When the proposal for the amendments were first put forward by Parliament members of the governing Justice and Development Party (AKP) last March, I wrote that if I were a Parliament member I would vote against two of those 26 amendments concerning the composition of the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Board of Judges and Prosecutors (HSYK), arguing in favor of a greater weight of Parliament rather than the president in the appointment of the members of these bodies as stipulated in the proposed amendments. I added, however, that my vote would still be “yes,” in the event the amendments, failing adoption by Parliament, would be subject to a referendum, arguing that the proposed amendments introduce broader democratic representation than the current Constitution. I have also argued in my columns that the constitutional amendments package would not be sufficient to consolidate a democracy on European norms, and that adoption of an entirely new, civilian and democratic constitution is absolutely necessary.After following with what is being said and done during the referendum campaign, I am now even more convinced that the adoption of the package has a vital bearing on the continuation of normalization of the regime in Turkey. I can now see even more clearly that an eventual rejection of the package would result in the seizing of the initiative by those political forces who favor reinforcement of the tutelary regime, and demand acquittal of those responsible for plotting military coups against the democratically elected government.
I surely respect the choices of those who will vote “no” or boycott the vote. After all democracy is as much freedom of expression as it is majority rule. Those who will vote in favor have, however, a fundamental difference of opinion with those who will vote against or boycott the vote. The former want Turkey to consolidate a democracy based on European Union (EU) norms, while the latter favor continuation of “a la turca” democracy under bureaucratic, military tutelage. For the latter, securing Kemalist secularism, that is state control of religion and restrictions on religious freedoms, is more important than democracy. For the latter, the regime should abide not by principles of liberal democracy but an authoritarian reading of Kemalism, that is, secular nationalism. Turkey is unfortunately some years away from reaching a broad-based consensus on the principles of a liberal and pluralist democracy as defined by the Copenhagen Political Criteria of the EU.
After following with what is being said and done during the referendum campaign, I am now even more determined to say “yes,” for the following reasons: First, adoption of the amendments will indicate the presence of a majority in favor of an entirely new, civilian and democratic constitution, and give the start signal for the campaign for a constitution that will secure not only individual freedoms but also the free expression of religious and ethnic identities the country so badly needs.
Secondly, adoption of the amendments I believe will help the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) to tidy up, and sever its ties with the bureaucratic tutelage regime. This would mean that there would be a broader and stronger will in the country to solve the countries basic problems like the Kurdish question, and establishing the supremacy of civilian rule.
Thirdly, adoption of the amendments will help those within the ranks of the governing AKP who are in this or another way attached to the status quo to come to their senses or help the party to clear its ranks from such elements. These elements within the party have played the major role in the failure of the amendment to subject the initiation of party closure cases to the permission of Parliament, and are not a bit aware that putting an end to the tutelary regime also requires that discriminative and racist views and practices are no longer tolerated.
Fourthly, adoption of the amendments will mean Turkey taking a big step towards normalizing democracy. This will enable the public opinion to focus not on the military’s or the judiciary’s interventions in politics, but on the performance of the elected governments.
Finally, I am now even more determined to say “yes” because if the amendments are adopted, social pressure on the governing AKP to negotiate with the pro–Kurdish Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) to solve the Kurdish problem and bring to an end the armed insurgency led by the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) will increase, thus opening the way for an increasingly democratic and prosperous Turkey that sets a shining example for its entire region.
