charges in the east and south-east of Türkiye. Requests by the prosecution to Parliament to remove the immunity of almost all HDP lawmakers are pending. Former HDP co-chair Selahattin Demirtaş remained in prison despite two final ECtHR judgements ruling for his immediate release. The Constitutional Court’s ruling of June 2020 on the violation of Mr. Demirtaş’ right to liberty and security was also not implemented. In April 2022, a new indictment against Mr Demirtaş was launched over some of his social media messages posted nine years ago. Campaigns for the release of a former HDP MP and co-chair, who is reportedly unable to sustain herself in prison, yielded no results.

As of April 2022, out of the 65 municipalities won by the HDP in the 2019 local elections, 48 elected mayors have been replaced by state-appointed trustees and another six elected municipal mayors have been replaced by AK Party mayors, as these were dismissed from their roles by law decrees. Since the first trustee appointment in June 2019, 83 co-mayors have been detained, and 39 mayors have been arrested. Currently eight HDP co-mayors remain in prison. In February 2022, the ECtHR issued a judgement on the 40 former HDP MPs (including former co-Chair Demirtaş) finding that removing their parliamentary immunity was against the Turkish Constitution and that their freedom of expression had been violated. The March 2022 monitoring report and recommendations on Türkiye of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe need to be implemented. Court cases are ongoing regarding government-funded construction projects on cultural, historical, and religious heritage sites which were damaged in 2015 and 2016. Two churches were restored using state funding. There were renewed tensions around several projects, which are considered to have a negative environmental impact and to disrupt cultural and religious places, such as the mining project in Tunceli Mountains, which is part of a national park and a sacred site for Alevis. The serious risk of such damages had been raised for years by residents and activists. There continued to be no comprehensive, consistent approach in place in relation to missing persons, to the exhumation of mass graves or to the independent investigation of all alleged cases of extrajudicial killing by security and law enforcement officers. Most of the investigations into cases of enforced disappearance from the 1990s have reached the 20-year statute of limitations. Out of more than 1 400 cases of missing persons since then, only 16 court cases have been launched. 14 of these ended in acquittals of the alleged perpetrators, two are ongoing and two other cases are before the Court of Cassation. Concerns remained about the continued justification of extraterritorial abductions and forced returns under the pretext of combating terrorism and protecting national security. Refugees and internally displaced persons Türkiye continues to host one of the largest refugee populations in the world. According to official data, as of May 2022, Türkiye hosted 3 737 369 Syrian refugees with temporary protection status, some 108 000 Syrians with legal residency and 193 000 Syrians with Turkish citizenship. The number of Syrian refugees who voluntarily returned to Syria from Türkiye stood at 470 000, according to the Turkish government. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, besides the Syrian refugees, Türkiye hosted 330 000 asylum-seekers and refugees from other countries including Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran and Somalia in December 2021. In 2021, Türkiye granted international protection (refugee status, conditional refugee status or subsidiary protection) to 13 227 applicants, an increase from 8 753 in 2021. The authorities rejected 11 908 applications compared to 10 674 in 2020. The backlog of international protection applications remains high. In February 2022, Türkiye officially closed registration of international and temporary protection applications in several provinces, based on a newly introduced ‘25 per cent rule’, which caps the proportion of foreigners residing in a given province. Human rights organisations and lawyers reported challenges in their access to registration in many other provinces, beyond those that are closed to registration. Barriers to registration hinder access to all essential services and compound the vulnerability of applicants as they increase the risk of detention and deportation. Unaccompanied children continue to face protection risks in asylum and migration procedures. A multi-disciplinary age determination procedure, which takes psycho-social aspects into consideration is necessary to improve compliance with European standards. In December 2021, 1 314 181 foreign nationals holding residence permits were present in Türkiye, including humanitarian residence permit holders. The return of irregular migrants from the Greek islands, unilaterally suspended by Türkiye on public health grounds in March 2020, has not resumed. The EU has repeatedly called on Türkiye to resume return operations