Americans have observed a sense of evolution, not revolution, since after the Civil War. Some would say though slow to change on some points over the past 200 or so years, progress has been made such as the following changes to the US Constitution:* The 13th Amendment, in 1865, forever banned the practice of slavery.
* The 15th Amendment, in 1870, gave all citizens the right to vote, regardless of race.
* The 19th Amendment, in 1920, made it possible for all women in the US to vote.
Over the past 200 years or so, the Constitution has been amended 27 times and through judicial review, the meaning of parts of the Constitution have changed many times. John R. Vile’s book, “Rewriting the United States Constitution: An Examination of Proposals from Reconstruction to the Present,” is an excellent source for all you want to know.
Constitutions should be more than a piece of paper that doesn’t change with the times for the good of the people.
In American history, Americans have changed their minds about things, too. Here is an example: In 1919, the 18th Amendment was passed. It banned the making and selling of alcohol. Soon folks realized that it was impossible to get all people to stop drinking. Naturally, many people felt the government had no right to make laws about their private habits. So in 1933, the 21st Amendment was adopted. It repealed the 18th Amendment. On the American government website it states this about the constitution: “This document is the framework by which America is governed today.”
Constitutions should serve as a framework for the respective government and as a guarantee of individual freedom. It’s probably best to make changes that are relatively small, incremental and evolutionary.
As I mentioned in “The Privilege to Vote” (Aug. 20, 2010) it is not so unusual to make changes to the Turkish Constitution. From what I understand from an article by the Hauser Global Law School Program, the Constitution of Turkey (1982) has so far been amended several times. Here are a few from the Hauser Global website:
“10.1. The Constitutional Amendments of 1987, 1993, and 1995
“The original text of the Constitution included a prohibition on the political activities of ex-politicians in its transitional Article 4. This Article was abolished in 1987 and ex-politicians were allowed to pursue political activities.
“The Constitution had originally established a state monopoly on radio and television broadcasting in its Article 133. According to the original text of Article 133 radio and television channels could only be established by the state. The state monopoly was eliminated by the 1993 amendment and the establishment of private radio and television channels was allowed.
“The constitutional amendments of 1995 significantly eliminated restrictions on political rights and liberties (the original text of the Constitution contained significant restrictions concerning the activities of political parties and civil society organizations in Articles 68, 69, 52, 33, and 135). Thus, the scope of political and civil rights was substantially enlarged.
“In addition, university staff and students were allowed to engage in political activities and the voting age was lowered from 20 to 18 by the amendments of Articles 67 and 68 in 1995.
“Furthermore, the prohibition preventing a deputy from resigning from his or her political party to joining another party (Article 84) was eliminated.
“Finally, the provision providing that all deputies belonging to a political party banned by the Constitutional Court shall lose their seats was amended. Instead, the Constitution stated that the deputy who caused the prohibition of his party by his words and actions will automatically lose his seat.
“Besides these constitutional amendments, the government had in 1987 adopted the right to individual application to the European Commission of Human Rights. In 1990, moreover, the government recognized the binding effects of decisions of the European Court of Human Rights.”
A number of other changes have been made that are signs of changing with the times. These changes have played a significant role in the liberalization and democratization of the Turkish legal system. For the full article see: http://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/turkey1.htm
With advances in technology and so on, every nation needs to make amendments in the future. I wonder if we may be able to vote from our own homes. Not just yet!
Note: Charlotte McPherson is the author of “Culture Smart: Turkey, 2005.” Please keep your questions and observations coming: I want to ensure this column is a help to you, Today’s Zaman’s readers. Email: c.mcpherson@todayszaman.com
