Less authority to the president

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan also appeared to give his support to the comments when asked about them. The adoption of a presidential system has been a common source of debate; however, strong opposition to the suggestion of changing the system has never allowed a conclusion to be reached.

In his article titled “A presidential system is not a one-man regime,” Star’s Fehmi Koru criticizes the harsh reactions to the government’s suggestion of adopting a presidential system, saying that it is an old topic of discussion, previously suggested by former President Turgut Özal, former Prime Minister Süleyman Demirel and now by Erdoğan. First, Koru says, it should be clarified that the true meaning of the term “presidential system” is not widely known in Turkey. The term is generally assumed to mean a great deal of authority being given to the president. But in fact, it is the opposite: The presidential system aims to have a full separation of powers in its real sense by building thick walls between the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. The walls are so thick that even deputies are not allowed to be members of parliament, he says.

Radikal’s Eyüp Can, on the other hand, argues that the reason for Erdoğan expressing his wish to adopt a presidential system has nothing to do with enabling stricter checks and balances over the practices of the government. If it were about this, then the control mechanism of the parliamentary system would not have been violated so many times to date, Can says.

Mustafa Karaalioğlu from the same daily points that since the adoption of a presidential system started to be discussed some days ago, the first name that springs to mind for president is Erdoğan. We are so sure that Erdoğan would be the president in a presidential system that the discussion is really, “Should this authority be given to Erdoğan?” But deciding on whether we should adopt a presidential system or not should not be about Erdoğan’s political identity. This issue was discussed before, yet the structure of the current Constitution was the biggest obstacle to this alteration. This is why now is a good time for the change, while a new constitution is being written.