in line with the commitments made under the EU-Turkey Statement. Resettlements of vulnerable Syrians refugees from Türkiye to EU Member States have continued in the reporting period. Recurrent allegations of human rights violations in the field of migration and asylum, particularly in removal centres remain a concern. Over the last year, media and civil society continued to report on policies and practices in breach of human rights standards and Turkish legislation. NGOs have noted reports of detainees being coerced to sign voluntary return forms in removal centres and an increase in hate crimes and incidents motivated by anti-refugee sentiments, and are a cause for concern. Türkiye needs to further align its practice in removal centres with European standards, in particular with regard to protection of human rights, including access to legal counselling and interpreters, and protection of vulnerable groups, in particular children staying with their families (see Chapter 24). Public discontent with the presence of Syrian refugees has become an election issue and a matter of constant debate. The pandemic had a disproportionately negative effect on vulnerable groups including refugees and internally displaced persons, who were already living in dire economic conditions. Türkiye has made sustained significant efforts to provide support for refugees and ensure wider access to healthcare and schooling, with approximately 742 000 children enrolled in formal education by December 2021, which is about 82 000 higher than for the previous academic year. However, more than 400 000 school-aged refugee children were still out of school and did not have any access to education opportunities. Syrian refugees continued to benefit from free-of-charge healthcare provided in 181 migrant health centres funded by the EU through its Facility for Refugees in Turkey and in Turkish hospitals. The EU supported the employment of over 4 000 healthcare workers to ensure access of refugees and people under subsidiary protection to healthcare services. 22.8 million primary health care consultations were conducted in EU- supported primary level healthcare facilities. Many cities continued to improve municipal services and infrastructure to respond to the population increase due to the influx of refugees. There was no progress on the situation of internally displaced persons resulting from the violence in the south-east in the 1990s and in more recent years. 2.1.2. Public Administration Reform Türkiye has some level of preparation/is moderately prepared in the field of public administration reform. No progress was made during the reporting period. The country still lacks a comprehensive reform agenda for public administration and public financial management. The political will to reform is still lacking. The administration’s accountability is insufficient and human resources management needs to be improved. Policy-making lacks evidence-based methods and participatory mechanisms. The politicisation of the administration continued. Women’s representation in civil service in the managerial posts remained low. Last year’s recommendations were not implemented and remain valid. In the coming year, Türkiye should in particular: ®prepare and adopt an interinstitutional public administration reform plan in line with EU principles and values, and with the necessary political ownership and support; ®ensure that the Inquiry Commission on the State of Emergency Measures provides for an effective remedy, which safeguards the right of every individual to a fair administrative process; ®introduce merit-based appointments and promotions for the senior managerial positions of the civil service. Strategic framework for public administration reform Türkiye still lacks an overarching strategy for public administration reform. The absence of political support and ownership for reforming the public administration continues. Several planning and sectoral policy documents on various aspects of public administration exist. However, they reflect a fragmented policy framework in the absence of an overall strategy document. Most of these sectoral policy documents do not specify the expected costs of reform measures, so financial sustainability of public sector reforms is not granted. They also lack a structured follow up mechanism (see Chapter 32 - Financial control). An administrative unit legally entitled to coordinate, design, and monitor public administration reforms needs to be set up. Such a unit would need to coordinate with the Ministry of Treasury and Finance, to ensure coherence of fiscal planning and to efficiently address issues with managerial accountability. Policy development and coordination The centralisation of policy-making under the presidential system continued. The presidential administration continued to play a leading role in policy-making, and the role of ministries was further diminished. Inter-agency policy development and coordination were limited, due to the dominant role of the Presidency. Most regulatory authorities are also linked by law to the Presidency.

