DOCSLIB.ORG

Kamu Hukukunun Dönüşümü Kamu Dönüşümü

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Kamu Hukukunun Dönüşümü Kamu Dönüşümü Prof. Dr. Necmi YÜZBAŞIOĞLU Necmi Dr. Prof. Arş. Gör. Burcu ALKIŞ Burcu Gör. Arş. KAMU HUKUKÇULARI PLATFORMU Editörler: Editörler: VI. TOPLANTISI KAMU HUKUKUNUN KAMU HUKUKUNUN DÖNÜŞÜMÜ DÖNÜŞÜMÜ 29-30 Nisan 2017 Galatasaray Üniversitesi, İstanbul Editörler: Prof. Dr. Necmi YÜZBAŞIOĞLU Arş. Gör. Burcu ALKIŞ ISBN 978-975-8400-41-6 KAMU HUKUKÇULARI PLATFORMU VI. TOPLANTISI KAMU HUKUKUNUN DÖNÜŞÜMÜ 29-30 Nisan 2017 Galatasaray Üniversitesi, İstanbul Editörler: Prof. Dr. Necmi YÜZBAŞIOĞLU & Arş. Gör. Burcu ALKIŞ Fakülte Yayın Numarası: 71 Üniversite Yayın Numarası: 92 KAMU HUKUKUNUN DÖNÜŞÜMÜ Prof. Dr. Necmi YÜZBAŞIOĞLU & Arş. Gör. Burcu ALKIŞ Birinci Baskı: Aralık 2018 ISBN: 978-975-8400-41-6 Tasarım Uygulama: Yağmur Işık Kapak Tasarım: Yağmur Işık Baskı ve Cilt: Birlik Fotokopi Baskı Ozalit Gıda San. Tic. Ltd. Şti. Nispetiye Mah. Birlik Sokak No: 2 Nevin Arıcan Plaza 1. Levent/Beşiktaş/İST. Tel: (0-212) 269 30 00 (Sertifika No. 20179) ® 2018 Beta Basım Yayım Dağıtım A.Ş. Tüm hakları saklıdır. Tamamının ya da herhangi bir bölümünün yayıncının yazılı izni olmadan çoğaltılması yasaktır. Beta Basım Yayım Dağıtım A.Ş. Sertifika No: 16136 Narlıbahçe Sok. No: 11 Cağaloğlu-İstanbul Tel: (0212) 511 54 32 - 519 01 77 Fax: (0212) 513 87 05 - 511 36 50 www.betayayincilik.com İçindekiler Birinci Gün – 29 Nisan 2017 Prof. Dr. Erdoğan Teziç’in anısına Prof. Dr. Fazıl Sağlam ......................................................................................... 3 Prof. Dr. Necmi Yüzbaşıoğlu ............................................................................. 5 Prof. Dr. Ülkü Azrak ........................................................................................... 8 Prof. Dr. Sait Güran ...........................................................................................12 Av. Turgut Kazan ................................................................................................15 Dr. Özen Ülgen ...................................................................................................17 Birinci Oturum Bildirilerin Sunumu 2000’li Yıllarda Türkiye’de Kamu Hukukunun ve Siyasetin Genel Görünümü Oturum Başkanı: Prof. Dr. Rona Aybay ..........................................................23 Prof. Dr. Sultan Üzeltürk, “2000’li Yıllarda Basın Özgürlüğü: Bir Bilanço Denemesi” ..................................................................................25 Doç. Dr. Murat Sevinç,“Yeni Anayasa ve Kuruculuk Tartışması: Bizim Sorunumuz Ne?” ................................................................................37 İkinci Oturum Yorumlar Oturum Başkanı: Prof. Dr. Naz Çavuşoğlu .....................................................85 Prof. Dr. Korkut Boratav ..................................................................................86 Dr. Özkan Agtaş .................................................................................................89 iv KAMU HUKUKUNUN DÖNÜŞÜMÜ Üçüncü Oturum Tartışma: Katılımcıların Katkıları Oturum Başkanı: Prof. Dr. Naz Çavuşoğlu ...................................................101 Dördüncü Oturum Bildirilerin Sunumu Türkiye’de Hukukun Yapısal Dönüşümü ve Yasama Süreci Oturum Başkanı: Prof. Dr. Necmi Yüzbaşıoğlu ............................................107 Yrd. Doç. Dr. Ayşe Cebeci, “Kalkınma Sürecinin Gerilimlerini Aşmak: Yasama ve Yürütme İlişkisi” ........................................................109 Doç. Dr. Fahri Bakırcı, “Yasama Sürecinin Hızlandırılması – Yasama Yetkisinin Devri ve Nedenleri Üzerine” ....................................................127 Beşinci Oturum Yorumlar Oturum Başkanı: Prof. Dr. Korkut Kanadoğlu ............................................203 Prof. Dr. Yasemin Özdek ................................................................................203 Yrd. Doç. Dr. Muammer Ketizmen ..............................................................209 Altıncı Oturum Tartışma: Katılımcıların Katkıları Oturum Başkanı: Prof. Dr. Korkut Kanadoğlu ............................................201 İkinci Gün – 30 Nisan 2017 Yedinci Oturum Tartışma: Katılımcıların Katkıları Oturum Başkanı: Prof. Dr. İbrahim Kaboğlu ...............................................231 Prof. Dr. Necmi YÜZBAŞIOĞLU & Arş. Gör. Burcu ALKIŞ v Sekizinci Oturum Bildiri Sunanların Yorum ve Eleştiriler Üzerine Değerlendirmeleri Oturum Başkanı: Prof. Dr. İbrahim Kaboğlu ...............................................247 Prof. Dr. Sultan Üzeltürk ................................................................................247 Doç. Dr. Murat Sevinç .....................................................................................247 Yrd. Doç. Dr. Ayşe Cebeci ..............................................................................247 Doç. Dr. Fahri Bakırcı .....................................................................................247 Dokuzuncu Oturum Genel Değerlendirme ve Kapanış Prof. Dr. Fazıl Sağlam .....................................................................................279 Kamu Hukukçuları Platformu VI. Toplantısı KAMU HUKUKUNUN DÖNÜŞÜMÜ 29-30 Nisan 2017 Galatasaray Üniversitesi, Beşiktaş, İstanbul 2017, Cumartesi Birinci Gün: 29 Nisan İkinci Gün: 30 Nisan 2017, Pazar PROF. DR. ERDOĞAN TEZİÇ’İN ANISINA TARTIŞMA (1. Bölüm) TARTIŞMA (3. Bölüm) (09.00 – 10.00) (11.45 – 13.00) (10.00 – 11.30) Prof. Dr. Fazıl Sağlam, KHP İcra Kurulu Üçüncü Oturum Yedinci Oturum Başkanı Oturum Başkanı: Prof. Dr. Naz Çavuşoğlu Oturum Başkanı: Prof. Dr. İbrahim Prof. Dr. Necmi Yüzbaşıoğlu, Katılımcıların Katkıları Kaboğlu Galatasaray Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Katılımcıların Katkıları Dekanı Öğle Yemeği Arası (13.00 – 14.30) Prof. Dr. Ülkü Azrak, İstanbul Çay – Kahve Arası (11.30 – 11.50) Üniversitesi SBF E. Öğretim Üyesi BİLDİRİLER (14.30 – 15.30) Prof. Dr. Sait Güran, İstanbul DEĞERLENDİRME Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi E. Öğretim Dördüncü Oturum (11.50 – 12.50) Üyesi Türkiye’de Hukukun Yapısal Av. Turgut Kazan, İstanbul Barosu Sekizinci Oturum Dönüşümü ve Yasama Süreci Bildiri Sunanların Yorum ve Dr. Özen Ülgen, Galatasaray Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Oturum Başkanı: Prof. Dr. Necmi Eleştiriler Üzerine Değerlendirmeleri Yüzbaşıoğlu BİLDİRİLER 1) Yrd. Doç. Dr. Ayşe Cebeci, Harran Oturum Başkanı: Prof. Dr. İbrahim (10.00-11.00) Üniversitesi İİBF (14.45 - 15.15) Kaboğlu Birinci Oturum "Kalkınma Sürecinin Gerilimlerini Aşmak: Prof. Dr. Sultan Üzeltürk, Yeditepe 2000’li Yıllarda Türkiye’de Kamu Yasama ve Yürütme İlişkisi" Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi (11.50 - 2) Doç. Dr. Fahri Bakırcı, TBMM Müdür Hukukunun ve Siyasetin Genel 12.05) Yardımcısı (15.15 - 15.45) Doç. Dr. Murat Sevinç (12.05 – 12.20) Görünümü “Yasama Sürecinin Hızlandırılması – Yasama Yetkisinin Devri ve Nedenleri Üzerine” Yrd. Doç. Dr. Ayşe Cebeci, Harran Oturum Başkanı: Prof. Dr. Rona Aybay Üniversitesi İİBF (12.20 – 12.35) Çay – Kahve Arası (15.30 – 15.50) Doç. Dr. Fahri Bakırcı, TBMM Müdür 1) Doç. Dr. Murat Sevinç (09.30 - 10.10) Yardımcısı (12.35 – 12.50) “Yeni Anayasa ve Kuruculuk Tartışması: Bizim YORUMLAR Sorunumuz Ne?” (15.50 – 16.20) 2) Prof. Dr. Sultan Üzeltürk, Yeditepe GENEL DEĞERLENDİRME VE KAPANIŞ Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi (10.10 - Beşinci Oturum (12.50.13.00) 10.50) Oturum Başkanı: Prof. Dr. Korkut “2000’li Yıllarda Basın Özgürlüğü: Bir Bilanço Kanadoğlu Dokuzuncu Oturum Denemesi” Genel Değerlendirme ve Kapanış 1) Yrd. Doç. Dr. Muammer Ketizmen, Hacettepe Üniv. Hukuk Fakültesi (16.05 - Çay – Kahve Arası (11.00 – 11.20) Prof. Dr. Fazıl Sağlam, KHP İcra Kurulu 16.20) Başkanı YORUMLAR 2) Prof. Dr. Yasemin Özdek, Yakın Doğu (11.20 – 11.45) Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi (16.20 - 16.35) İkinci Oturum Oturum Başkanı: Prof. Dr. Naz Çavuşoğlu TARTIŞMA (2. Bölüm) (16.20– 18.00) 1) Prof. Dr. Korkut Boratav, Ankara Üniversitesi SBF E. Öğretim Üyesi (11.15 Altıncı Oturum Oturum Başkanı: Prof. Dr. Korkut – 11.30) Kanadoğlu 2) Dr. Özkan Agtaş, Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Öğretim Üyesi (11.30 – 11.45) Katılımcıların Katkıları * Hergüner Bilgen Özeke Avukatlık Ortaklığına katkıları için teşekkür ederiz. Prof. Dr. Erdoğan Teziç’in Anısına Birinci Gün – 29 Nisan 2017 Prof. Dr. Fazıl Sağlam: Değerli meslektaşlarım, hepinize hoş geldi- niz diyorum. Aslında tabii klasik açılış konuşmaları yapılacaktı; onun yerine Erdoğan Hoca’yı anma toplantısı yapmayı düşündük. Kamu Hukukçuları Platformu 2009’da kurulmuştu. O kuruluş gününden bu yana altıncı toplan- tımıza ulaşmış bulunuyoruz. Ama nedense bu toplantıda aksilikler birbirini kovaladı. Önce iptal etmek zorunda kaldığımız bir Kıbrıs macerası yaşa- dık. Ayrıntısına girmiyorum, ama program çok güzeldi. Kamu hukukunun dönüşümü, hem Türkiye hem Kıbrıs açısından, her iki tarafın çok seçkin bildiri sunacak kişilerince programlanmıştı. Üniversitemiz ile iletişimde bir kopukluk mu oldu, ne olduysa ne yazık ki o toplantıyı yapamadık. Bu arada Galatasaray Üniversitesi imdadımıza yetişti ve dört aylık bir gecikmeyle de olsa bu toplantının yapılmasını sağladı. Başta Necmi Yüzbaşıoğlu olmak üzere Galatasaray Üniversitesi yönetimine teşekkür borçluyuz. Ama talih- sizlikler bununla bitmiş değil. Toplantının ikinci bölümünde açılış bildirisini sunacak olan meslektaşımız Ali Murat Özdemir tarih değişikliğinin kendisi- ne uymadığını, bu nedenle toplantıya katılamayacağını bildirdi. Onun yerini kurul üyelerimizden Ozan Ergül aldı. Ozan’ın sunacağı çok güzel bir bil- diri vardı. Bildiri “Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi’nin Yasama Performansı: Yasama Siyaseti, Hukuk Devleti ve Demokrasi Anlayışı Yönlerinden Bir Değerlendirme” başlığını taşıyordu ve çok güzel bir konuşma bekliyorduk.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Transformation of Work and Citizenship in Turkey and the United States Under Neo-Liberalism1
