Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Constitution-Making in Turkey After the 2011 Elections

2012; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 13; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/14683849.2012.685253

1743-9663

Burak Bilgehan Özpek,

Public Administration and Governance

Abstract When the 2011 parliamentary election campaign started, Turkish political parties promised to draft a new constitution in their manifestos. Not surprisingly, after the election, the political parties that gained representation in parliament reiterated this promise to their constituents. Furthermore, hopes for a new constitution have increased with the beginning of the legislative session because the above-mentioned political parties have agreed to join the negotiation process without presenting any pre-conditions. However, each party has its own agenda and hopes for a new constitution might collapse when these agendas appear during the negotiation process. Acknowledgements I am grateful to Paul Kubicek and Nil S. Satana for their valuable comments and suggestions. Notes Sami Selcuk, Demokrasiye Dogru (Ankara: Yeni Turkiye Yayinlari, 1999), p. 64. Pinar Bilgin, “Turkey's Changing Security Discourses: The Challenge of Globalisation,” European Journal of Political Research, Vol. 44, No. 1 (January 2005), pp. 175–201. Paul Kubicek, “The European Union and Grassroots Democratization in Turkey,” Turkish Studies, Vol. 6, No. 3 (September 2005), pp. 361–366. Huseyin Gulerce, “Anayasa Degisikligi Bekcileri Telaslandirdi,” Zaman, April 1, 2010. “Darbesiz Tam Demokrasi Kazanacak,” Sabah, September 9, 2010. Political Islamist Felicity Party (Saadet Partisi) and the Big Union Party (Büyük Birlik Partisi), which have religious and nationalist elements, also supported the package. In addition to the rightist and religious parties, leftist groups sympathized with the amendments as well. The Revolutionary Socialist Labor Party (Devrimci Sosyalist İşçi Partisi) and the Equality and Democracy Party (Eşitlik ve Demokrasi Partisi) declared their support; their slogan was “yes, but not enough.” Liberal scholars, who have columns in the newspapers such as Taraf, Sabah, Star, Zaman, and Yeni Şafak, defended the amendments for democratization concerns. Finally, leading business organizations such as chambers unions (TOBB), syndicates (Hak-İş), and business associations (e.g. MÜSIAD) gave their support. In addition to the CHP and the MHP, leftist groups such as the Turkish Communist Party (Türkiye Komünist Partisi), Labour Party (İşçi Partisi), and Freedom and Solidarity Party (Özgürlük ve Dayanışma Partisi) opposed the amendment package. And it should be noted that the Turkish Industry and Business Association (TÜSİAD) did not give an institutional support for the package but was not actively involved in the “no” campaign. “BDP'den İki ilde Referanduma Boykot Mitingi,” August 5, 2010, http://www.radikal.com.tr/Default.aspx?aType=RadikalDetayV3&Date=&ArticleID=1011964&CategoryID=78 (Last Access: September 23, 2011). Mustafa Erdoğan, Turkiye'de Anayasalar ve Siyaset (Ankara: Liberte, 2001), pp. 2–3. Sina Aksin, Siyasi Tarih 1789–1908, in Sina Aksin, ed. Osmanli Devleti 1600–1908 (Istanbul: Cem, 2001), pp. 124–132. Norman Stone, Turkey: A Short History (London: Thams & Hudson, 2010), pp. 118–119. Elie Kedourie, Politics in the Middle East (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992), p. 74. Mustafa Erdoğan, Turkiye'de Anayasalar ve Siyaset (Ankara: Liberte, 2001), pp. 39–43. Ibid., pp. 49–50. William Hale, Turkey, in Peter Sluglett and Marion Farouk Sluglett eds., The Middle East: The Arab World and Its Neighbours (London: Times Books, 1991), pp. 273–274. Feroz Ahmad, Bir Kimlik Pesinde Turkiye (Istanbul: Istanbul Bilgi Universitesi Yayinlari, 2006), pp. 148–153. Eric Jan Zurcher, Modernlesen Turkiye'nin Tarihi (Istanbul: Iletisim, 2005), pp. 405–410. David Pion Berlin, “Turkish Civil Military Relations: A Latin American Comparison,” Turkish Studies, Vol. 12, No. 2 (July 2011), p. 295. For example, The EU Progress Report 2011 highlights the constitutional problems of Turkey. See http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2011/package/tr_rapport_2011_en.pdf (Last Access: December 5, 2011). Kemal Kirisci and Gareth Winrow, Kurt Sorunu: Kokeni ve Gelisimi (Istanbul: Tarih Vakfi Yayinlari, 2010), pp. 53–56. Nil Seda Satana, “The Kurdish Issue in June 2011 Elections: Continuity or Change in Turkey's Democratization?” Turkish Studies, Vol. 13, No. 2 (June 2012), pp. 169–189. 2011 Election manifesto of the Justice and Development Party. Carol Migdalowitz, “Turkey: Update on Crises of Identity and Power,” CRS Report For Congress, September 2, 2008. Ibid. 2002 Election Manifesto of the Justice and Development Party; The Official Party Program of the Justice and Development Party. Ibid. 2011 Election manifesto of the Republican People's Party. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. “Kılıçdaroğlu: Avrupa Yerel Yönetimler Özerklik Şartını Kabul Edeceğiz,” May 24, 2011, http://www.euractiv.com.tr/yerel-yonetimler-ve-ab/article/kilicdaroglu-hakkaride-konustu-avrupa-yerel-yonetimler-ozerklik-sartini-kabul-edecegiz-018385 (Last Access: September 15, 2011). 2011 Election manifesto of the Nationalist Movement Party. 2011 Election manifesto of the Labor Democracy and Freedom Block. “Kılıçdaroğlu: CHP'nin Anayasa İçin Ön Şartı İlk Üç Madde,” October 10, 2011, http://www.euractiv.com.tr/politika-000110/article/kldarolu-chpnin-anayasa-iin-n-art-ilk-3-madde-021629 (Last Access: October 17, 2011). “Amaç Devleti Milletten Esirgemeyen Anayasa,” October 16, 2011, http://www.sabah.com.tr/Gundem/2011/10/16/amac-devleti-milletten-esirgemeyen-anayasa (Last Access: October 28, 2011). “Anayasa İmtihanı,” October 3, 2011, http://www.ntvmsnbc.com/id/25284730/ (Last Access: October 16, 2011). “Demirtaş: Arkadaşlarımız Çürüdükçe AKP ile Diyalog Kuramayız,” October 5, 2010, http://jiyan.org/2010/10/demirtas-arkadaslarimiz-curudukce-akp-ile-diyalog-kuramayiz/ (Last Access: October 12, 2011).