The link between policy-making and financial planning remains weak. There is no legal requirement to conduct public consultations for policy-making. Evidence-based policy-making instruments, such as regulatory impact assessments, are not used by the executive and legislative branches. Therefore, the country lacks an inclusive and evidence-based policy-making process. Türkiye’s state institutions do not carry out systematic ex post monitoring and public reporting on the implementation of key government programmes. Therefore, the public scrutiny of the government’s work has remained very limited. Public financial management Türkiye continued to lack an overarching public financial management reform programme. The annual budget is prepared as part of the medium-term budgetary framework. Public procurement legislation is not in line with the EU acquis. The very large number of exemptions inserted into the Law on public procurement disrupts the transparency and accountability of public expenditures (See also Chapter 5). In the absence of adequate ex post monitoring, major public investment programmes lack transparency. As regards external audit, the Turkish Court of Accounts’ (TCA) ex post controls continued to constitute the basis for parliamentary oversight of the budget. The TCA reports also provided substantial information about the budgetary expenditures for the public. The TCA’s audit findings of misuse of public resources were also reported in the media. However, there remained shortcomings in the coverage and in parliamentary and judicial follow up on the TCA’s audits. Some institutions are exempt from the Court’s remit and, therefore from the associated parliamentary scrutiny. Parliamentary and judicial follow-up on audit reports need to be improved. The limited parliamentary oversight of the budget resulted in reduced budget transparency. The Turkish State Wealth Fund (TWF) lacks accountability and transparency. The TWF audit report for 2021 has not yet been made public. The new law, adopted in May 2022, introduced significant amendments to the TWF’s legislative framework, extending the already numerous exemptions and exceptions to cover companies, funds and their subsidiaries of which the TWF has become the controlling shareholder. This is a source of concern. An overview of the TWF’s investments and borrowings is not included in the budget. Annual budgetary figures are aggregated, making budget reports difficult to analyse. Public engagement with the budgetary process is virtually absent. Public service and human resources management The functions and the human resources management of the civil service remain substantially governed by the Civil Servants’ Act of 1965. The need for new legislation on the public service remain, but a non-systematic approach continued to prevail. Türkiye is still missing an overall civil service strategy and overall monitoring report on the implementation of civil service policy. The civil service legal framework does not guarantee neutrality, continuity or merit-based recruitment and promotion procedures. Numerous incidents indicated a growing politicisation of the civil service. During the reporting period, two deputy governors and one monetary policy board member of the central bank were dismissed. The first phase of external recruitment for entry-level positions is based on merit, whereas the oral interview phase remains poorly regulated and thus open to political patronage. The recruitment procedure for the most senior civil service posts lacks objective criteria, leaving appointments open to nepotism and political interference. Accountability of the administration The presidential system has introduced strictly centralised lines of accountability to the Presidency. Given that internal control and audit systems do not function effectively, the accountability of central government agencies remains weak and at risk of political patronage. The functional division of roles and responsibilities between different governmental institutions needs to be clarified to improve efficiency, transparency and accountability. State institutions are formally required to submit annual accountability reports on the use of resources to achieve their designated targets. However, a systematic mechanism for follow-up by the executive is not in place. (See Chapter 32 - Financial control). Citizens’ right to good administration is formally ensured, through internal and external oversight arrangements. However, the implementation of the internal and external control mechanisms is not effective. The role of oversight institutions such as the Ombudsman remained limited in the absence of ex officio powers (see Governance). Internal controls did not result in systematic prosecution of alleged wrongdoings within the civil service. The right to access public information is regulated by the Law on the Right to Information. However, there is no effective follow up mechanism overseeing the implementation of the law. The law allows for broad exemptions on grounds of protecting state secrets, commercial secrets and personal data, thus limiting actual public accessibility to state information. Strong concerns remain on the quality of the work of the Inquiry Commission on the State of Emergency Measures. As of 31 December 2021, the commission closed 120 703 cases out of 126 783 applications in four years. There are 6 080 applications pending. Strong concerns remain as to whether cases are examined individually, whether the rights of defence of those dismissed are