DOCSLIB.ORG

Local Elections in Turkey

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Local Elections in Turkey THE MARCH 31 LOCAL ELECTIONS IN TURKEY NEBI MIŞ • HAZAL DURAN ANALYSIS MARCH 2019 NO.50 THE MARCH 31 LOCAL ELECTIONS IN TURKEY NEBI MIŞ • HAZAL DURAN COPYRIGHT © 2019 by SETA All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical or other means, without permission in writing from the publishers. SETA Yayınları ISBN: 978-605-7544-37-7 Layout: Hasan Suat Olgun Printed in Turkey, İstanbul by Turkuvaz Haberleşme ve Yayıncılık A.Ş., 2019 SETA | SİYASET, EKONOMİ VE TOPLUM ARAŞTIRMALARI VAKFI Nenehatun Cd. No: 66 GOP Çankaya 06700 Ankara TÜRKİYE Tel: +90 312 551 21 00 | Faks: +90 312 551 21 90 www.setav.org | [email protected] | @setavakfi SETA | İstanbul Defterdar Mh. Savaklar Cd. Ayvansaray Kavşağı No: 41-43 Eyüpsultan İstanbul TÜRKİYE Tel: +90 212 395 11 00 | Faks: +90 212 395 11 11 SETA | Washington D.C. 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 1106 Washington D.C., 20036 USA Tel: 202-223-9885 | Faks: 202-223-6099 www.setadc.org | [email protected] | @setadc SETA | Kahire 21 Fahmi Street Bab al Luq Abdeen Flat No: 19 Cairo EGYPT Tel: 00202 279 56866 | 00202 279 56985 | @setakahire SETA | Berlin Französische Straße 12, 10117 Berlin GERMANY Tel: +49 30 20188466 THE MARCH 31 LOCAL ELECTIONS IN TURKEY CONTENTS ABSTRACT 7 INTRODUCTION 8 LEADING DYNAMICS OF THE MARCH 2019 LOCAL ELECTIONS 9 WHAT THE MARCH 2019 ELECTION MEANS TO POLITICAL PARTIES 12 VISIONS FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT: FROM PAST TO PRESENT 15 CONCLUSION 25 setav.org 5 ANALYSIS ABOUT THE AUTHORS Nebi Miş Nebi Miş is the Director of Political Studies at the SETA Foundation. He is also faculty member in the department of Political Sciences and Public Administration, and the Middle East Institute of Sakarya University. Dr. Miş received his BA in International Relations from Sakarya University in 2003, and his MA in 2005. He received his Ph.D. from Sakarya University upon completion of his doctoral thesis titled “Securitization Politics of Turkey: 1923-2003” in 2012. He also worked as a researcher for Katholieke Universiteit Leuven in Belgium for a year during his Ph.D. studies. His research areas include political systems and institutions, democratization, Kurdish issue, Turkish civil-military relations, security politics in Turkey, Islamism and democratization in the Middle East. His articles have been published in various national and international academic journals. Dr. Mis is also the co- editor and co-writer of several books such as “Democracy Watch: Social Perception of 15 July Coup Attempt”, “Turkey’s Presidential System: Model and Practices”, “The AK Party’s Fifteen Years in Politics”. Hazal Duran Hazal Duran graduated from TOBB University of Economics and Technology Departments of International Relations and Turkish Language and Literature (double major) in 2012. She completed her MA in Modern Turkish Studies (MTS) at İstanbul Şehir University. Duran con- tinues her doctoral studiesat Bilkent University, Department of Political Science. She works as a Researcher at SETA Ankara Directorate of Political Studies. 6 setav.org THE MARCH 31 LOCAL ELECTIONS IN TURKEY ABSTRACT The analysis explains the March 2019 local election’s significance to Turkish politics and concentrates on the ways in which the visions of various politi cal parties for local government have changed over the years. On March 31, 2019, Turkey will hold local elections in 30 metropolitan districts, 51 provinces, 922 counties, 32,105 neighborhoods, and 18,306 villages. This lo- cal election will be the fifteenth electoral contest since the Justice and Develop- ment Party (AK Party) came to power 17 years ago. Yet there will be a range of new dynamics at play, as Turkey’s political arena undergoes major changes. The April 2017 constitutional referendum facilitated the country’s transition from the parliamentary system of government to a type of presidentialism known as the “Presidency System of Government.” The country’s political arena has been reshaped under the new system. On June 24, 2018, Turkey held a national election for the first time under presidentialism. Parliamentary and presidential elections took place on the same day and various political parties contested races by forming electoral alliances among themselves. Those alliances made a signifi- cant impact on the election results. A large number of political parties will participate in the March 2019 local election as