Heel Turkije is in rep en roer na de aankondiging van de hoogste openbare aanklager dat hij naar het Constitutionele Hof stapt. Hij wil de regerende conservatieve AK-partij verbieden, omdat de partij een gevaar zou vormen voor de in de Turkse grondwet vastgelegde seculiere staat.

Woensdag verscheen er in de Engelstalige Turkse krant Today's Zaman een commentaar van Joost Lagendijk met als titel The state vs. the people waarin hij zegt dat de wil van bijna de helft van de Turkse kiezers niet genegeerd kan worden.

De Europese Unie bij monde van Eurocommissaris voor Uitbreiding Rehn heeft inmiddels ook scherpe kritiek geuit op het justitiële voornemen de AKP buiten de wet te stellen.

The State versus The People

The efforts by one of the country’s top prosecutors to close down AKP are a clear example of the mindset that is still dominant within the Turkish judiciary. They see themselves as the ultimate guardians of the foundations on which the republic is based. Even if most people reject their claims these hard core secularists do not hesitate to stage a constitutional coup against the party that represents almost 50% of the Turkish people.

In the run up to the elections in July 2007 many accusations were thrown at AKP putting their secular credentials in doubt. Then president Sezer, Chief of Staff Büyükanit and CHP leader Baykal all warned the Turkish population that by electing Erdogan and Gul the country would be in danger of losing its secular character. The accusations against AKP were all expressions of a wordview that I would call ‘aggressive’ secularism. According to that ‘belief’ religion should be pushed back into the private domain, if necessary through coercion and prohibitions.
In July this strategy based on fear and suspicion totally backfired. On top of the support from its core electorate AKP received the votes of many Turks that did not believe Erdogan was leading Turkey in the direction of Iran. Almost 50% of the population rewarded the government for its economic policies and were open to a new interpretation of secularism (let’s call it ‘passive’ secularism) resembling the one practised in Europe and the USA where the state adopts a neutral position on all religions and has no objection to religious expressions in the public domain.

Taking advantage of the defeat suffered by the army after their e-coup the government managed very cleverly to strike a deal with Büyükanit. The army would remain silent on politics for the foreseeable future but would get the opportunity to prove themselves in the fight against terrorism.
What followed simultaneously where the lifting of the ban on headscarves at universities without the army protesting and the incursions in Northern Iraq without the government slowing down the operations. AKP got the best of both worlds.
It made them so confident (some would say arrogant) that they pushed the changes to the Constitution through the parliament without bothering to create trust among many doubtful moderate secularists. Erdogan should have spent much more energy in trying to convince AKP sceptics that lifting of the ban at universities was part of a new consensus and not a stepping stone to allow the wearing of headscarves at other public places as well. Distrust in Turkey and in Europe could also have been prevented when the government had presented these changes as part of a package of reforms (or a proposal for a new Constitution) that should have contained other reforms on freedom of speech and minority rights as well.

AKP self confidently ruling the country without effective opposition left the hard core of the dogmatic secularists desperate. CHP had lost the elections, the army was busy in Northern Iraq. How to stop AKP now? The only method available was to use the last secular bulwark not touched (at least for the moment) by the new spirit in the country: the judiciary. Full of people that deep down think they know better than the majority of the people. Most judges and prosecutors feel so strongly about the perceived dangers to the Turkish state that they believe the rule of law and the outcome of democratic elections can be overturned if necessary. They said so in a recent opinion poll, they acted accordingly last Friday. The State had to teach the people a lesson.

The constitutional coup we are now witnessing is the action of desperate people. Afraid of what the future will bring. They know the present Constitution, based on the idea that the State has to be protected against its citizens, will soon be replaced by a new civil and democratic one that will protect the citizens against the State. This coup is the ultimate effort to stop history. It may succeed in the short run because the present highest judges share the same mindset. It will fail in the long run because the Turkish people will punish the politicians, the military and the judges supporting this coup.

What will be the effect on Turkey-EU relations? That depends of course first and foremost on the decision of the Constitutional Court: will they open a case against AKP or will they not? If there will be no case the damage is small also because it will show that Turkey has moved beyond the point where political disputes can be decided via court cases. If AKP will have to defend itself before court the effects could be worrying, at least in the short run. The court case will stop the efficient functioning of the government and the parliament. The reforms the EU is waiting for such a long time will be postponed again. The Turkey sceptics in Europe will use the situation to prove they were always right and that the EU better forget about integrating such a instable and undemocratic country. The defenders of Turkish accession will have a hard time making the case for ongoing negotiations while the reform process is halted and the pro-European elected politicians in Turkey are in danger of losing out to the anti-European bureaucrats.

In the long run I am much more optimistic. This crisis might well turn out to be a turning point in Turkish history. I am deeply convinced that also many AKP opponents will come to the conclusion that this is not the way to fight Erdogan and his policy. If one thinks that Turkey would be better of with an other policy than the next elections are the moment to prove AKP is wrong and to convince the people. The irony is that most probably after a court case or after a possible closing down of AKP its successor will gain even more votes because most Turks do not want either the army or the judiciary to tell them what is right or wrong. This means the process of reform will continue. There will be a new Constitution. There will be a new generation of prosecutors and judges that are willing to serve the people instead of bullying them. The EU will see that things are moving on in Turkey and that it is in the self interest of Europe to have Turkey as a member state where democracy has defeated the self appointed guardians of the status quo.

Zie ook: