DOCSLIB.ORG

Making of a New Constitution in Turkey Monitoring Report: the Basic Principles and the Choice of Government [4] System in the New Constitution October 2013

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Making of a New Constitution in Turkey Monitoring Report: the Basic Principles and the Choice of Government [4] System in the New Constitution October 2013 TESEV DEMOCRATIZATION PROGRAM Making of a New Constitution in Turkey Monitoring Report: The Basic Principles and the Choice of Government [4] System in the New Constitution October 2013 Author: Levent Köker The monitoring reports on the new constitutional process aims to monitor and record efforts towards a new TESEV constitution by the Constitutional Reconciliation Commission within the Turkish Grand National Assembly Bankalar Cad. that began in October 2011. This report is the fourth among a series of monitoring reports in which the Minerva Han, No: 2 Kat: 3 respective roles, contributions and performances of the Parliament, political parties, non-governmental 34420 Karaköy İstanbul T +90 212 292 89 03 organizations and the media are monitored, evaluated and recorded. Previous reports that make up this F +90 212 292 90 46 series, intended as a guideline and means for solution-oriented intervention at such times when the process www.tesev.org.tr may be blocked, may be obtained at www.tesev.org.tr and www.turkeyconstitutionwatch.org. Copyright © November 2013 All rights of this publication are reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced electronically or mechanically (photocopy, storage of the records or information, etc.) without the permission of Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (Türkiye Ekonomik ve Sosyal Etüdler Vakfı - TESEV). The views expressed in this report may not coincide partly or completely with TESEV’s institutional views. TESEV Democratization Program would like to thank the Swedish International Development Agency (Sida) and TESEV High Advisory Board for their contributions to the preparation and promotion of this report. ISBN: 978-605-5332-51-8 Printed by: İmak Ofset Basım Yayın San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti. Translated by: Salih Selçuk Özgün Atatürk Cad. Göl Sok. No: 1 Yenibosna Bahçelievler/İSTANBUL-TÜRKİYE Prepared for publication by: Sezen Ünlüönen Tel: 0212 656 49 97 Copies: 300 www.turkeyconstitutionwatch.org Contents FOREWORD, 2 INTRODUCTION, 4 I. THE BASIC PRINCIPLES AND RULES THAT SHOULD BE PART OF THE NEW CONSTITUTIONAL ORDER, 5 A. The Philosophy of State, Society and Politics, 5 B. Basic Rights and Liberties, 6 C. The Basic Organization of the State: Local Autonomy and the Independence and Impartiality of the Judiciary, 9 II. THE PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM OPTION, 11 A. The Parliamentary System through the English Example, 11 B. The Evaluation of Other World Examples, 12 C. An Evaluation from the Perspective of Turkey, 13 D. The Proposals for a Parliamentary System in the New Constitution, 14 III. THE PRESIDENTIAL SYSTEM IN THE NEW CONSTITUTION, 17 A. The Presidential System as a Conceptual Type through the USA Example, 17 B. The Evaluation of Other World Examples, 18 C. The Presidential System in Turkey’s Search for a Government System: An Evaluation, 19 IV. THE SEMI-PRESIDENTIAL SYSTEM OR “A PARTY-AFFILIATED PRESIDENT,” 22 CONCLUSION, 23 1 Foreword Özge Genç, TESEV Democratization Program It has been two years since the work began to write a new constitution under the roof of the Turkish Grand National Assembly (TBMM). Currently, we see that the four political parties which make up the Constitutional Reconciliation Commission have not reached an agreement in many areas that would render the constitution new, and that they continue to have political-ideological divides between them that are hard to overcome. One of the controversial issues is the government system, which closely concerns not only the executive body, central-local administrative relations, justice in representation and the judiciary, but also basic rights and liberties. As we have previously stated in the third monitoring report, which was released as part of our “Constitutional Monitoring” study, the proposals of the political parties regarding new legislation on the government system are not the type of remedies that can help solve systemic problems. The presidential system as offered by AK Party, which is based on the vision of an efficient state apparatus that can operate with an increased pace, responds only to the party’s own needs. CHP and MHP fail to suggest a