part of broader electoral alliances. As a matter of fact, those electoral alliances have deepened since last year’s national election, with each alliance endorsing a joint mayoral candidate in many provinces. In some cases, they even jointly nominated a group of candidates for the city council. As such, Turkey will discover for the first time how electoral alliances will influence voter behav- ior in local races. This analysis explains the March 2019 local election’s significance to Turkish politics and concentrates on the ways in which the visions of various politi- cal parties for local government have changed over the years. Accordingly, the analysis primarily discusses the upcoming election’s key dynamics. It proceeds to analyze the March 2019 election’s significance for each major political party’s internal agenda and future projections. Moreover, this analysis offers a detailed account of how each political party’s vision for local government has changed over the years and how their respective visions have been tailored for the 2019 local election campaign. Finally, it identifies a number of issues that will pos- sibly set the post-election political agenda in Turkey. setav.org 7 ANALYSIS (CHP), the Good Party, and the Felicity Party (SP) together on the basis of opposition to the AK Party and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. In the end, President Erdoğan and the AK Party claimed their fourteenth con- secutive victory, including parliamentary and presidential elections, and constitutional refer- endums. Having received 52.59 percent of the popular vote, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan became Turkey’s first president under the new system of government. The People’s Alliance, which the AK Party and the MHP had formed joint- ly, attained parliamentary majority with 53.66 percent. The AK Party claimed 295 parliamen- INTRODUCTION tary seats with 42.56 percent of the vote and The June 2018 presidential and parliamenta- the People’s Alliance, together with the MHP’s ry elections, which took place shortly before 49 parliamentarians, managed to control a to- the 2019 local election, represented a turn- tal of 344 seats.1 ing point in Turkey’s political history for two Turkey’s formal transition to the presiden- reasons. First, those elections were a critical tial system after the June 2018 elections raised threshold for the transformation of the coun- a number of questions about the potential try’s political system since the transition to impact of the new rules and the introduction presidentialism had already been accepted by of electoral alliances in the first local election the April 16, 2017 constitutional referendum. under the new system. In this regard, each po- Moreover, various political parties could form litical party assessed how joining an electoral electoral alliances for the first time under the alliance might help or hurt them. In the end, new rules, which set apart the June 2018 elec- they decided to join forces in what they con- tions from previous electoral contests. sidered key districts. Whereas the AK Party Ahead of the June 2018 elections, Tur- and the MHP jointly endorsed candidates in key’s leading political parties formed two ma- 51 provinces and many counties, the CHP jor alliances. The AK Party and the National- and the Good Party adopted the same strategy ist Movement Party (MHP) formally joined in 50 provinces. The Peoples’ Democratic Par- forces, with the implicit support of the Grand ty (HDP), in turn, supported the CHP-Good Union Party (BBP), to contest the election as Party alliance by not contesting the election in part of the People’s Alliance - whose stated pur- 11 provinces. pose was to protect Turkey’s interests at home 1. For analyses of the June 2018 election results, see Ali Çarkoğlu and abroad with an emphasis on native and and Kerem Yıldırım, “Change and Continuity in Turkey’s June 2018 Elections”, Insight Turkey, Vol: 20, No: 4 (2018); Nebi Miş, “Yeni national values. Its opponent, the Nation Al- Siyasal Sistemin İlk Seçimleri ve Sonuçlarının Karşılaştırmalı Analizi” liance, brought the Republican People’s Party [A Comparative Analysis of the First Election under the New Political System and Its Outcome], Muhafazakar Düşünce, No: 54, (2018). 