New amendment rectifies an anomaly and makes the country's elected president accountable to parliament, writes Elif Comoglu Ulgen
Constitution making is a difficult endeavour. It requires a consensus-building effort against the backdrop of divisive politics. South Africa represents a valuable exception. The South African constitution reflects a consensus that has reached even beyond the borders of this rainbow nation. That is the reason why it is often viewed as the gold standard in constitution making.
Turkey’s constitutional history dates back to Ottoman times. First efforts to delineate the powers of the Ottoman Sultan by way of an introduction of a written constitution were in 1876.
Since the founding of the modern Turkish Republic in 1923, Turkey has had four constitutions. The last version of this core document was prepared by a military junta in 1982 in the wake of the 1980 coup d’etat. Since then, the Turkish body politic has striven to amend this constitution. To date 19 such amendments have been finalised. The latest one was done by popular consent as a result of a referendum held on April 16 which saw a participation rate exceeding 85%.
The referendum in Turkey triggered a wide variety of comments in the international media.
South Africa was no exception to this wave of interest. As the Turkish ambassador here, I have had the pleasure to read many such views. That is the reason that motivated me to pen this article to clarify some of the misconceptions that seem to have shaded the perspectives on this important political development.
The change, as historic as it has been, does not alter Turkey’s constitutional regime. The fundamental premises of the Republic of Turkey is that it is a democratic, secular, social state governed by the rule of law. These are the fundamental pillars and they remain as they were. The constitutional amendments have streamlined the executive power and made the head of the executive, the popularly elected president of the republic, accountable to parliament.
The new constitutional arrangements have rectified the anomaly created by previous constitutional arrangements which instituted a presidency that is held by direct popular vote and the symbolic and unaccountable nature of the president’s responsibilities.
The new system also preserves checks and balances among three distinct poles, namely the executive, legislative and judiciary powers. It does, however, streamline the executive power in support of the directly elected president of the republic.
This outcome was also shaped by the still vivid trauma of the botched coup attempt of last July. A majority of the Turkish population opted for a strong and centralised presidential system which is deemed necessary to overcome these security challenges.
It is, therefore, a severe affront to the free will of the Turkish people to interpret the outcome of this referendum as Turkey having paved the way to authoritarianism or even a return of the Ottoman Sultan.
The referendum campaign was nonetheless characterised by a rise in diplomatic tension between Turkey and some European capitals. This was essentially the consequence of these governments having decided to take sides in a political issue which is exclusively of essence to the Turkish nation. We have thus witnessed practices in Europe that are incompatible with a basic understanding of democratic rights in terms of constraining the access of Turkish political representatives to their nationals due to vote in this key referendum, but resident in Europe.
Ultimately, the Turkish nation did favour the proposed constitutional order. This inclination can in no way be interpreted as a desire to be unmoored from Europe where Turkey belongs - even less so as a proclivity to accept a curtailment of democracy and human rights. Turkey will continue to espouse the role of a regional leader, persevere to find the most humanitarian solutions to the challenges it faces and most certainly focus its resources to maintain and enhance the success story of its own economic development which has accelerated in the last decade and a half.
It is clear that part of the support for the proposed amendments stem from a desire to consolidate the political and economic stability of the country. For it is only this long-term stability that can allow Turkey to reach its potential to contribute to peace and prosperity in its region and beyond.
* Ulgen is ambassador (designate) of the Republic of Turkey in Pretoria.
** The views expressed here are not necessarily those of Independent Media.