democratic, pluralist and individual-based system that will improve the parliamentary system by eliminating problems in representation, and thus, fail to provide a solution to the troubled parliamentary experiences of the past and the present. The current positions of the political parties on the matter do not allow for an effective debate to take place concerning the government system. Unless a new constitution is written, however, we will have to face the problem of a popularly elected presidential office that has authority but lacks responsibility along with new problems in representation. The present report is the fourth of a series of monitoring reports in which the TESEV Democratization Program follows and analyzes the process of constitution making, and it addresses the selection of a government system in the new constitution. It aims to offer a substantial basis for the public debates on the government system which accompany the process of constitution making, and to provide a reference point for such debates. The report, which was written by Levent Köker, intends to assess the presidential and parliamentary systems proposed by the political parties, establish their strengths and shortcomings, and deal with the current problems of the political system in order to answer the question of what kind of a system is needed. Drawing on several world examples, Köker searches for answers to the questions of “if a choice is to be made between the parliamentary and the presidential system, which will be acceptable according to which criteria?” and “what is an ideal parliamentary or presidential system?” In the final section of the report, he touches upon options like the semi-presidential 2 system and a party-affiliated president, which are sometimes mentioned in the debates on the issue. One important point repeatedly emphasized by the report is the existence of sine qua non principles which a system needs to be based on in order to be considered democratic, regardless of the form of government. Köker sums up these principles under the headings of the philosophy of state, society and politics; rights and liberties; and local autonomy and the independence and impartiality of the judiciary. As indicated by Köker, the tradition of parliamentary government has historically been overwhelmed by a strict authoritarian bureaucratic tutelage in Turkey. In this regard, while the parliamentary system may be a preferable form of government given Turkey’s experience with democracy, it is clear that this is not an ideal system, either, if it is not subject to a consistent set of principles. On the other hand, Turkey lacks the kind of political culture and the kind of public administration tradition required for an ideal presidential system. The notion that there is a positive correlation between stable government and the presidential system stands in contradiction with the principle that a constitutional state mechanism requires the separation of powers, which is the fundamental raison d’être of the presidential system. Therefore, it is not possible to regard the proposals of the political parties as liberal suggestions with the capacity to solve the most basic problems that have led to Turkey’s need for a new constitution. Considering the inadequacy of the current debate in solving Turkey’s democratization problems, it will not be wrong to argue that the debate on the government system is likely to emerge again and again. Thus, it is necessary to, first, discuss what the sine qua non principles for the new constitution and the new political system should be, and then turn to a discussion of systems when an agreement is reached on those principles. No system is permanent, and what is important is that the debate on what kind of a system will be adopted should be undertaken in an informed and participatory manner. Consequently, we hope that the fourth monitoring report prepared as part of the TESEV Democratization Program’s “Constitutional Monitoring” study will offer a foundation for the debate on the government system and lead to the creation of a platform for debate that is prudent and not solely reactionary. We would like to thank Seyfettin Gürsel and Oktay Uygun for bringing valuable contributions to the first draft of the report with their observations and assessments; Bekir Ağırdır, Şahin Alpay, Meral Danış Beştaş, Ferhat Kentel, Yusuf Tekin and Serap Yazıcı for attending the round table meeting organized preceding the preparation of the report, and Abbas Kılıç for preparing the preliminary report for that meeting. [*] [*] The views expressed in this