8 setav.org THE MARCH 31 LOCAL ELECTIONS IN TURKEY TABLE 1. ELECTORAL ALLIANCES AMONG POLITICAL PARTIES BY PROVINCE The People’s Alliance The Nation Alliance HDP Provinces Where the HDP Provinces Where the MHP Will Support the Provinces Where the Good Party Will Will not Contest in Favor of AK Party Support the CHP the Nation Alliance Ağrı, Ankara, Antalya, Ardahan, Artvin, Aydın, Adana, Ankara, Antalya Artvin, Balıkesir, Bilecik, Bitlis, Bolu, Burdur, Bursa, Aydın, Bartın Bilecik, Bolu, Burdur Çanakkale, Denizli, Diyarbakır, Eskişehir, Bursa, Çanakkale, Edirne, Erzincan, Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir, Erzurum, Gaziantep, Giresun, Hakkari, Hatay, Eskişehir, Giresun, Hatay, Istanbul, Adana, Mersin, Hatay, Aydın, Istanbul, Izmir, Kahramanmaraş, Kocaeli, Izmir, Kahramanmaraş, Kastamonu, Antalya, Bursa, Gaziantep, Konya, Malatya, Mardin, Muğla, Muş, Ordu, Kırklareli, Kırşehir, Malatya, Muğla,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Turkey: Background and U.S. Relations
    Turkey: Background and U.S. Relations Updated November 9, 2020 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R41368 SUMMARY R41368 Turkey: Background and U.S. Relations November 9, 2020 U.S.-Turkey tensions have raised questions about the future of bilateral relations and have led to congressional action against Turkey, including informal holds on major new Jim Zanotti arms sales (such as upgrades to F-16 aircraft) and efforts to impose sanctions. Specialist in Middle Nevertheless, both countries’ officials emphasize the importance of continued U.S.- Eastern Affairs Turkey cooperation and Turkey’s membership in NATO. Observers voice concerns about the largely authoritarian rule of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Clayton Thomas Turkey’s polarized electorate could affect Erdogan’s future leadership. His biggest Analyst in Middle Eastern challenge may be structural weaknesses in Turkey’s economy—including a sharp Affairs decline in Turkey’s currency—that have worsened since the Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic began. The following are key factors in the U.S.-Turkey relationship. Turkey’s strategic orientation and U.S./NATO basing. Traditionally, Turkey has relied closely on the United States and NATO for defense cooperation, European countries for trade and investment, and Russia and Iran for energy imports. A number of complicated situations in Turkey’s surrounding region—including those involving Syria, Libya, Nagorno-Karabakh (a region disputed by Armenia and Azerbaijan), and Eastern Mediterranean energy exploration—affect its relationships with the United States and other key actors, as Turkey seeks a more independent role. President Erdogan’s concerns about maintaining his parliamentary coalition with Turkish nationalists may partly explain his actions in some of the situations mentioned above.
    [Show full text]
  • Turkey and the European Union: the Omesd Tic Politics of Negotiating Pre-Accession Kemal Kirisci Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey
    Macalester International Volume 15 Hybrid Geographies in the Eastern Article 10 Mediterranean: Views from the Bosphorus Winter 2005 Turkey and the European Union: The omesD tic Politics of Negotiating Pre-Accession Kemal Kirisci Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/macintl Recommended Citation Kirisci, Kemal (2005) "Turkey and the European Union: The omeD stic Politics of Negotiating Pre-Accession," Macalester International: Vol. 15, Article 10. Available at: http://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/macintl/vol15/iss1/10 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Institute for Global Citizenship at DigitalCommons@Macalester College. It has been accepted for inclusion in Macalester International by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Macalester College. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Turkey and the European Union: The Domestic Politics of Negotiating Pre-Accession Kemal Kirisci I. Introduction In May 2004, ten countries joined the European Union (EU), to be followed by two more countries most probably in 2007. Turkey, together with Croatia, is the next country in line to enter the pre- accession process for membership. Turkey was given candidate status in December 1999 at the Helsinki European Council summit. How- ever, accession negotiations with Turkey will only start if the European Commission concludes that Turkey has indeed met the Copenhagen political criteria and EU member governments make a positive deci- sion at their European Council meeting in December 2004.1 Unlike the case of other candidate countries, the decision “to give or not to give” a negotiating date to Turkey stands as a very great challenge.
