Halkbank again applied to the court of appeal in the USA


Halkbank, which applied to the Second District Court of Appeal for an appeal against a lower court’s decision on the claim that it could not be tried in the USA before, and whose appeal was rejected, made a new application to the court.

In its last application, Halkbank wants a retrial and a new hearing, and the court to review its previous rejection decision.

According to the news of Can Kamiloğlu from VOA Turkish Halkbank’s 27-page request for a retrial and a new trial was submitted to the bank’s lawyers in the USA, Robert M. Cary, Simon Latcovich, Eden Schiffmann, James w. With Kirkpatrick’s signature, it was filed on Nov. 5 via the Justice Department’s electronic filing system. Halkbank’s lawyers added the reasoned decision of the same court on October 22 to their petitions.

WHAT STATEMENTS ARE INCLUDED IN THE PETITION?

In Halkbank’s application, it was claimed that the court gave the green light for an institution to be tried in the USA for the first time in the country’s history under the “Independent Foreign State Immunity Act”, and that the court made an extremely important legal mistake. The petition included the decisions taken in similar cases before. In the petition, it was claimed that the court’s decision rejecting Halkbank’s appeal on October 22 did not comply with the legal precedents. It was stated that the US Constitutional Court does not allow foreign government entities to be tried in this country under the “Independent Foreign State Immunity Act”. The tribunal, consisting of three judges of the Second District Court of Appeal, evaluated the appeal filed by Halkbank on October 22, following the hearing held on April 12, on the allegation that Halkbank is a public institution. He announced that they rejected his appeal that he could not be tried in .

“USA HAS THE RIGHT TO TRIAL HALKBANK”

The court decided that the majority of Halkbank’s shares being owned by the Republic of Turkey did not place the institution within the scope of the ‘Immunity of Independent Foreign State Law’. In its reasoned decision, the court declared that Halkbank did not comply with any of the three separate criteria set for being within the scope of the law and applying immunity from jurisdiction. In the reasoned decision, it was stated that it was determined that the organization had commercial activities, that it violated the US sanctions against Iran, that it laundered more than one billion dollars of money by using the American financial system and that it engaged in banking fraud, “American courts have the right to prosecute Halkbank. The previous decision of a lower court in this regard is correct. To summarize the decision, we have the authority to judge Halkbank. Halkbank’s request for dismissal of the case was rejected. The decision of a lower court regarding the continuation of the judicial process by Halkbank in the USA is valid”.

HALKBANK MADE A STATEMENT

Halkbank stated that it would appeal the decision after the decision taken in the USA and made the following statement after the decision: Our appeal was dismissed by the Court. All our legal rights will be used to appeal the rejection decision of the Second Court of Appeal. We present it to the public and investors.”


Source: Cumhuriyet Gazetesi – Güncel by www.cumhuriyet.com.tr.

*The article has been translated based on the content of Cumhuriyet Gazetesi – Güncel by www.cumhuriyet.com.tr. If there is any problem regarding the content, copyright, please leave a report below the article. We will try to process as quickly as possible to protect the rights of the author. Thank you very much!

*We just want readers to access information more quickly and easily with other multilingual content, instead of information only available in a certain language.

*We always respect the copyright of the content of the author and always include the original link of the source article.If the author disagrees, just leave the report below the article, the article will be edited or deleted at the request of the author. Thanks very much! Best regards!