It would be very wrong to compare the April vote with previous constitutional reforms, which were forcefully created by the representatives of the coup tradition

This critical referendum aimed at fixing a system that has been generating significant crises for Turkey's governance.

The constitutional vote on Sunday constitutes Turkey's best solution to its years-long political, governing and democratic problems

If the ‘yes' vote wins in Sunday's referendum, Turkey will get rid of the tutelage in its politics, which is the root cause of the country's chronic crises

What keeps opposition leaders up at night is the off chance that the AK Party will be able to build a grand multi-party coalition to push presidentialism through Parliament.

These being the basic functions of a constitution, the Turkish Constitution of 1982 brought forth, since it came into force, a rather precarious situation for the Turkish legal and political systems.

As the ruling AK Party accelerates its efforts to draft a new constitution with the consent of opposition parties, constitutional law expert Uzun says without the mention of a new political system, a new constitution cannot be considered new.

What Turkey desperately needs, above and beyond party politics, is an end to the elite-level tensions that trigger political polarization across the country.

Pre-new constitution period is an appropriate time to discuss the disadvantages of the current political system and to pursue the quest for a new political system.

SETA CONFERENCE Chair:     Taha Özhan, SETA Konuşmacılar:     İhsan Dağı, METU     Ertan Aydın, Pollmark     Date: September 22, 2010 Wednesday Time: 14.00 – 15.30 Venue: SETA Foundation, ANKARA

On Sunday September 12th, 2010, Turkey voted "yes" in a referendum to a package of amendments by a wide margin (58 percent yes; 42 percent no) with a high level of participation (77.5 percent) despite the pro-Kurdish Peace and Democracy Party's (BDP) boycott. The amendments were designed to restrict the power of the military and the judicial bureaucracy in Turkey that originated from the 1982 junta-made Turkish constitution. The immediate political consequence of the referendum will be a serious relaxation of domestic political tensions, which have been undergirded for over 50 years by the one constant in Turkish politics: the ever present threat of military coup.

Turkish politics is currently undergoing a heated political debate on the constitutional reform package (supported by Prime Minister Erdogan's ruling party), which is on its way to a referendum this Sunday. The package includes amendments to 26 articles of the current constitution along. In addition, it would eliminate the controversial Article 15, a ‘temporary' article that has been in the constitution since the 1980's, preventing the prosecution of officials involved in the military coup of 1980. All in all, Sunday's referendum is one of the ruling AK Party's clearest challenges thus far to Turkey's Kemalist establishment. Since the establishment of the Turkish Republic, four new constitutions have been adopted (1921, 1924, 1961, 1982) - the latest two were drafted after military interventions - and numerous amendments have been made. Since the most recent constitution was adopted in 1982, there have been 15 amendment packages, which have affected almost half of the constitution. As such, the debate on the present constitution is not exactly a new one for Turkey, as the public is quite accustomed to constitutional changes and the public debate they generate. To understand, then, why the current package has touched off such a firestorm in Turkish society and led to an intensified political atmosphere, it is important to consider both the ramifications that the current reform efforts has for the political system in Turkey and the historical context.

Since the establishment of the Turkish Republic, four constitutions have been adopted (1921, 1924, 1961, and 1982), which were significantly amended by the successive parliaments in light of new developments, yet remained short of meeting universal democratic standards. The last two constitutions were drafted in the aftermath of military interventions, and none of them have been produced out of negotiation, bargaining or a compromise process. Within the framework of the EU reforms, Turkey’s most recent constitution of 1982 has been amended several times – so much so that almost one third of the constitution has been reconstructed. There have been demands for the drawing up of a new constitution from both right and left wing parties, but the idea has never been realized.

The 2009 Gaza massacre is not the first incident where Israel has killed, pillaged and destroyed Palestinian lives. In 1982 the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) under Ariel Sharon allowed the killing of more than 2,000 Palestinians in two Palestinian refugee camps in Sabra and Shatila.  

The Turkish Constitutional Court’s verdict annulling the Parliament’s amendments to Articles 10 and 42 of the Constitution disregards popular will, legalizes arbitrary restrictions on the right to equal access to education, and erodes the separation of powers by permitting itself to act outside of the legal order.

Female students with headscarf are currently prevented to enter the university in Turkey although there is no legal ground for such a ban. The ongoing controversy about the type of clothing for female students at the higher education institutions has become more intensified since the recent constitutional change in February 2008 to lift the de facto headscarf ban. The debate over this question revolves around whether headscarf is a religious attire or a political symbol, whether it should be banned to protect the secular foundations of the state or conversely allowed on the basis of individual freedom of religion as a corollary of secularism. The solution lies in the implementation of constitutional amendments without a further delay.

Current developments and recent social and cultural transformations under the forces of globalization indicate that the prophecy of traditional secularization thesis seems to have failed to capture the ongoing influence of religion. Proponents of secularization thesis established an unavoidable and casual connection between the beginning of modernity and the decline of traditional forms of religious life. Generally speaking theorists of secularization process argued that religion would lose its influence on social and political life once the society absorbs the values and institutions of modernization. For B. Wilson for example “secularization relates to the diminution in the social significance of religion”. L. Shiner on the other hand, argued that the culmination of secularization would be religionless society.