    Interns and Infidels: The Transformation of Work and Citizenship in Turkey and the United States under Neo-liberalism1 Kaan Agartan, Framingham State University, USA Cedric de Leon, Providence College, USA ABSTRACT How do the dispossessed remain governable under economic insecurity? What explains the persistence of work as a prerequisite to social rights in a time when fewer formal jobs exist? Drawing on a comparison of Turkey and the United States since 1980, we demonstrate that the neo-liberal state deploys different versions of the “work-citizenship nexus” to manage both the shrinking minority who enjoy the benefits of full citizenship and the rest who struggle to attain the rights and privileges of the formally employed. We find that neo-liberal state practices comprise a dual movement. On the one hand, the state in both countries reorients itself toward the market in welfare provision and the regulation of labour relations, capitalising on precarious work structures to bring their populations into the fold of neo-liberal governance. On the other hand, the state directly intervenes in disparate ways to manage those who cannot make it in the market. While the American state uses tactics of mass incarceration and deportation, the Turkish state opts for a blend of social conservatism and authoritarianism. This dual movement of reorientation and direct intervention results in what we call “tiered citizenship regimes” that facilitate the management of the population in each case. KEYWORDS neo-liberalism; work; social citizenship; governmentality; Turkey; United States Introduction Macro-historical accounts typically frame neo-liberalism as an economic doctrine that has exploded the Fordist mode of capital accumulation and in doing so deepened economic inequality.
    [Show full text]
  • Violations Against Children's Rights in Turkey
    Violations Against Children’s Rights in Turkey By Leighann Spencer for 1 Violations Against Children’s Rights in Turkey 1. Children in Turkey’s Prisons---2 1.1 Pregnant Women and New Mothers Imprisoned---2 1.2 668+ Babies Behind Bars---3 1.3 Children Under the Age of 18---4 2. Refugee Syrian Children in Turkey---5 2.1 Sexual Abuse Against Refugee Children---5 2.2 Forced into Labour---6 2.3 Deprived of Other Fundamental Rights---6 3. Turkey’s Child Marriage Problem---7 3.1 Child Marriage in Numbers--- 7 3.2 Related Issues---8 3.3 Encouraged by Authorities---9 Conclusion---9 References---10 2 1. Children in Turkey’s Prisons Depiction of Turkey’s jailed mothers and children, via Carlos Latuff/The Globe Post 1.1 Pregnant Women and New Mothers Imprisoned Article 16 of Turkish domestic Law No. 5275 requires imprisonment to be postponed for women who are pregnant or who have not passed six months since giving birth.1 Nonetheless, there have been numerous accounts of pregnant women and new mothers being detained following the July 2016 coup attempt. In all, about 17,000 women have been subjected to coup-related charges, such as having subscriptions to newspaper Zaman, making payments through Bank Asya, or using the ByLock messaging application. The subject of detained new mothers and mothers-to-be is avoided by Turkish authorities, so exact statistics are elusive. This section covers what we do know about these rights abuses. Firstly, contrary to domestic and international law, mothers are being taken from maternity wards straight after giving birth.
