It should decide if it is either for greater democracy, deeper integration with the global economy and speedy membership in the EU or happy with the status quo. As it tilts ever more toward the latter, TÜSİAD loses its democratic credentials and sincerity when calling for reform and the EU membership process.The reason I am evaluating TÜSİAD's commitment to democracy is its attitude toward the latest change in law that enables civilian courts to try military personal who attempt to stage a military coup. The new law does not leave the matter (that is, plotting against democracy by staging a military coup) to a reluctant military bureaucracy and its extension, military courts.
TÜSİAD did not like this new rule. They are not happy with a new legal, political and social stand that is a true deterrence for any planners of coups. It is unbelievable for TÜSİAD to not support such a meaningful step for civilianization and democratization, a step applauded by many in the European quarters who support Turkey's membership process.
TÜSİAD criticized the government of passing the latest law “in a rush,” It is truly incredible to hear such a statement from TÜSİAD. Instead of criticizing the government for being late and slow, it calls on the government to slow down and seek an agreement with the military. The fact that the law was passed in a midnight session of Parliament is presented as yet another reason for TÜSİAD's negative attitude toward the change. I think they have no idea how Parliament works. Many laws are debated and adopted after midnight in Parliament, where the normal session starts at 3 p.m.
TÜSİAD's objection is also based on an argument that this change should have been part of a greater reform package, not a piecemeal change. It does not say, though, “how and by whose support?” Even if TÜSİAD does not support such a minor change, how would a comprehensive reform package be developed with agreement of all stakeholders, including the military?
This is poor logic. What does it mean to introduce all reforms at once? Is it possible? How many harmonization laws have been passed so far? Why did they not say that all those reforms should have been introduced at once instead of tens of packages?
Trying to understand the reasons for TÜSİAD's failure in supporting this legal step, I cannot come up with any clear answer. What I see, though, is an observation that TÜSİAD is becoming an extension of a media group represented in the organization at the top. Its hesitant attitude toward democratization and reform may be linked to attempts of Doğan Holding to finish off the government. An attitude of revenge from the government for a tax fine extended to the Doğan group is turning TÜSİAD into an organization supporting anything and anyone (be it civilian, military or judicial) that opposes the government.
Is democracy something that can be sacrificed for the fight between Doğan Holding and the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) government? I think TÜSİAD members at large should think and decide about this question.
This is a pity because TÜSİAD has billed itself over the last decade as an organization that unconditionally supports Turkey's democratization and reform process. Its democratization reports served as the ultimate source of reference for the content and direction of the reform process. It supported constitutional changes and EU harmonization reform packages that included abolishing the death penalty and state security courts as well as a solution to the Cyprus question on the basis of the Annan plan back in 2004.
Now the same TÜSİAD criticizes the new law, which allows for the trial of military officers by civilian courts.
It appears that TÜSİAD has settled for a Turkish model of “military democracy” instead of pressing for full-fledged democracy. But the business circle's turning into a Republican People's Party (CHP) does not benefit TÜSİAD at all. If TÜSİAD turns into a pro-status quo force, it will be left behind by more progressive business organizations that have sprung up in Anatolia and it will be abandoned by global forces, too.
