Turkey’s battle for democracy gains ground despite resistance

 They claim that for a long time Parliament and the government, both elected by the people directly, were delegated to a lesser role in the governance of the country and that their powers were usurped and often curtailed by the outspoken, politically motivated generals and by judicial activism.

 “Turkey is going through a transformation during which a more transparent state will emerge, and the country will normalize itself while moving away from constant tension and discomfort,” Yusuf Alataş, vice president of the International Federation for Human Rights, told Sunday’s Zaman. Referring to a court investigation and a search warrant executed for two weeks at the Special Forces Command in Ankara, he said Turkey is finally doing away with counter-insurgent and secret Gladio-type organizations.

 “It is unfortunate to see some people still rushing to defend these clandestine organizations in the name of revering the sanctity of the Turkish state when these groups were apparently involved in illegal practices,” he argued, adding that “no modern state that respects the law can allow illegal practices to go on.” It is obvious that a coup in Turkey today is no longer possible as conditions for it, be they domestic or external, no longer exist in modern Turkey.

In the last decade, all coup attempts and plots have hit a wall, and most military personnel involved in such plots are being tried in a court of law today. The proceedings are still going on in the Ergenekon trial, also known as the trial of the century, which looks into allegations that a clandestine group of people from all walks of life had conspired to overthrow the democratically elected government of Turkey.

Turkey has come a long way

It does not seem so distant, however, when a military commander can completely ignore a call to testify in front of a parliamentary investigation committee. The strong warning of the chief of General Staff could easily have ousted the ruling government from power. Today, however, we witness the justice system vigorously inspecting a military headquarters that has been identified as the most secret center of operation within the heart of the army. Hopes are high that no matter who it is that has overstepped the boundaries drawn by the law, now they must face the justice system.

An Ankara court announced last week that a civilian search of the Special Forces Command would continue, rejecting a recent request by the legal advisory board of the General Staff for an end to the search. The request was filed with the Ankara 11th High Criminal Court in late December. The General Staff’s legal advisory board argued that the documents kept in the archives of the Special Forces Command are “state secrets” and that a civilian judge and prosecutors should not be allowed to continue their search. That claim did not hold water with the justices on the bench.

From a politician’s vantage point, the Justice and Development Party’s (AK Party) parliamentary group deputy chairman Bekir Bozdağ sees the ongoing debate as a ploy for the opposition to beat down the government. He told Sunday’s Zaman that the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) is actually trying to provoke state institutions against the government. “Deniz Baykal, the leader of the CHP, who said on the record that the government is assaulting state agencies and institutions, is trying to create a hostile bureaucracy against the ruling party,” he said, stressing the claim that the CHP is trying to form alliances among the bureaucracy, including one within the justice system, to be able to use against the government.

The opposition has not stopped adding fuel to the fire in an ongoing controversy among various institutions. Baykal went further by saying: “There is no conflict between institutions. There is an attack against the armed forces. The attack is being carried out under the knowledge and auspices of the government.” Many think that the CHP is just trying to provoke the military against the government.

Framing the debate in the right way

For many including columnist Hüseyin Gülerce, this is a futile attempt in Turkey as society has radically changed in the last decade or so and has become a strong advocate of the rule of law and the supremacy of democratic institutions. “Society has decided in favor of democracy, the rule of law and accountability. Now the Kemalist-secularist-authoritarian administrative elite class must also make a decision. The military tutelage regime is ending. This regime’s support system is completely collapsing. The media have changed, bar associations have changed, universities have changed, people have changed, the ruling power is not like previous ruling powers, and Turkey has changed. Turkey cannot continue to move forward under a military tutelage regime,” Gülerce wrote recently.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has dismissed speculation that there is a conflict between various state institutions in the wake of a probe into allegations that some military officers were plotting to assassinate Deputy Prime Minister Bülent Arınç. Speaking at his parliamentary group meeting last week, Erdoğan said: “No institution is in conflict with another. This is out of the question. Our institutions are carrying out their duties in harmony and coordination. There isn’t the slightest doubt about that.”

In an attempt to shift the debate from institutions to culprits who plotted subversive schemes, the prime minister stressed that the reputation of an institution would never be damaged because of the mistakes of individuals. “We will not let any institution be portrayed as anti-democratic. I am not saying this as a clichéd opinion. There might be individuals in every agency who have committed a crime or gone down the wrong path. These individuals never represent the entire institution, and we should understand this as such.”

No matter how you frame the debate, however, the current saga in Turkey represents an ongoing struggle to become a country fully transparent and democratic with respect to law and human rights, accountable to public scrutiny. Not only should the government and Parliament be representing the will and diversity of society, but all state institutions ought to embrace the same diversity. As it stands now for example, Parliament has no say in appointing justices to the Constitutional Court, and it cannot influence the nomination of superior judges in the Supreme Court of Appeals or the Council of State, for that matter. Many in Turkey argue that this situation is simply not compatible with democratic principles and erode the legitimacy of state institutions.

* Ercan Yavuz from Ankara contributed to this report.