Parliamentary committee passes first 3 articles of draft constitution in Turkey
Parliamentary committee of Turkey on constitutional amendment has approved the first three articles of the proposed draft constitution prepared by Turkey’s ruling party AKP and right-wing nationalist party MHP.
Having caused even skirmishes between the parliamentarians during the committee meeting over the weekend, where an MP of CHP threw water bottles at AKP MPs who insistently wanted to skip into approval phase without discussing through all articles, the process for the constitutional amendment in Turkey will be sped up this week.
The first 3 articles approved at today’s (December 27) committee meeting are 1) inclusion of the word ‘impartial’ in the section on ‘judicial power’, where there is currently only the word ‘independent’; 2) increasing the number of parliamentarians from 550 to 600; and, 3) lowering the age of eligibility for being elected as a parliamentarian from 25 to 18.
The most debated part of the proposed changes remains to be with regards to the planned shift from the current parliamentarian system to a presidential system.
***
Earlier last week, deputy co-chair of Turkey’s main opposition party (CHP) Bülent Tezcan outlined the constitutional changes that are tried to be brought forth by AKP and MHP.
Following are some of the 35 questions that Tezcan posed and answered with an explanation:
Q. Is it a presidential system that is being proposed?
A. In presidential systems, there is a firm separation of powers and checks and balances. In the proposed system of AKP, all authority is consolidated in the hand of one person.
Q. Is it a system change or regime change?
A. It’s a transition to an authoritarian regime. This is an attempt to take power from the hands of the people and give it to the Presidential Palace.
Q. The president will be elected by the people; so, how is it that power is taken away from the people?
A. Election by itself is not enough to guarantee that power lies in the hands of the people. The president is to be elected by the majority of valid votes. And, this means that the president can be elected by a representative vote of less than 51%. Furthermore, since the president will be the head of the executive branch by keeping his party affiliation, it will obviously end up in representation of that particular political view, rather than the whole nation.
Q. Are there checks and balances?
A. In the proposed amendment, almost all mechanisms that serve as checks and balances, such as the approval authority of the Parliament; election of the president and the parliamentarians at different dates; restrictions on veto and dissolution powers; and, independence of judiciary have been voided by AKP based on an assertions that they were ‘blocking the system to function.’
Q. What’s to happen if the president, deputy president(s) and the ministers commit a crime?
A. In order for them to be brought before a court, 301 parliamentarians (out of 600) will have to first demand a legal action to be taken. Then, 360 parliamentarians will have to approve of such action to be started. After that, approval of 400 parliamentarians will be necessary for the case(s) to be referred to the supreme court. If these approval rates are not gained, the president, deputy president(s) or the ministers will not be tried for the crimes they had committed. In other words, according to the proposal, it will be almost impossible to refer the president to the supreme council for her/his crimes.
Q. What will the president be able to do under this new system?
A. According to AKP’s proposal, the president will be able to form and/or remove state institution and determine the posts in these institutions; carry out investigations; arrange discipline rules; make a tender; and, establish regional governments. Moreover, she/he will be able to designate candidates for the parliament; interfere with the parliament; and, dissolve the parliament. So, simply put, the president will be an omnipotent individual who will have the eligibility to touch on everything and everyone but remain protected from everything and everyone.
Q. What’s the problem with the president keeping affiliation with her/his political party?
A. As the chair of her/his party, she/he will be able to make the list of the parliamentarians from that party. She/he will be the head of that party’s parliamentary group. And, in that way, she/he will have the opportunity to influence and shape the parliament as she/he wishes.
Q. Is unitary state put under threat?
A. Yes, with the proposed amendment, the president will be given authority to pass decrees and create regional governing structures through these decrees. This is a preparation for shifting the country into a federation.
Q. What is a ‘presidential decree’?
A. The president is given authority to pass a decree on any topic except for fundamental rights; and, these decrees are considered as law. They’re the ‘decrees of the sultan’, in other words.
Q. Since the decree of the president would be void if the parliament passes a law about the same particular issue, the parliament actually has the power to block the decree decisions of the president, doesn’t it?
A. No, it does not have the power to block it because the president will have the power to veto such overrule, as well. If a law of the parliament is vetoed by the president, the parliament will have to pass it again with absolute majority.
Q. What is the harm about the president having the authority to dissolve the parliament?
A. The president will be empowered to dissolve the parliament without having to show any reason. This basically means she/he can dissolve it just because she/he does not like how things are going. For example, if there is a parliamentary approval for the president to be tried for a crime committed, the president can simply dissolve the parliament at that point and avoid being brought before the court.
Q. Is it really the case that the president will be eligible to serve for only two terms?
A. According to the statements in the proposal, the president will be eligible to serve for two terms. However, if the 3/5 of the parliament decides to hold elections again towards the end of the second term of the president and if the president gets re-elected, that would end up extending his service for more than two consecutive terms.
Q. What’s wrong with the idea of a ‘substitute parliamentarian’?
A. The plan for a substitute parliamentarian to take the place of an MP in case she/he cannot meet the obligations of the duty – including in case of death – would take away the people’s right to have representation in line with their will throughout the time past between two elections.
Q. Doesn’t the judiciary have authority to check over the legislative and executive bodies?
A. According to the proposed draft, judiciary is completely under the authority of politics. It becomes a body that functions almost fully with the order of the president since the president is to make most of the appointments of critical posts within the high courts.