Evaluation of judicial detention practice in criminal procedure in the context of the principle of legality

In criminal proceedings, protective measures are used to ensure that the trial continues and that the sentence handed down as a result of the trial is enforced. Protective measures interfere with fundamental rights and freedoms without a final conviction. Due to their restrictive nature regarding fundamental rights and freedoms, protective measures fall within the scope of the limited legality principle applied in criminal proceedings. Among protective measures, detention is considered the most severe protective measure because it directly interferes with the right to personal liberty. The maximum periods of detention are regulated in Article 102 of the Turkish Criminal Procedure Code No. 5271. These periods apply to the entire criminal proceedings for suspects or defendants who are in detention. The practice of detention pending trial, developed by the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, does not take into account the time spent in appeal and cassation proceedings after the first instance criminal court's conviction in calculating the maximum detention periods. In line with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, the Court of Cassation and the Constitutional Court have also adopted the practice of detention pending trial. The concept of judicial detention is not found in national or international legislation and causes many problems in practice. The thesis defines the concept of judicial detention, its scope, its place in national and international legislation, identifies problems encountered in practice in this regard, and focuses on proposed solutions.