Whatever the results shall be, it won’t be the end of the world. Even if the public says no to the amendments for reasons not pertaining to the content of the reform, a future government will certainly bring a better prepared and better presented constitution to the public. This is so because this is the reality of the times. Change is inevitable. The current Constitution of Turkey is an anomaly. More than 75 articles of the text have already passed through amendments. The Constitution looks more like a patched dress that is too small for the growing body of the country. Even the temporary leader of the main opposition party have declared that they will prepare a better, more democratic and more consensus-based constitution if the public says no to partial amendments.
Nobody likes the constitution we have. Everybody wants to change it, but everybody wants to change it in his own way.
This is the greater picture of the referendum, but not a great picture. It shows the immaturity of our politicians in their understanding of democracy. Yes, the constitutional amendments are an attempt to turn Turkey into a more democratic, participatory and just country institutionally. Unquestionably the new Supreme Board of Judges and Prosecutors (HSYK) or the Constitutional Court will be more democratic than the current one if the amendments pass the test of the referendum. But our politicians will continue to be the same old dummies.
I have been observing both the “yes” camp and the “no” camp. The “yes” camp presents its arguments in an apodictic manner, as if it has reached the absolute truth, as if there is nothing missing from the package, as if the government has discovered a miraculous recipe to cure all the illnesses of the state and its apparatus. The prime minister is wise enough not to turn campaign meetings into a show for his own party. The local organizers are careful enough not to have participants carry flags for the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) and the prime minister continuously refers to the supporters of the two opposition parties -- the Republican People’s Party (CHP) and the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) -- as “my brothers.”
His voice recording is broadcasted by mobile minibuses where he states that the referendum is not about party allegiances, and that it is not a vote of confidence or no-confidence for the AK Party.
These are clever public relations measures indeed. But we find one thing if we ask members of the “yes” camp about the content of the amendment they will be supporting on Sept. 12: Yes, they are better informed about the content of the package, but no, they don’t know exactly what they are supporting.
The situation in the “no” camp is worse -- worse than one would expect. I have done a few personal experiments with seemingly educated members of the “no” camp and presented them with a few twisted versions of the amendments and asked them why they are saying “no” to that. In one case I claimed that the additional members of the Constitutional Court would be elected through a general vote by lawyers, judges and prosecutors who are members of the bars; which is true for the additional 10 members of the HSYK -- and my addressees had no difficulty in criticizing this twisted version of the amendment.
The content is not important for them. They are against the fact that the AK Party is doing this.
What should we say to the so-called leader of the main opposition party, who asks whether this constitution would help the prices of apricots, or whether it would solve the problem of unemployment? This is clear insult to the people, to the men in the street. “Say ‘no’ and get general amnesty!” he cries. This is the equivalent of saying: “The people are donkeys. They don’t understand!”
The greater picture is that we still have politicians who regard the general public as an easily deceivable flock of sheep. A clear “yes” in the referendum will not only make Turkey more institutionally democratic, but it will also teach these outmoded politicians a lesson: We are not donkeys.
After the referendum the man on the street must start an even greater campaign to get rid of this tradition of elitism and do away with these politicians.
