President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, a staunch advocate for Turkey's adoption of an executive presidential system, has become the object of anger since using Hitler'sGermany as proof that it is possible to implement a presidential system while maintaining the unitary structure of the state.
Speaking at a press conference on Thursday evening, Erdoğan was asked whether a presidential system can be adopted while keeping the country's unitary structure. "There is no such thing as 'no presidential system in unitary states.' There are examples of this around the world. There are examples in the past, too. When you look at Hitler's Germany, you can see it there. You can see examples in other countries as well," he said.
There has been an uproar over Erdoğan's statement from opposition parties, with some critics claiming that bestowing more executive powers in the hands of Erdoğan will likely intensify Turkey's drift toward one-man rule, some even fearing that he would resemble Adolf Hitler, who was also elected by popular vote but then turned Germany into a fascist dictatorship.
Gürsel Tekin, the secretary-general of the Republican People's Party (CHP), said time will tell if Erdoğan's statement was really a slip of the tongue or a manifestation of his subconscious.
Speaking to Today's Zaman on Friday, Tekin said the CHP is clear on its position regarding a possible switch to a presidential system and that CHP leader Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu made this position clear to Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu when they met on Wednesday.
Tekin said that Erdoğan and his top legal advisor, Burhan Kuzu, the former head of Parliament's Constitution Commission, had tried everything in their power to try and create the rhetoric for a presidential system suitable for Erdoğan but failed. He said it is ironic that Erdoğan should find Hitler's Germany befitting for his vision of Turkey.
Erdoğan's statement comes days after AK Party spokesperson Ömer Çelik took a swing at the parliamentary system of governance Turkey currently uses, saying it was the same system that brought Hitler to power in Germany in the 1930s.
Speaking at a press conference after the meeting between Davutoğlu and Kılıçdaroğlu, Çelik claimed that a switch would allow for the strengthening of the independence of the judiciary, separation of powers and institutions enforcing checks and balances.
He also asserted that that the most important aspect of the proposed system is that the people will be directly in control of the political process.
Ayla Akat Ata, a former member of the pro-Kurdish Peace and Democracy Party (BDP), the precursor to the Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP), told Today's Zaman on Friday that what Erdoğan said shows a “real state of obliviousness” on his part.
“Not even Germany refers to the Hitler era, or praises it. Hitler's goal of creating a state based on the concept of an exalted ethnic identity and its evolution into fascism did great harm, not just to the people of Germany, but to all humankind,” she said.
Noting that the Justice and Development Party (AK Party), to which Erdoğan still has strong ties to despite the constitutional requirement of impartiality, is unclear on the possible route to the presidential system Erdoğan desires, Ata claims it was Erdoğan's slip of the tongue that really shows what the government is striving to implement.
“I wish he had given an example, not of the Germany under Hitler, but of today's Germany, which has a federal system of governance and binds its citizens together through a social contract,” she said.
Erdoğan is the staunchest supporter of the formation of a “Turkish-style” presidential system that he claims will help the country's development by eliminating "double-headedness" in state governance and thus pave the way for a more effective decision-making system.
On Aug. 12, he bluntly pointed to his desire for a switch to a presidential system, saying at a meeting with members of civil society organizations: "You can accept it or not. Turkey's governmental system has been de-facto changed in this regard. What should be done now is to finalize the legal framework of this de-facto situation with a new constitution.”
Turkey has enjoyed nearly 140 years with a constitution since the inception of the Ottoman Constitution of 1876, known in Turkish as the Kanûn-u Esâsî, and a parliamentary system has been the defining characteristic of all constitutions following it.
Even through 60-odd years of multiparty politics, four military coups and the execution of a prime minister, Turkey has never taken a step toward changing its system of governance to a presidential one.
Erdoğan has emphasized the superiority of the presidential system many times in the past and said that he wants to change the current parliamentary system of government to a strong presidential system.
Claiming that most developed countries are governed by a presidential system, although this is not actually the case, he said in January: “That shows that this [system] produces results. Given this, why should we put shackles on our feet [by sticking with a parliamentary system]?”
The debate on the proposed switch has recently gained traction as Selim Savaş Genç, associate professor of international relations at Fatih University, posted a picture of Adolf Hitler which had the words “One nation, one country, one leader… Great Germany,” slogans used widely by the AK Party and Erdoğan to promote their own ideology.
“[Political] Islamists have always had a fondness for Adolf Hitler. Anti-Semitism and marginal ideologies are shared by both [Hitler and political Islamists],” he wrote.
On the other side of the spectrum, a theologian known for giving Islamic legal opinion in line with the government's ideology recently claimed the Islamic political system is similar to that which Erdoğan espouses, adding that the president under such a system would be a “caliph or emir.”
Hayrettin Karaman wrote in his column in the pro-government Yeni Şafak daily on Dec. 25 that when the people vote for a nominee in an Islamic presidential system, they choose and obey the “caliph” or “emir,” who in turn appoints members of government and high-level bureaucracy.
No comments:
Post a Comment