report belong to the author and may not coincide partly or completely with 3 those of the contributors. Introduction Turkey has nearly reached, albeit slowly, a crossroads in the process of making a new constitution. This crossroads probably will become even clearer in the fall months, when we expect to witness the process of solving the Kurdish issue, called the peace and solution process, gain speed. It seems that if the building of an entirely new constitutional order fails, a partial constitutional amendment will emerge as an inevitable alternative. One of the major reasons for this stems from the defects of the established constitutional order, which comprise the main source of the government system debate ignited by AK Party’s proposal for a presidential system. Foremost among them is that the constitution of 1982, which appears to adopt a parliamentary system, has, in violation of that system choice, created a presidential office that carries too much authority. Thus, since it has created such an “authorized but irresponsible” presidential office, the current system is already defected. Unless any changes are made, this defect is likely to lead to new conflicts and crises from 2014 onwards, when the president will start being popularly elected. Therefore, the system needs to be rebuilt within a framework of logical coherence and legal suitability that takes into account the relationship between authority and responsibility.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Constitution for the Ottoman Empire
    COULD AND SHOULD AMERICA HAVE MADE AN OTTOMAN REPUBLIC IN 1919? PAUL D. CARRINGTON * Generations of American school children have memorized the words of Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence. Its evangelical spirit was echoed in Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address and scores of other presidential addresses. Partly on that account, numerous Americans, perhaps especially American lawyers, have since the 1780s presumed to tell other peoples how to govern themselves. In 2006, that persistent impulse was echoed once again in an address to the American Bar Association by a Justice of the United States Supreme Court. 1 The purpose of this Essay is to question the wisdom of this evangelical ambition. Sometimes cited as examples of successful political evangelism are the constitution of Japan and the Basic Law of Germany. 2 Both of those constitutions were for numerous reasons congenial to the existing local cultures and traditions. 3 The 2003 invasion of Iraq was in important respects a product of the notion that orderly democratic government can be imposed almost anywhere, an idea that seems to have had special appeal to the * Professor of Law, Duke University. This Essay draws passages from my book, SPREADING AMERICA ’S WORD : STORIES OF ITS LAWYER -M ISSIONARIES (2005). Kristin Seeger has provided very valuable assistance in assembling it. Portions of this Essay were published previously in Paul D. Carrington, Mandatory Constitutions , 1 BUCERIUS L.J. 31, 31-38 (2007), and are reprinted herein with grateful acknowledgment. 1. For a video of Justice Kennedy’s keynote address to the ABA, see Justice Kennedy Declares World Jury Still Out on Meaning of Freedom (Aug.
    [Show full text]
  • Turkish Parliamentary Experience Review of the Parliamentary
    ISSN: 2667-4432 Journal of Universal History Studies (JUHIS)• 2(2 ) • December • 2019 • pp. 239 – 250 Turkish Parliamentary Experience Review of the Parliamentary Experience of Turkey from Ottoman to Republic Periods1 Saltanat Kydyralieva2 Istanbul University, Institute of Social Sciences PhD Alumna Received- Accepted: 23.09.2019- 02.12.2019 Research Article Abstract Turkish parliamentary tradition with a history of 140 years, no doubt is a result of challenging periods which roots extending to the history of the Ottoman Empire. Tanzimat reforms as well as Constitutional Monarchy periods (known as I. and II. Meşrutiyet) crowned with the National Liberation Movement initiated the new political regime in Turkey and formed a parliamentary institution that call now the Turkish parliament or the Grand National Assembly of Turkey. The analysis of the historical evolution of the Turkish parliamentary experience along with its parliamentary functions and activities will provide us valuable information on politics and socio-historical development of the Turkish state. Certainly, the unique characteristics of Turkish society and Turkish history, as well as parliamentary transformations at the global level along with political developments affecting the parliamentary tradition makes a Turkish parliamentary experience noteworthy to be analyzed. Social structure, bureaucracy and traditions of every society or political entity define the role of a parliament in the certain political system. The social and political structure gives important information on the organization and behaviour of the parliament as well as parliamentary functions provide first-hand data on features and characteristics of the society reciprocally. This study is a brief historical account of the Turkish parliament as a representative institution.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rise of President Erdogan and the End of Kemalist Turkey
