TURKEY: Referendum Win May Invite Future Unrest

By IPS Correspondents Reprint | | Print |

Analysis by Jacques N. Couvas

ANKARA, Oct 24 2007 (IPS) - Turkish voters gave new evidence Sunday that their country has made a further step towards maturity in dealing with democracy. But the result of the referendum may just open a fresh pandora’s box.

The government-sponsored package to amend certain provisions in the current constitution was adopted in the referendum with a 69 percent majority.

Participation was high at 66.7 percent, with 28 million of the 42.5 million eligible citizens casting their vote. But this was almost 20 percentage points lower than the turnout in the Jul. 22 parliamentary elections. A sign of fatigue, after six months of continuous tension around the presidential appointment and the role of the Armed Forces (TSK) in the nation’s political direction. The tension may not yet have ended.

In fact, Sunday’s referendum, the fifth in the history of the Turkish republic, was closely tied with the role of the head of state, in an attempt by the governing Justice and Development (AK) Party to reduce the influence of TSK and the opposition.

It was the climax of a crisis that began in April after TSK issued an ultimatum, backed by the left-wing Republican People’s (CH) Party, implying that the armed forces could intervene, should AKP candidate Abdullah Gul be elected president of the republic by the members of the parliament.

After cancellation of the first round of the presidential election for lack of quorum, candidate Gul withdrew from the race. In response, AKP advanced the legislative elections by four months to July. It also submitted a package for amendments to the constitution aiming at changing the method of election of the head of state.

With a victory of 47 percent of the vote at the polls, AKP felt confident enough to proceed with the appointment by the MPs of the president, overlooking its own proposal for constitutional amendments. Abdullah Gul was comfortably elected as the 11th president of Turkey.

During preparations for the Oct. 21 referendum it became evident that there was a contradiction between the actual situation and the text, as the latter was providing for an election of the “11th president” through referendum rather than parliament. Gul had, however, already been appointed 11th president.

This was bound to cause confusion, even a constitutional crisis, as the amendments package was interpreted to require the resignation of Gul, and a new presidential election. AKP was swift to manoeuvre and obtain repeal of the articles specifically referring to the “11th president” the week before the poll from the Supreme Election Board (YSK).

What were the Turks called to vote for last Sunday?

First, election of the president directly by the people instead of in a parliamentary poll. Second, reduction of the term of the president and MPs from seven to five and from five to four years respectively. Third, that the number of MPs necessary for quorum at parliamentary sessions be brought down to 184 from 367, out of a total of 550.

Two-thirds of the voters have approved the amendments, but a more careful analysis speaks of Turkey’s two-speed social nature.

Eastern provinces, with high rates of unemployment and who are strong supporters of the AKP, voted massively “Yes”. Scores ranged 85-95 percent. The government’s proposals were also supported in Istanbul and Ankara, where eastern immigrants are numerous.

However, seven out of the 81 provinces cast an unequivocal “No” vote. These are primarily located in western Turkey, the European part of the state, in regions with a large Kurdish population, and those that include important cities such as Izmir, Edirne and Aydin. Votes against the government’s initiative ranged between 51.7 and 64.5 percent. But this is not surprising as these areas are strongholds of the opposition CHP, Nationalist Action (MH) and the pro-Kurdish Democratic Society (DT) parties.

Looking below the floating line of the iceberg, it appears that 47 percent of the eligible voters approved the constitutional changes, while 53 percent either abstained or voted against it.

Participation in the elections is mandatory. Abstention is subject to a fine of 19 liras (11 euros) per person. If all fines were collected, they would provide the state treasury 275 million liras (158 million euros).

Despite the euphoria amongst AKP members and supporters, adoption of the new constitutional provisions may become the departure point for future political unrest, although not immediately.

The shift of the methodology to elect the president from parliamentary vote to popular referendum is likely to be the first step towards moving away from the democratic construction conceived in the 1920s by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, founder of modern Turkey, and supported by politicians and the military.

The political system seems now to be leaning towards a presidential format in which the head of state will acquire more direct decision-making power and influence in the daily governance of the country, on the French model.

This and other radical changes will be confirmed in the new constitution, currently being drafted by AKP. The constitution will be put to referendum at the end of the year or in early 2008.

Prime Minister Recip Tayyip Erdogan, architect of the new concept of democratic Turkey, claims that the changes aim at transferring power from the president to the people and the institutions, not the other way around. But the opposition remains unimpressed.

In France, a presidential democracy, although presidents have generally respected the turf of their prime ministers, they have often overshadowed them, whenever they did not clash with each other. This tendency is exacerbated by President Nicholas Sarkozy, who is criticised for assuming powers, and confining Prime Minister François Fillon to a minor housekeeping role. Could this be repeated in Gul-Erdogan’s Turkey?

With increased powers in day-to-day affairs, Turkish presidents may also be challenged by prime ministers elected on the ticket of a party different to theirs. Cohabitation has poisoned political life in France in the past.

Sunday’s referendum has triggered concerns among the opposition also for another reason. The reduction of the number of MPs needed for quorum at the parliament to a mere one-third of the total seats will enable the AKP to legislate at will and put to popular vote any issues that it would not want to resolve through parliamentary debate. Islamophobes are already raising a yellow card, given the Islamist origins of the AKP.

Meanwhile, CHP deputy leader Kemal Anadol told reporters Tuesday that as soon as the referendum results are published in the official gazette, Gul should resign and new presidential elections be called. This autumn may be too hot for the AKP’s taste