respected and whether the assessment procedure is in line with international standards. Since there were no hearings, there was a general lack of procedural rights for applicants and decisions were taken on the basis of the written files relating to the original dismissal, all of which call into question the extent to which the Inquiry Commission is an effective judicial remedy. Service delivery to citizens and businesses There is still no specific law on general administrative procedures in Türkiye. The simplification of administrative procedures needs to be developed, to reduce the burden of bureaucracy. In the absence of such law, citizens and businesses continue to be faced with legal uncertainty. There is no central policy or co-ordination mechanism for improving the overall quality of public services. Most of the institutions have developed service delivery standards within their own legal remit. However, no institution is responsible for overall promotion or measurement of the quality of public services. 2.2. Rule of law and fundamental rights 2.2.1. Chapter 23: Judiciary and fundamental rights

The rule of law and respect for human rights are amongst the EU’s founding values. Respect for fundamental rights in law and in practice, the effectiveness of the judicial system (its independence, high quality and efficiency) and the effectiveness of the fight against corruption are of paramount importance. Türkiye is at an early stage of applying the EU acquis and European standards in this area. Serious backsliding continued during the reporting period. Major issues identified in previous reports, in particular the systemic lack of independence of the judiciary and the urgent need to improve the human rights situation, remained unaddressed. The 2019 judicial reform strategy (JRS) and the March 2021 human rights action plan (HRAP), while tackling some of the areas where reforms are needed, do not include concrete steps to remedy the most acute problems in this area. Undue pressure by the authorities on judges and prosecutors continued to have a negative effect on the independence and the quality of the judiciary. Concerns related to the judiciary’s adherence to the international and European standards increased, in particular as regards the refusal to implement rulings by the European Court of Human Rights. Corruption remained widespread and continued to be an issue of concern. There was no progress in addressing the many gaps in the Turkish anti-corruption framework, which is a sign of a lack of will to decisively fight corruption. The human rights situation continued to deteriorate. Broad restrictions on the activities of journalists, writers, lawyers, academics, human rights defenders and critical voices continued to have a negative effect on the exercise of their freedoms. The damage caused by the state of emergency on fundamental rights and related legislation adopted was not remedied. There were some positive but limited efforts by the Human Rights and Equality Institution. Despite some legal changes, violence against women and gender discrimination remained matters of grave concern, in the aftermath of Türkiye’s withdrawal from the Istanbul Convention. Sentences for gender-based violence remained low and incapable of providing an effective deterrent, and the culture of impunity remained unaddressed. In July 2022, the Council of State ruled that the Presidential decree, allowing Türkiye’s withdrawal from the Istanbul Convention, was lawful and rejected the cases asking for its reversal. In its ruling, the Council of State concluded that the President has the authority to withdraw from international conventions. The decision was appealed. Functioning of the judiciary Türkiye is at an early stage in this area. There was serious backsliding during the reporting period and structural deficiencies in the judicial system were not addressed. Undue pressure by the authorities on judges and prosecutors continued to have a negative effect on the independence and the quality of the judiciary. Concerns related to the judiciary’s adherence to the international and European standards increased, in particular as regards the refusal to implement the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights. The judiciary continued to launch actions against opposition politicians. Implementation of the 2021 HRAP and the 2019 JRS continued. However, both documents failed to address the major shortcomings of the Turkish judiciary, lacking significant improvements in the overall functioning of the country’s judicial system. The lack of objective, merit-based, uniform and pre-established criteria for recruiting and promoting judges and prosecutors remains a source of concern. Following the criticism of the Venice Commission regarding the institution of criminal judges of peace, the appeal system was changed in July 2021, enabling their decisions to be appealed to a higher court. The recommendations of last year were not addressed. In the coming year, Türkiye should in particular: ®create a political and legal environment that allows the judiciary to carry out its duties independently and impartially, respecting European standards; strengthen judicial responsibilities, with the executive and legislature fully respecting the separation of powers; and ensure that lower courts respect judgments by the Constitutional Court, whose decisions should abide by the ECtHR jurisprudence; ®amend the structure and process of selecting the members of the Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSK) so