    History in the Making Volume 11 Article 5 January 2018 Unconditional Surrender: The Rise of President Erdogan and the end of Kemalist Turkey Amelia Sullivan CSUSB Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/history-in-the-making Part of the Islamic World and Near East History Commons, and the Political History Commons Recommended Citation Sullivan, Amelia (2018) "Unconditional Surrender: The Rise of President Erdogan and the end of Kemalist Turkey," History in the Making: Vol. 11 , Article 5. Available at: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/history-in-the-making/vol11/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the History at CSUSB ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in History in the Making by an authorized editor of CSUSB ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Articles Unconditional Surrender: The Rise of President Erdogan and the end of Kemalist Turkey By Amelia Sullivan Abstract: In October 1923, Mustafa Kemal, or Ataturk, became leader of Turkey. Over the next decade and a half, Kemal used his considerable political power to reform the nation. He modernized infrastructure, reorganized government, and led an aggressive campaign to westernize and secularize Turkish society. By the time Kemal passed in 1938, Turkey rose from the ashes of the Ottoman Empire and reestablished itself as a democracy. Almost eighty years later, Ataturk’s legacy is in jeopardy. In 2017, the Turkey held a constitutional referendum to radically restructure the nation’s government and place an unprecedented degree of power in the office of the presidency.
    [Show full text]
  • The Changing Nature of the Turkish State Authority for Religious Affairs (ARA) and Turkish Islam in Europe Günter Seufert
    Working Paper SWP Working Papers are online publications within the purview of the respective Research Division. Unlike SWP Research Papers and SWP Comments they are not reviewed by the Institute. CENTRE FOR APPLIED TURKEY STUDIES (CATS) | WP NR. 02, JUNE 2020 The changing nature of the Turkish State Authority for Religious Affairs (ARA) and Turkish Islam in Europe Günter Seufert Contents Introduction 4 The umbrella organizations of the Turkish Authority for Religious Affairs in Europe 6 From "partner in integration" to "tool of a foreign power” 7 Definition of terms 9 Historical outline 11 The Authority for Religious Affairs as a product of Turkish secularization: the gradual exclusion of religious discourses and norms from administration and politics 11 The Authority for Religious Affairs as a bone of contention between secular and religious forces 14 Muslim policies beyond traditionalism and Islamism 17 The Authority for Religious Affairs between theological autonomy and political instrumentalization 21 The independence of the Diyanet as a step towards the rehabilitation and empowerment of the Islamic religion in society (and politics?) 21 The independence of the Diyanet as a step towards strengthening the civil character of religion and effectively dealing with worrying currents within national and international Islam 23 The intensified role of the Diyanet in the context of Turkish foreign policy 24 The Diyanet's attitude to subject areas 26 The comments of Diyanet on Fethullah Gülen 26 The Diyanet's Statement on the Ideology of the
    [Show full text]
  • Greco Eval III Rep 2009 5E Final Turkey PF PUBLIC
    DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND LEGAL AFFAIRS DIRECTORATE OF MONITORING Strasbourg, 26 March 2010 Public Greco Eval III Rep (2009) 5E Theme II Third Evaluation Round Evaluation Report on Turkey on Transparency of Party Funding (Theme II) Adopted by GRECO at its 46 th Plenary Meeting (Strasbourg, 22-26 March 2010) Secrétariat du GRECO GRECO Secretariat www.coe.int/greco Conseil de l’Europe Council of Europe F-67075 Strasbourg Cedex +33 3 88 41 20 00 Fax +33 3 88 41 39 55 I. INTRODUCTION 1. Turkey joined GRECO in 2004. GRECO adopted the Joint First and Second Round Evaluation Report (Greco Eval I Rep (2005) 3E) in respect of Turkey at its 27 th Plenary Meeting (10 March 2006). The aforementioned Evaluation Report, as well as its corresponding Compliance Report, are available on GRECO’s homepage ( http://www.coe.int/greco ). 2. GRECO’s current Third Evaluation Round (launched on 1 January 2007) deals with the following themes: - Theme I – Incriminations: Articles 1a and 1b, 2-12, 15-17, 19 paragraph 1 of the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (ETS 173), Articles 1-6 of its Additional Protocol (ETS 191) and Guiding Principle 2 (criminalisation of corruption). - Theme II – Transparency of party funding: Articles 8, 11, 12, 13b, 14 and 16 of Recommendation Rec(2003)4 on Common Rules against Corruption in the Funding of Political Parties and Electoral Campaigns, and - more generally - Guiding Principle 15 (financing of political parties and election campaigns) . 3. The GRECO Evaluation Team for Theme II (hereafter referred to as
    [Show full text]
  • Latest Developments Regarding Human Rights in Turkey
    PERCEPTIONS JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS December 1998 - February 1999 Volume III - Number 4 LATEST DEVELOPMENTS REGARDING HUMAN RIGHTS IN TURKEY MESUT ŞENOL Mesut Şenol is an Advisor at the Prime Minister’s Office, responsible for Human Rights "Every individual has the rights and freedoms to think what he wants, to believe what he wants, to possess a political opinion that is unique to himself, and to undertake or not undertake the requirements of the religion he has chosen. No one’s ideas or conscience can be dominated." ATATÜRK, The Founder ofthe Republic of Turkey (1925) INTRODUCTION It is appropriate to evaluate Turkey’s human rights record on the 75th, anniversary of the Republic of Turkey. An evaluation will shed light on Turkey’s achievements in this field. What does human rights mean to us with regard to living in a modern state? The evolution of human rights has made the individual the focus of contemporary liberties and rights as opposed to the absolute power of the state. In general, in countries in which democracy and universal rights are accorded respect, one finds a genuine possibility to further real democratic values and practices in the everyday life of the individual. The concept of human rights encompasses the basic rights and freedoms to which all human beings are entitled irrespective of their race, creed, religion, gender, ethnicity, language, national origin and age. Human rights have evolved to this day as the natural right of an individual in which he enjoys equal rights before the law. This definition of human rights is applied universally and thus the principles of human rights have become an effective measure of the democratic level of a society.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    Journal of Liberty and International Affairs | Vol. 7, No. 2, 2021 | eISSN 1857-9760 Published online by the Institute for Research and European Studies at www.e-jlia.com Copyright © 2021 The Author/s This work is licensed under a CC-BY 3.0 License Peer review method: Double-Blind Accepted: May 18, 2021 Published: June 18, 2021 Original scientific article DOI: https://www.doi.org/10.47305/JLIA21720043p LEGITIMISATION OF AUTOCRACY IN TURKEY AND RUSSIA THROUGH THE REVIEW OF THE CONSTITUTION Etleva Paplekaj The University of Prishtina “Hasan Prishtina” - Prishtina, Kosovo ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7158-8628 [email protected] Abstract: The review of the constitution emanates from the constitution, from the institute of constitutional review of which the latter is closely related to the dynamic processes in society as well as with the demand for sustainable stability, stability which very well it may be economic, political or social, national or international, the stability that affects even the constitutional order itself in a state. In this article, we will address the constitutional changes, the amendments over the years In Turkey and Russia which are 'proof' of the violation of the constitutional order, 'proof' of the impinging of democracy and stability in the country. Through this article, we will see that the constitutional system, rule of law, democracy or its consolidation, the stability in the country to a large extent are influenced by the way it is conducted the constitutional review process. The application or non- application of this instrument has multi-dimensional effects, negative, destabilizing ones.