    [Show full text]
  • ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed
    APPENDIX A3 POLITICAL PARTIES, ESS9 - 2018 ed. 3.0 Austria 2 Belgium 4 Bulgaria 7 Croatia 8 Cyprus 10 Czechia 12 Denmark 14 Estonia 15 Finland 17 France 19 Germany 20 Hungary 21 Iceland 23 Ireland 25 Italy 26 Latvia 28 Lithuania 31 Montenegro 34 Netherlands 36 Norway 38 Poland 40 Portugal 44 Serbia 47 Slovakia 52 Slovenia 53 Spain 54 Sweden 57 Switzerland 58 United Kingdom 61 Version Notes, ESS9 Appendix A3 POLITICAL PARTIES ESS9 edition 3.0 (published 10.12.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Denmark, Iceland. ESS9 edition 2.0 (published 15.06.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden. Austria 1. Political parties Language used in data file: German Year of last election: 2017 Official party names, English 1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ) - Social Democratic Party of Austria - 26.9 % names/translation, and size in last 2. Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP) - Austrian People's Party - 31.5 % election: 3. Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) - Freedom Party of Austria - 26.0 % 4. Liste Peter Pilz (PILZ) - PILZ - 4.4 % 5. Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (Grüne) - The Greens – The Green Alternative - 3.8 % 6. Kommunistische Partei Österreichs (KPÖ) - Communist Party of Austria - 0.8 % 7. NEOS – Das Neue Österreich und Liberales Forum (NEOS) - NEOS – The New Austria and Liberal Forum - 5.3 % 8. G!LT - Verein zur Förderung der Offenen Demokratie (GILT) - My Vote Counts! - 1.0 % Description of political parties listed 1. The Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs, or SPÖ) is a social above democratic/center-left political party that was founded in 1888 as the Social Democratic Worker's Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei, or SDAP), when Victor Adler managed to unite the various opposing factions.
    [Show full text]
  • Analyzing Party Positions and Electoral Dynamics in Turkey
    International Journal of Political Science & Urban Studies • Uluslararası Siyaset Bilimi ve Kentsel Araştırmalar Dergisi Cilt 7, Sayı 2, Eylül 2019, ISSN 2630-6263, ss. 382-404 • DOI: 10.14782/ipsus.623236 RESEARCH ARTICLE / ARAŞTIRMA MAKALESİ Analyzing Party Positions and Electoral Dynamics in Turkey Türkiye’de Partilerin Konumları ve Seçim Dinamiklerinin Analizi * Arda Can KUMBARACIBAŞI 1 Abstract This article examines the June and November 2015 general elections in Turkey – the final elections before Turkey’s transition into a presidential system – focusing on the political environment leading up to the elections, the coalition deals and potential coalition scenarios between the two elections and the aftermath of the November elections. The analysis is two-fold: first section looks into the background of electoral politics in Turkey and how policy dimensions of parties changed or stabilized over the years, covering the concepts of coalition potential, party adaptability and survival. The second section looks into electoral geography in Turkey, changes in voting patterns, strategic voting and the discrepancies in numbers in 2015. Keywords: Turkish Politics, Elections, Coalitions, Party Positions, Party Politics, AKP. Öz Bu çalışma Türkiye’de başkanlık sistemine geçilmeden önceki son seçimler olan Haziran ve Kasım 2015 genel seçimlerini, seçimler öncesindeki siyasi sürece, iki seçim arasındaki dönemde yapılmış olan koalisyon görüşmelerine, olası koalisyon senaryolarına, ve seçimler sonrasındaki gelişmelere bakarak, incelemektedir. Bu analiz iki bölüme ayrılmaktadır. İlk bölüm Turkiye’de seçimlerin arka planını incelemekte; koalisyon potansiyeli, partilerin adaptasyonu ve partilerin kalıcılığı gibi kavramlar üzerinden, politika alanlarına göre parti konumlarının yıllar içerisinde ne kadar değişip değişmediğini analiz etmektedir. İkinci kısım ise Turkiye’deki seçim coğrafyasını ele alarak 2015’teki oy verme eğilimlerini, stratejik oyları ve seçim sonuçlarındaki uyuşmazlıkları tartışmaktadır.