that the role and influence of the executive is limited, and introduce safeguards against any interference by the HSK or high-level officials in judicial proceedings; ®provide effective guarantees against transfers of judges without their consent; ®in accordance with the guaranteed judicial independence under the Constitution, limit any suspension of judges from office to cases where there are well-founded suspicions of serious misbehaviour and take measures to remedy the damage caused by the dismissals that took place in breach of procedural rights; ®revise the system of disciplinary proceedings so that it is based on objective criteria without undue influence from the executive; ®in relation to the administrative and judicial measure taken against individuals, ensure that any allegation of wrongdoing or crime is subject to due process, based on concrete evidence, following fully transparent procedures under the authority of an independent judiciary; ®ensure that all judicial proceedings respect fundamental rights, including procedural rights, in particular the presumption of innocence, individual criminal responsibility, legal certainty, the right to defence, the right to a fair trial, equality of arms and the right to an effective appeal. Strategic documents Implementation of the 2021 human rights action plan and the 2019-2023 judicial reform strategy continued. So far, six judicial reform packages (JRP) have been adopted, in addition to several pieces of legislation on fundamental rights. The 6th JRP introduced inter alia the posts of assistant judge and assistant prosecutor and changed some regulations on the Council of State and the Court of Cassation. However, it failed to address key shortcomings in the judicial system. The government’s implementation report for the JRP issued in December 2021 indicated that 171 out of 256 activities (67 %) have been completed. However, there is no evidence-based assessment of the results of the implementation of the package. These legislative changes address a limited number of issues and fail short of tackling the main long-standing structural shortcomings. Management bodies

Concerns remain around the structure of the Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSK), its lack of independence from the executive, and the appointment process of its members. In accordance with the Constitution, out of the thirteen members of the HSK, eleven are elected. Out of the eleven elected members, four are appointed by the President and seven are appointed by Parliament by qualified majority. None is elected by their peers. The remaining two seats are attributed ex officio to the Minister of Justice and the Deputy Minister, who are also appointed by the President. In the absence of a transparent selection process, the resignation of one member of the HSK and appointment of his replacement raised several public questions regarding political influence and patronage networks in the judiciary. Due to its lack of independence, the HSK has been suspended from participating in the European Network of Councils for the Judiciary since December 2016. The budget allocated to the Council of Judges and Prosecutors increased to TRY 72 764 805 in 2022, compared to TRY 30 209 000 for 2021. Independence and impartiality Judicial independence is set out in the Constitution and in relevant legislation; however, serious concerns remained about political influence upon the judicial system, particularly from the executive branch. The shortcomings identified in the Venice Commission’s December 2016, relating to the minimal standards for dismissals of judges and legal safeguards regarding the transfer of judges and prosecutors remained unaddressed. Appeals against such transfers are possible but usually unsuccessful. The human rights action plan provides for some actions to improve the independence of the judiciary, including the prevention of frequent transfer of judges, geographical guarantees for judges and prosecutors, a review of the disciplinary and promotion system for judges and prosecutors and an improved inspection system based on objective criteria. However, most of these activities have not yet been implemented. Overall, 3 985 judges and public prosecutors have been dismissed for alleged links to the Gülen movement since the 2016 attempted coup and only 515 have been returned to their positions. 17 more judges and prosecutors were dismissed over the reporting period. Judicial independence was further undermined by public comments by representatives from the executive and legislative branched, including the President, over ongoing judicial cases. Some government officials also made public statements showing disregard for the rule of law and for human rights. Representatives of the executive and the legislature continued to publicly criticise and openly reject ECtHR and Constitutional Court case-law. Pre-trial detention was frequently imposed, while European standards consider it a measure of last resort, which should be applied for the shortest amount of time. The Law on Permanent State of Emergency, which allowed detention for up to 12 days in cases of collective crimes, was abolished in July 2022. Accordingly, detention periods cannot exceed 4 days. The ECtHR concluded that in several cases, including in the judgments relating to Selahattin Demirtaș and Osman Kavala, the judicial authorities’ decision to extend the detention was not sufficiently justified. In November 2021, the ECtHR issued a ruling on the pre-trial detention