    [Show full text]
  • Turkey's Constitution of 1982 with Amendments Through 2011
    PDF generated: 26 Aug 2021, 16:52 constituteproject.org Turkey's Constitution of 1982 with Amendments through 2011 This complete constitution has been generated from excerpts of texts from the repository of the Comparative Constitutions Project, and distributed on constituteproject.org. constituteproject.org PDF generated: 26 Aug 2021, 16:52 Table of contents Preamble . 9 PART ONE: General Principles . 9 I. Form of the State . 9 II. Characteristics of the Republic . 10 III. Integrity, official language, flag, national anthem, and capital of the State . 10 IV. Irrevocable provisions . 10 V. Fundamental aims and duties of the State . 10 VI. Sovereignty . 10 VII. Legislative power . 11 VIII. Executive power and function . 11 IX. Judicial power . 11 X. Equality before the law . 11 XI. Supremacy and binding force of the Constitution . 12 PART TWO: Fundamental Rights and Duties . 12 CHAPTER ONE: General Provisions . 12 I. Nature of fundamental rights and freedoms . 12 II. Restriction of fundamental rights and freedoms . 12 III. Prohibition of abuse of fundamental rights and freedoms . 12 IV. Suspension of the exercise of fundamental rights and freedoms . 13 V. Status of aliens . 13 CHAPTER TWO: Rights and Duties of the Individual . 13 I. Personal inviolability, corporeal and spiritual existence of the individual . 13 II. Prohibition of forced labour . 14 III. Personal liberty and security . 14 IV. Privacy and protection of private life . 15 A. Privacy of private life . 15 B. Inviolability of the domicile . 15 C. Freedom of communication . 16 V. Freedom of residence and movement . 16 VI. Freedom of religion and conscience . 16 VII. Freedom of thought and opinion .
    [Show full text]
  • The Rule of Law and Human Rights in Turkey
    Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Turkey A Scoping Report British Institute of International and Comparative Law December 2015 Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Turkey – A Scoping Report Executive Summary This Scoping Report on Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Turkey has been produced by the British Institute of International and Comparative Law (BIICL), the foremost independent research and discussion body in the United Kingdom. BIICL is unaffiliated to any university, and is one of the leading such bodies in the world. It undertakes high quality research, publications, events and training on issues of international and comparative law around the globe. The content of this Scoping Report covers the current human rights and rule of law situation in Turkey. It first sets the scene by providing a contextual background, which includes some of the major constitutional and political developments since the establishment of the republic. Key domestic facts are also part of this introductory section of the Report, including demographic information, education and literacy, economy, minority groups, domestic security and foreign relations. It also entails some information regarding what is known as the Hizmet (or Cemaat) movement. The second section of the report focuses on the government structure. It presents the executive power with the role of the President and the Council of Ministers before discussing their relationship with the military. The legislature and the current position of the ruling political party are then explained. This section ends with a presentation of the judiciary, including its structure and key institutions, the way judges are appointed, as well as judicial remedies and judicial review.
    [Show full text]
  • 14 September 2020 Excellency, I Have the Honour to Address You in My
    PALAIS DES NATIONS • 1211 GENEVA 10, SWITZERLAND Mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers REFERENCE: OL TUR 15/2020 14 September 2020 Excellency, I have the honour to address you in my capacity as Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, pursuant to Human Rights Council resolution 35/11. I would like to bring to the attention of your Excellency’s Government information I have received concerning the adverse impact that the amendments to article 159 of the Constitution, introduced by Act No. 6771, have on the independence of the judiciary and the separation of powers. I already expressed concerns in relation to the composition and functioning of the Council of Judges and Prosecutors (hereinafter, “the Council” or “CJP”) in OL TUR 5/2017, which focused on the dismissal, arrest and detention of judges, prosecutors and lawyers following the failed coup d’état of July 2016. I thank once again your Excellency’s Government for its reply to this communication, and in particular