    [Show full text]
  • Constitutional Court
    REPUBLIC OF TURKEY CONSTITUTIONAL COURT FIRST SECTION DECISION Application No: 2014/4705 Date of Decision: 29/5/2014 GENERAL ASSEMBLY DECISION President : Ha şim KILIÇ Deputy President : Serruh KALEL İ Deputy President : Alparslan ALTAN Members : Serdar ÖZGÜLDÜR Osman Alifeyyaz PAKSÜT Zehra Ayla PERKTA Ş Recep KÖMÜRCÜ Engin YILDIRIM Nuri NEC İPO ĞLU Hicabi DURSUN Celal Mümtaz AKINCI Erdal TERCAN Muammer TOPAL Zühtü ARSLAN M. Emin KUZ Hasan Tahsin GÖKCAN Rapporteur : Esat Caner YILMAZO ĞLU 1. Applicant : Youtube LLC Corporation Service Company (App.No:2014/4705, App.No:2014/4737) Representative :John Kent WALKER Counsel : Att. Gönenç GÜRKAYNAK 2. Applicant : Kerem ALTIPARMAK (App.No:2014/4767, App.No:2014/5543) Counsel : Att. Çi ğdem DURKAN 3. Applicant : Yaman AKDEN İZ (App.No:2014/4769, App.No:2014/5542) Counsel : Att. Çi ğdem DURKAN 4. Applicant : Mustafa Sezgin TANRIKULU Counsel : Att. Berk BA ŞARA 5. Applicant : Metin FEYZ İOĞLU 6. Applicant : Erol ERG İN Counsel : Att. Serkan ŞAH İN 7. Applicant : Mahmut TANAL 8. Applicant : Mesut BED İRHANO ĞLU Counsel : Att. Ferit ALGAN I. SUBJECT OF APPLICATON 1. The applicants alleged that articles 22, 26, 27, 40, 48 and 67 of the Constitution were violated due to the action of the Presidency of Telecommunication and Communication (PoTC) dated 27/3/2014 regarding the blocking of access to the video-sharing website named youtube.com. http://www.youtube.com II. APPLICATION PROCESS 2. The applications were lodged directly at the Constitutional Court on the dates of 4/4/2014, 7/4/2014, 8/4/2014, 14/4/2014 and 24/4/2014. As a result of the preliminary administrative examination of the petitions and their annexes, it has been determined that there is no deficiency to prevent the submission thereof to the Commission.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Sets the Agenda? Polarization and Issue Ownership in Turkey's Political Twittersphere
    International Journal of Communication 13(2019), 229–250 1932–8036/20190005 Who Sets the Agenda? Polarization and Issue Ownership in Turkey’s Political Twittersphere BURAK DOĞU Izmir University of Economics, Turkey HAZIM ONUR MAT Independent Researcher Research on political agenda setting, in general, is interested in how issues are conveyed to the political agenda, and how governments tend to reflect on those issues. Media are assumed to have an effect on governmental policies; however, the extent to which media agenda influences the political agenda is ambiguous. Ambiguity is further exacerbated in predominant-party systems, where the media are more likely to be directly linked with the state. In this study, we examined whether the news media can still set the political agenda in a highly polarized political environment. In line with this, we applied the network agenda-setting model to Twitter, and compared the issues on the media and political agendas in Turkey. Findings indicate political parallelism as the major factor in defining the relationship between the issues and accounts. The results also show that in all cases the political agenda essentially preceded the media agenda. Keywords: media agenda, political agenda, network agenda-setting, network analysis, Twitter, polarization Twitter has a vast potential for advancements in political communication and has brought a new dimension to the mediation process between media and politics. It offers a space for diverse actors competing for attention to their issues of interest. Among these actors are the news media organizations, who were quick to realize the benefits of Twitter almost a decade ago; political agents, who typically spread party ideologies, and provoke polarization in the platform; and the public, who turn to Twitter not only to become better informed but also to participate in political discussions.