of 426 applicants on suspicion of membership in the Gülen movement, and ruled that their pre-trial detention had been unlawful. Physical presence at trials should be ensured whenever possible in order to safeguard the right to defence. Elections to the bar associations were completed, after a hiatus due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Council of Judges and Prosecutors published a social media usage guide. Accountability The obligation for judges and prosecutors to declare their assets every five years is still applicable. It remains important to have a credible and functioning verification system and to ensure that there is appropriate follow-up for late or incorrect declarations of assets. No information is available as to sanctions imposed if this procedure is not followed. Professionalism and competence Judges and prosecutors continued to be selected and recruited through a non-transparent process. Ministry of Justice supervision over the selection boards for new judges and prosecutors continued. The Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSK) itself has no role in the selection boards, as the Minister of Justice leads the process. The HSK also manages the annual appraisal of judges and prosecutors. The legal exam introduced in October 2019 for candidate judges, lawyers or public notaries has yet to take place. There was limited progress on setting objective, merit-based, standardised and pre-established criteria for recruiting and promoting judges and prosecutors. As regards the promotion systems, the HSK adopted in September 2021 a number of criteria which still need to be implemented. Quality of justice Pre-service training for candidate judges and prosecutors and in-service training continued to be delivered by the Justice Academy, whose lack of independence remained a matter of concern. Despite the Academy’s independence being enshrined in law, its management is left to its president, who is appointed by the President of the Republic. The Academy’s lack of independence affects its capacity to provide training programmes that meet the requirements of openness, competence and impartiality. Since 2017, the European Judicial Training Network has suspended the Academy’s observer status. As of July 2022 Türkiye had 15 263 full-time judges (18.1 per 100,000 inhabitants) and 7 442 full-time prosecutors (8.9 per 100,000 inhabitants) in 2021. According to the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ), the European averages are 21 judges/12 prosecutors per 100,000 inhabitants. Out of 22 705 judges and prosecutors, 8 233 are women. The budget for the judiciary increased to TRY 24 billion in 2021 compared with almost TRY 20 billion in 2020. Concerns remain regarding the quality of judicial decisions and indictments, due to the lack of legal reasoning and factual evidence. Civil society trial monitoring reports reveal that in some politically sensitive cases, defence rights were violated as judges interrupted defendants’ statements, or handed down a decision without listening to the defendant’s statement. Particularly in terrorism-related cases, the practice of providing evidence extracted coercively, from secret witnesses who cannot be cross-examined properly, or from a single witness without supporting evidence should be addressed. The system of confidentiality of decisions should be revised, as it is still used in many cases to limit the lawyers’ access to their clients’ files, thus violating the right of defence. Frequent transfers of judges and prosecutors continued to negatively affect the quality of justice along with posting newly recruited and less experienced judges and prosecutors to criminal courts. Efficiency While the judicial reform strategy aims to increase the quality and quantity of human resources, this objective has not yet been achieved. The backlog of cases has not reduced. Large parts of the judiciary continued to be under severe pressure to handle cases in a timely manner. Criminal cases especially, are often postponed for months and in cases where the defendants are arrested pending trial, this delay further violates the defendant’s rights. Regarding the backlog of cases in the high courts, at the end of 2021, 296 907 criminal and 76 455 administrative cases for the Court of Cassation were transferred to 2022, compared to 263 160 and 90 612 respectively in 2020. 128 961 cases for the Council of State were transferred from 2021 compared to 134 284 in 2020. As regards the regional courts of appeals, in 2021, a total of 745 416 cases were transferred from 2020; the courts received 1 986 864 new cases and settled 1 032 900 cases. Individual applications to the Constitutional Court continued to increase. Since the process for individual applications was introduced in September 2012, there have been a total of 392 758 individual applications as of 31 December 2021 and 311 097 of these have been concluded. In 2021, 66 121 applications were lodged and 45 321 were concluded. Fight against corruption Türkiye is at an early stage in the fight against corruption. There was no progress during the reporting period and last year’s recommendations were not addressed. The country has not set up anti-corruption bodies in line with the United Nations Convention against Corruption to which Türkiye is party. The legal framework and institutional architecture need to be improved to limit undue political influence in the prosecution and adjudication of corruption cases. The accountability and transparency of public institutions need to be improved. The absence of an anti-corruption strategy and action plan indicated a lack of will to decisively fight corruption. Most of the Council of Europe’s Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) outstanding recommendations have not been implemented. Overall, corruption is widespread, and remains an issue of concern. The sectors most vulnerable to corruption require targeted risk assessments and dedicated actions. In the coming year, Türkiye should in particular:

