Political parties are an indispensable element of democracy and have an undeniable importance with their main goal of "governing
the state". “Dissolution”, which is a sanction that terminates the legal existence of political parties as a legal entity, corresponds to the
“death penalty” which ends the legal existence of natural persons as a sanction. Considering the current debates on the necessity and
conditions of the "death penalty" abolished by the derivative constituent power, the issue of dissolution of the political parties
remains up to date and debatable. Following the indictment of the Chief Public Prosecutor of the Supreme Court of Cassation, the
lawsuits for political party dissolution at the Constitutional Court have attracted the attention of the public with the judicial processes.
The dissolution, which is the heaviest legal sanction for political parties, has also been a topic of interest and attention in the
academic field. In academic studies, the issue of the dissolution of political parties and cases of political party dissolution are
generally handled with a "critical" perspective, based on their compliance with supranational norms and case law. In this study, the
political party dissolution cases filed in the Constitutional Court during the 1982 Constitutional period were classified on the basis of
the indictment and decision justifications, and based on this classification, the duration of the political party dissolution cases,
institutional attitude (dissolution / rejection or unanimous / majority etc.) and the members' individual judicial attitudes were
examined. In the study, it is also discussed whether the judicial attitudes of the members of the Constitutional Court show a
commonality according to the sources (Supreme Court of Cassation, Council of State, etc.) and the elected President.