    [Show full text]
  • Raporu PDF Olarak Görüntülemek Için Tıklayın…
    TİHV Türkiye İnsan Hakları Vakfı Türkiye İnsan Hakları Raporu 2020 Hazırlayanlar TİHV Dokümantasyon Merkezi: Eylem Yıldızer, Cihan Deniz Zarakolu, Coşkun Üsterci Ankara, Haziran 2021 Türkiye İnsan Hakları Vakfı Yayınları 141 Türkiye İnsan Hakları Vakfı, Türk Medeni Yasası’na göre kurulmuş, hükümet dışı ve bağımsız bir kuruluştur. Statüsü 30 Aralık 1990 tarihli ve 20741 sayılı Resmi Gazete’de yayımlanarak yürürlüğe girmiştir. ISBN: 978-605-9880-31-2 Bu rapor, TİHV’in Ankara, Diyarbakır, İstanbul, İzmir ve Van Temsilcilikleri ile Cizre Referans Merkezinde profesyonel ve gönüllü olarak çalışan arkadaşlarımızın çok değerli katkılarıyla hazırlanmıştır. TÜRKİYE İNSAN HAKLARI VAKFI Mithatpaşa Cad. 49/11 6. Kat 06420 Kızılay, Ankara Tel: (312) 310 66 36 • Faks: (312) 310 64 63 E-posta: [email protected] Web: http://www.tihv.org.tr BULUŞ Tasarım ve Matbaacılık Hizmetleri San. Tic., Ankara Tel: (312) 222 44 06 • Faks: (312) 222 44 07 www.bulustasarim.com.tr Bu yayın Hrant Dink Vakfı Hibe Programı kapsamında Avrupa Birliği desteği ile hazırlanmıştır. İçeriğin sorumluluğu tamamıyla Türkiye İnsan Hakları Vakfı’na aittir ve Avrupa Birliği’nin ve/veya Hrant Dink Vakfı’nın görüşlerini yansıtmamaktadır. -II- İÇİNDEKİLER KISALTMALAR .........................................................................................................................................VII ÖNSÖZ .........................................................................................................................................................IX 1. YAŞAM HAKKI .........................................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Hillary by Philip Elliott and David Von Drehle
    AUGUST 1, 2016 IN SEARCH OF HILLARY BY PHILIP ELLIOTT AND DAVID VON DREHLE time.com How to cut your cell phone bill in half.†† 1. Grab your phone. 2. Use our BYOP® SIM Activation Kit. Keep your 4G LTE† network and number. BRING YOUR OWN PHONEBRING YOUR OWN ACTIVATION KIT 3. Sew extra big pocket on pants. UNLIMITED The Bring Your Own Phone Activation Kit makes it easy to TALK, TEXT AND DATA switch almost any phone to a more affordable plan. Use it to 5GB UP TO 4G LTE† THEN 2G* keep the same network and number you currently have, and $ then buy our Unlimited plan for just $45 a month. No 45/mo NO CONTRACT activation fees or credit checks. Start saving today. Learn more at StraightTalkBYOP.com ††”Cut Your Cell Phone Bill in Half” is based on a comparison of the average cost of the $45 Straight Talk Service Plan plus average sales tax and fees when purchased in Walmart and the average total monthly cost reported by top two carriers’ postpaid customers on a 2-year service contract individual plan with unlimited talk, text and comparable high speed data. Plan costs include all taxes, fees and overage charges. Source: Nationwide survey conducted February 2016. †To get 4G LTE speed, you must have a 4G LTE capable device and 4G LTE SIM. Actual availability, coverage and speed may vary. LTE is a trademark of ETSI. *At 2G speeds, the functionality of some data applications, such as streaming audio or video, may be affected. Straight Talk’s Bring Your Own Phone plan requires a compatible, unlocked phone, activation kit and Straight Talk service plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Parti Meclisi Merkez Yönetim Kurulu
    Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi PARTİ MECLİSİ TOPLANTISINA SUNULAN MERKEZ YÖNETİM KURULU RAPORU 7 HAZİRAN 2012 Sayı : 2012 /5654 Ankara 01 .06.2012 Konu : Toplantı Gündemi Hk. Parti Meclisimiz 7 Haziran 2012 Perşembe günü Saat 11:00’de Ankara’da Parti Genel Merkezinde aşağıdaki gündem maddelerini görüşmek üzere toplanacaktır. Bilgilerinizi rica ederim. Saygılarımla Kemal KILIÇDAROĞLU Genel Başkan GÜNDEM 1- Genel Başkanın sunuşu 2- Sunum 3- CHP 16. Olağanüstü Kurultayının kabul ettiği, 1 Mart 2012 tarihinde yürürlüğe giren, Tüzük hükümleri uyarınca hazırlanmış, yönetmelik değişiklik önerilerinin görüşülmesi 4- 34.Olağan Kurultay’ın toplanacağı yer, gün, saat ve gündemin belirlenmesi 5- MYK Raporunun görüşülmesi 6- Dilek ve Öneriler CHP PARTİ MECLİSİNE SUNULAN MYK RAPORU (7 Haziran 2012) İÇİNDEKİLER MYK RAPOR ÖZETİ ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 GENEL BAŞKANIN KATILDIĞI PROGRAMLAR .................................................................................................... 