Before Arzuhan Yalçındağ, the daughter of Aydın Doğan, stepped down, this powerful organization had unfortunately opted for a distant type of management that was utterly indifferent to the promotion of democracy. The TÜSİAD of recent years was, regretfully, fully against change, democratization and the removal of military influence from the public sphere. At least it acted in such a way as to pave the way for the creation of such a perception.Thus, it was as if TÜSİAD -- which in the past and until the first half of the 2000s spoke the unspoken and sponsored the most visionary reports, even on the most controversial of issues; which voiced extremely radical views on critical issues such as the Kurdish issue, the promotion of pluralism, participation in politics and the elimination of military influence from the political sphere, and the Higher Education Board (YÖK) issue; and whose every meeting would have a great impact on the country -- had disappeared. That old TÜSİAD had been replaced with a carbon copy of the Hürriyet newspaper, which emerged as a stronghold of resistance to change in recent years, and of the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), which dedicates all of its energy and resources to maintaining the status quo. It should be frankly noted that Turkey has been longing to hear again the powerful and sincere voice of TÜSİAD demanding change, renewal, removal of military influence from politics and democratization. With its transformation into a cumbersome, CHP-like organization that was done with its past role of being the driving force of curtailed military influence in the public sphere, transparency and democratization and that was acting like the representative of bureaucratic tutelage, it nearly committed suicide.
Hearing the statements of TÜSİAD’s new head, Boyner, which made it into the papers yesterday, I immediately thought that this strong business organization is finally coming to its senses and making moves toward rectifying the damage done to its image by the pro-status quo deviation during the last several years. I would like to give a heartfelt welcome to TÜSİAD and its new president, Boyner, who boldly voice the reformist views that we would never have heard from her predecessor, Yalçındağ, and that strongly opt for supporting change, democracy and the removal of military influence from politics once again.
I hail Boyner for the statements, which deserve to be called a “manifesto of democracy,” that she made during the press conference she held on Monday with other TÜSİAD executives. I attach great importance to what she said about the coefficient issue, which concerns hundreds of thousands of young people and the destructive attitude of the Council of State in this respect. Boyner’s message that “the matter of applying coefficients to the graduates of vocational high schools is a matter that should be settled jointly by the Education Ministry and YÖK” was directed at the Council of State, which has made strange and ideological decisions to the detriment of the trust in the justice system.
One cannot agree more with Boyner’s remarks about civilian-military relations. Noting Turkey’s need for improving its democracy, Boyner said: “Who wouldn’t want higher standards of democracy? In fact, the process of democratization that is certain to introduce higher standards of living for all social groups has been heatedly debated by civil society. Greater rights and freedoms -- how can it be that citizens do not want them? We must go back to the process of democratization.”
What Boyner understands about democratization is made clear in her remarks: “The role of the armed forces in democracy is well defined. So are the roles of civilian governments and public institutions. The attitudes and behaviors other than these cannot be accepted in pluralistic, parliamentary democracies. No explanation can be provided for such attitudes or behaviors. If there are legal arrangements to allow such attitudes or behaviors, action should be taken immediately to remedy them. No discussion can be made about them. The rule of law does not introduce absolute protection for any person or institution. In a democratic society, all public officials can be tried for their actions independently of their institutions. The ‘demilitarization’ of democracy in Turkey requires that the military bureaucracy and all units of our bureaucracy are subordinated to the political authority and that the military bureaucracy is reorganized to fulfill its primary task of national defense according to the division of labor set by the public administration.”
Boyner also says, “An integral, comprehensive and prioritized democracy package should be opened to discussion,” adding that a new constitution should be drafted to this end. “To reinforce foundations of democracy and promote political reforms in Turkey in 2010, the priority is on constitutional reform. The Constitution of 1982 was drafted after a military coup, and during its drafting, pluralism was excluded. Therefore, it was not heartily adopted by the people. Although reforms under a reformist mentality have been made on constitutions during the last 30 years, its authoritarian structure was preserved. Despite the pressing need for a new constitution, this issue has become a source of tension among political parties during the last three years, and no consensus could be achieved. … We not only continue to maintain our views about constitutional reforms but have also started to work on the 10th democracy package, which we believe introduces permanent democratization to Turkey. ... We, as TÜSİAD, would like to see a pluralistic, parliamentary democracy with a constitution governed by the principle of separation of powers and a functional checks-and-balances mechanism. The creation of such a parliamentary democracy entails the idea of a collective system that comprises everything ranging from political parties legislation to the powers and authorities of the president as well as the role of the military in democracies. Constitutional reforms should be made to establish a regime of fundamental rights and freedoms in line with the European Convention on Human Rights. Moreover, progress should not be restricted to legislation only, but it should be supported with mechanisms to secure human rights in practice.”
Touching on the current political fluctuations, Boyner also cautioned the politicians who use offensive language and Chief of General Staff Gen. İlker Başbuğ, who has occasionally “cautioned” the nation and the media: “There is only one criterion for political success: to create a peaceful, happy and hopeful society. The parliamentary brawl, the lack of dialogue among parties, the growing polarization in society, the disturbing political polemics, the allegations of [military] interference in politics, the threats to ‘tell the public all we know’ and a settling of accounts are not befitting of us.”
Pointing out that the Ergenekon trial has extensive popular support, Boyner indicated that the units conducting the investigation should be provided with additional resources and personnel so that the judicial process is expedited and demanded that all political groups refrain from making remarks to cast a shadow over the independence and impartiality of the judiciary.
One can only appreciate these views of Mrs. Boyner. It is my hope that TÜSİAD does not deviate from this course and turns into, once again, a strong voice for change, democracy, human rights, freedoms, reforms, transparency and the elimination of military influence in politics.