®implement its international obligations effectively in relation to the fight against corruption, including the United Nations Convention against Corruption and the Council of Europe Conventions; ®ensure effective follow-up to the recommendations issued by GRECO, including by adopting the necessary legislation; ®establish a track record of successful investigations of, prosecution of, and convictions for, corruption including at high-level; ®adopt an anti-corruption strategy, reflecting a clear political will and vision to address corruption effectively, underpinned by a credible and realistic action plan. Track record Türkiye has a poor track record of investigations, prosecutions and convictions in corruption cases, particularly in relation to high-level corruption cases implicating politician and public officials. Sentences for corruption need to be more dissuasive. Cooperation between audit and inspection units and prosecution offices is insufficient. The increasing use and wide scope of exemptions in procurement procedures undermined the integrity of public procurement. The government continued to award several large public-private partnership contracts for big infrastructure projects to a small number of companies. Political financing, local administrations, land administration, zoning and construction remained particularly prone to corruption. Institutional framework Prevention measures The country continued to lack a permanent, functionally independent anti-corruption body. The level of coordination between various preventive bodies remained largely inadequate. The State Supervisory Council, responsible for coordinating preventive anti-corruption measures, lacks independence. The anti-corruption legal framework is still weak in the private sector. There are no regular awareness-raising campaigns on transparency and the fight against corruption. Law enforcement No specialised prosecution services have been established to lead corruption investigations. Similarly, there are no specialised courts exclusively adjudicating on anti-corruption cases. The legal framework allows the government to retain undue political influence over the judicial police, which had an impact on independent and effective investigations. Inter-agency cooperation and information sharing between law enforcement and the financial intelligence unit need to be further developed. Legal framework Türkiye is party to all international anti-corruption conventions, including the United Nations Convention against Corruption. However, the country fails to fully align with the provisions of these conventions. Previous anti-corruption strategies and action plans have not been effectively followed up. The outstanding legislative amendments envisaged in previous national anti-corruption strategies were not adopted. These included amendments to the Law on the general administrative procedure, the Law on public procurement, the Code of Ethics for Members of Parliament and the Law on whistle-blower protection. The legal framework for whistle-blower protection and public procurement still needs to be aligned with the new relevant EU acquis. During the reporting period no tangible progress was made to implement GRECO’s recommendations. Under the previous Third Evaluation Round on the transparency of political financing, Türkiye implemented only one out of nine recommendations over a period of 10 years. As regards the ethics and integrity of Members of Parliament, judges and prosecutors, covered by the current Fourth Evaluation Round, the latest interim report from June 2022 indicates that only three out of 22 recommendations have been fully implemented, nine have been partially implemented and ten recommendations remain not implemented, demonstrating that no real progress has been made since the publication of the previous interim report in March 2021. Shortcomings remain unaddressed in the corruption-related provisions of the Criminal Code, which do not meet the standards of the Council of Europe Criminal Law Convention on Corruption. The definition of active bribery provided in the Criminal Code is still not in line with international standards. The shortcomings particularly relate to the provisions on bribery in the private sector. Public procurement legislation is not in line with the EU acquis. The vast number of exemptions inserted into the law on public procurement continued to be a matter of serious concern. Legal privileges for public officials, such as the requirement for prior authorisation from their hierarchy before an investigation can be initiated against them for alleged wrongdoing, continued to provide legal protection for public officials in anti-corruption criminal and administrative investigations. The legal framework on preventing, prosecuting and issuing penalties for conflicts of interest as well as on declaring, verifying and disclosing assets remained inadequate. Financial control of political parties remained ineffective. Türkiye has no legislation governing lobbying. Strategic framework The