7 SEÇİM VE HUKUK İŞLERİ FAALİYET RAPORU .................................................................................................. 31 YEREL YÖNETİMLER FAALİYET RAPORU .......................................................................................................... 33 İŞÇİ MEMUR SENDİKALARI, EMEKLİLER VE EMEK BÜROLARIYLA SENDİKALARI, MESLEK İŞVEREN KURULUŞLARI VE DİĞER SİVİL TOPLUM KURULUŞLARI FAALİYET RAPORU ................... 43
    [Show full text]
  • Who Wants a Coup? a List Experiment in Turkey
    Who Wants a Coup? A List Experiment in Turkey Sharan Grewal∗ October 3, 2018 Abstract The failed coup in Turkey in 2016 highlighted the importance of public support for a military takeover. Why do some coups enjoy public support while others do not? This paper presents a new theory for when the opposition will support a coup, hypothesizing that they should oppose a coup if they believe that: (1) they can win in elections, (2) the military will not appoint the opposition to power, or (3) a coup will increase sympathy for the ruling party. This paper then tests this theory through an original list experiment of 820 Turkish citizens gauging their support for the 2016 coup attempt. Results suggest that Turkish citizens may have opposed the coup as a result of these strategic, political considerations about the best pathways to power. ∗Postdoctoral fellow at Brookings ([email protected]). Survey approved through Princeton IRB #7855. I thank Kim Guiler and Matthew Cebul for jointly fielding the survey in Turkey and for helpful feedback. I also thank Holger Albrecht, Risa Brooks, Erica de Bruin, Ekrem Karako¸c,Kemal Kiri¸sci and participants at the 2018 APSA conference for useful questions and comments. 1 Introduction On July 15, 2016, Turkish troops descended upon strategic locations in Istanbul and Ankara in an attempt to stage a coup. The coup-plotters, self-styled the Peace at Home Council, had hoped to continue a trend of the military ousting polarizing presidents who in their mind had violated core tenets of secularism and democracy, as in 1960, 1971, 1980, and 1997.
    [Show full text]
  • Turkish Foreign Policy and the Kurdistan Regional Government
    Turkish Foreign Policy and the Kurdistan Regional Government Marianna CHAROUNTAKI* Abstract Introduction This paper examines the Kurdistan Region’s This paper analyses Turkish foreign increasing significance for regional politics, including its role in Turkish foreign policy. It policy towards the Kurdistan Regional also discusses Turkey’s foreign policy towards the Government (KRG) and examines Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) since the overall importance of the Kurds of its creation and describes the stages the relations Iraq since the establishment of the first Ankara and Erbil have undergone since the 1991 Gulf War. Four different phases of Turkey’s Kurdish de facto state entity in May 1992 foreign policy practice towards the KRG are in the aftermath of the Second Gulf War pinpointed in this paper. Conclusions are also in 1991.1 A couple of decades earlier, drawn concerning the KRG’s increasing role no one could ever have imagined that in a possible transformed post-Assad political setting and what this means for the regional we would be discussing Turkish foreign balance of power, especially if the Kurds of policy towards the Kurdistan Region or Syria succeed in achieving autonomy. Finally, even a change in favour of the KRG, the study’s theoretical implications are also let alone the current transformation in highlighted, considering its relevance in current international relations literature. the regional balance of power with the Arab Spring and the Syrian crisis which Key Words is currently in progress. The future and the role of Syria are highly important Turkish foreign policy, KRG, Kurds of as they are key factors in the creation Syria, PKK, Baghdad, Sunni-Shia divide.