for the information provided in relation to the Council. However, I continue to remain extremely concerned at the adverse effects that the reform of the CJP have had, and continues to have, on the independence of the judiciary and the separation of powers. * * * Act No. 6771 of 11 February 2017 introduces various amendments to the Constitution of Turkey.1 Its 18 articles modified almost 50 constitutional provisions and repealed 21 other provisions, with the effect of “changing the Turkish polity to what the Turkish authorities have described as a ‘Turkish-style’ Presidential system”.2 In particular, article 14 of the law modifies the composition and functions of the High Council of Judges and Prosecutors, now renamed ‘Council of Judges and Prosecutors’, which has general responsibilities with regard to the organisation and functioning of the judiciary and the prosecution service and all aspects of the career of judges and prosecutors (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • ETD MCGRATH FINAL2.Pdf
    DYNAMICS OF CONSTITUTIONALISM BETWEEN DEMOCRACY AND AUTHORITARIANISM AS A COMPLEX ADAPTIVE SYSTEM by Erin C. McGrath BBA, University of Wisconsin—Madison, 2000 MPP, Central European University, 2005 Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Pittsburgh 2015 i UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS This dissertation was presented by Erin C. McGrath It was defended on August 3, 2015 and approved by Naim Kapucu, Professor, University of Central Florida Müge Kökten-Finkel, Assistant Professor, GSPIA Paul J. Nelson, Associate Professor, GSPIA Dissertation Advisor: Louise K. Comfort, Professor, GSPIA ii DYNAMICS OF CONSTITUTIONALISM BETWEEN DEMOCRACY AND AUTHORITARIANISM AS A COMPLEX ADAPTIVE SYSTEM Erin C. McGrath, PhD University of Pittsburgh, 2015 Copyright © by Erin C. McGrath 2015 iii ABSTRACT International democratization of authoritarian states has created a complex political dynamic pitting the goal of democratic diffusion against the objective of maintaining dictatorial power. By enacting legal reforms while episodically upholding rights or freedoms, amid repression, semi- authoritarian regimes generate diverse political grievances for obtaining constitutional rights and observations of those rights. Semi-authoritarian regimes have developed new tactics of manipulation of information exchange to address these grievances. This dissertation argues that to model semi-authoritarian constitutionalism, scholars must tackle complex multi-level interactions of aggrieved sub-national and state actors under influences of democratization. This dissertation develops a theory, and testable hypotheses, of semi-authoritarian resilience modeled as a complex adaptive system of systems (CASoS). This approach emphasizes concepts such as initial conditions, system structure, information exchange, and emergent phenomena.
    [Show full text]
  • The Minority Languages Dilemmas in Turkey: a Critical Approach to an Emerging Literature
    Journal of Educational Issues ISSN 2377-2263 2018, Vol. 4, No. 1 The Minority Languages Dilemmas in Turkey: A Critical Approach to an Emerging Literature Burhan Ozfidan (Corresponding author) Department of Teaching, Learning and Culture Texas A&M University, TX, USA E-mail: [email protected] Lynn M. Burlbaw Department of Teaching, Learning and Culture Texas A&M University, TX, USA E-mail: [email protected] Hasan Aydin Department of Curriculum, Instruction and Culture Florida Gulf Coast University, FL, USA E-mail: [email protected] Received: July 3, 2016 Accepted: August 24, 2017 Published: January 6, 2018 doi:10.5296/jei.v4i1.11498 URL: https://doi.org/10.5296/jei.v4i1.11498 1 www.macrothink.org/jei Journal of Educational Issues ISSN 2377-2263 2018, Vol. 4, No. 1 Abstract Turkey comprises many ethnic groups other than Turks including, but not limited to, Armenians, Assyrians, Alevi, Arabs, Circassians, Greeks, Kurds, Laz, and Zaza. These groups are ethnically different from Turks and were incorporated into the Ottoman Empire’s eastern provinces with de facto autonomy. The main objective of this study is to illustrate the need for a language curriculum and identify the obstacles that minority groups encountered in Turkey. This study examines three large communities: Arabs, Kurds, and Laz. The results indicate that minority people in Turkey who had poor Turkish language education were unable to learn their mother tongue within the formal educational settings from the foundation of the republic until 2012. Some of the ethnic groups’ languages, such as Laz, Kurdish, and Arabic, were started at schools as elective courses, but few, if any, textbooks written in these languages exist.
    [Show full text]