    [Show full text]
  • Turkish Criminal Peace Judgeships a Comprehensive Analysis
    TURKISH CRIMINAL PEACE JUDGESHIPS A COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS SEPTEMBER 2018 This page is intentionally left blank. 1 / 51 TURKISH CRIMINAL PEACE JUDGESHIPS Executive Summary __________________________________________________________ 3 Introduction ________________________________________________________________ 6 A. Establishment Process of the Criminal Peace Judgeships in 2014 ____________________ 6 1. The emergence of facts _______________________________________________________ 6 2. First apparent interferences to the Turkish Judiciary ________________________________ 10 B. Establishment of Criminal Peace Judgeships ___________________________________ 11 1. Evidence that Criminal Peace Judgeships do not satisfy the requirements of independence and impartiality, and violate the principle of a natural judge _________________________________ 13 2. Structure and composition of the Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSYK/HSK)__________ 14 3. Formation of the ‘HSYK’ After the Elections of the 13 of October 2014 __________________ 15 4. Composition of the ‘HSK’ After the Constitutional Amendment on 16 April 2017 __________ 20 C. Concrete facts showing that the courts of first and second instance have lost their independence and impartiality _________________________________________________ 21 1. Tribunals and Courts of First Instance, Including Criminal Peace Judgeships ______________ 21 2. Courts of Second Instances (Regional Courts of Justice and Regional Administrative Courts) _ 27 D. Concrete facts proving the lack of independence of the
    [Show full text]
  • M4D Project Media Monitoring R Eport:July-August-September 2020
    1 M4D Project Media Monitoring Report:July-August-September 2020 Media Monitoring Report:July-August-September M4D Project This project is funded by the European Union An Association of Journalists Press House Publication This publication was produced with the financial support of the European Union. Its contents are the sole responsibility of Association of Journalists and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union. Media for Democracy, Democracy for Media Project”, implemented by the Association of Journalists with the financial support of the European Union, has prepared this report through utilizing open sources, scanning developments in the media, documenting violations reported to the project office, and through making use of the content of reports written by the Association of Journalists- “Press for Freedom Project”. This report may be reproduced partially or in whole by giving reference. Its contents are the sole responsibility of Association of Journalists and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union. Editors: Yusuf Kanlı, Ozan Acar, Özgür Fırat Yumuşak Thanks: We would like to thank our team-mates for their dedication and hard work in writing this report. We would like to extend our thanks to Igor Chelov, Yıldız Yazıcıoğlu and the Association of Journalists- “Press for Freedom Project” team for their research and contributions, Arife Acıyan for her graph work, Okan Özmen for his data analysis and visualization work, Ozan Acar for translating the report into English, Lawyer Tuncay Alemdaroğlu and Prof. Korkmaz Alemdar for their guidance, and Chairman of the Association of Journalists Nazmi Bilgin for his support in making all of this possible.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dynamics of the Queer Movement in Turkey Before and During The
    Working Paper Research Group EU/Europe Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik German Institute for International and Security Affairs Zülfukar Çetin The Dynamics of the Queer Movement in Turkey before and during the Conservative AKP Government Working Paper , Research Group EU/Europe 2016/01, January 2016 SWP Berlin SWP Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik German Institute for International and Security Affairs Ludwigkirchplatz 3−4 10719 Berlin Telefon +49 30 880 07-0 Fax +49 30 880 07-100 www.swp-berlin.org [email protected] SWP Working Papers do not undergo any formal peer review process. Translated by Daniel Hendrickson. Dr Zülfukar Çetin was IPC-Mercator Fellow at SWP from 2014 to 2015. The IPC-Stiftung Mercator Fellowship Program at SWP is supported by Stiftung Mercator. Table of contents Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 5 1. The History of the Queer Movement…………………………………………………. 6 1.1. The 1970s ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 7 1.2. The 1980s ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 8 1.3. The 1990s ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 11 1.4. The 2000s ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 12 1.5. Post-Gezi ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 15 2. Demands of the Queer Movement …………………………………………………….. 16 2.1. Reforming the Criminal Code, Articles 3 and 122 …………………………… 16 2.2. Equal Treatment Requirement in Article 5 of the Labour Law ……….. 17 2.3. Discrimination in the Civil Code of November 22, 2001, in the version from May 15, 2014, Article 40 ……………………………………. 19 2.4. Discrimination by the Military Conscription Law ……………………………. 19 2.5. The Specific Demand “Equality before the Law”: Changes to Article 10 of the Constitution …………………………………………. 20 2.6. Demands with regard to due process ………………………………………………… 24 2.7. Demands with regard to the political system …………………………………… 24 3.
    [Show full text]