    [Show full text]
  • Turkey 2020 Human Rights Report
    TURKEY 2020 HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Turkey is a constitutional republic with an executive presidential system and a unicameral 600-seat parliament (the Grand National Assembly). In presidential and parliamentary elections in 2018, Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe observers expressed concern regarding restrictions on media reporting and the campaign environment, including the jailing of a presidential candidate that restricted the ability of opposition candidates to compete on an equal basis and campaign freely. The National Police and Jandarma, under the control of the Ministry of Interior, are responsible for security in urban areas and rural and border areas, respectively. The military has overall responsibility for border control and external security. Civilian authorities maintained effective control over law enforcement officials, but mechanisms to investigate and punish abuse and corruption remained inadequate. Members of the security forces committed some abuses. Under broad antiterror legislation passed in 2018 the government continued to restrict fundamental freedoms and compromised the rule of law. Since the 2016 coup attempt, authorities have dismissed or suspended more than 60,000 police and military personnel and approximately 125,000 civil servants, dismissed one-third of the judiciary, arrested or imprisoned more than 90,000 citizens, and closed more than 1,500 nongovernmental organizations on terrorism-related grounds, primarily for alleged ties to the movement of cleric Fethullah Gulen, whom the government accused of masterminding the coup attempt and designated as the leader of the “Fethullah Terrorist Organization.” Significant human rights issues included: reports of arbitrary killings; suspicious deaths of persons in custody; forced disappearances; torture; arbitrary arrest and continued detention of tens of thousands of persons, including opposition politicians and former members of parliament, lawyers, journalists, human rights activists, and employees of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Diplomacy and Conflict Resolution
    Cultural Diplomacy and Conflict Resolution Introduction In his poem, The Second Coming (1919), William Butler Yeats captured the moment we are now experiencing: Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity. As we see the deterioration of the institutions created and fostered after the Second World War to create a climate in which peace and prosperity could flourish in Europe and beyond, it is important to understand the role played by diplomacy in securing the stability and strengthening the shared values of freedom and democracy that have marked this era for the nations of the world. It is most instructive to read the Inaugural Address of President John F. Kennedy, in which he encouraged Americans not only to do good things for their own country, but to do good things in the world. The creation of the Peace Corps is an example of the kind of spirit that put young American volunteers into some of the poorest nations in an effort to improve the standard of living for people around the globe. We knew we were leaders; we knew that we had many political and economic and social advantages. There was an impetus to share this wealth. Generosity, not greed, was the motivation of that generation. Of course, this did not begin with Kennedy. It was preceded by the Marshall Plan, one of the only times in history that the conqueror decided to rebuild the country of the vanquished foe.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Populism in Europe
    2018 State of Populism in Europe The past few years have seen a surge in the public support of populist, Eurosceptical and radical parties throughout almost the entire European Union. In several countries, their popularity matches or even exceeds the level of public support of the centre-left. Even though the centre-left parties, think tanks and researchers are aware of this challenge, there is still more OF POPULISM IN EUROPE – 2018 STATE that could be done in this fi eld. There is occasional research on individual populist parties in some countries, but there is no regular overview – updated every year – how the popularity of populist parties changes in the EU Member States, where new parties appear and old ones disappear. That is the reason why FEPS and Policy Solutions have launched this series of yearbooks, entitled “State of Populism in Europe”. *** FEPS is the fi rst progressive political foundation established at the European level. Created in 2007 and co-fi nanced by the European Parliament, it aims at establishing an intellectual crossroad between social democracy and the European project. Policy Solutions is a progressive political research institute based in Budapest. Among the pre-eminent areas of its research are the investigation of how the quality of democracy evolves, the analysis of factors driving populism, and election research. Contributors : Tamás BOROS, Maria FREITAS, Gergely LAKI, Ernst STETTER STATE OF POPULISM Tamás BOROS IN EUROPE Maria FREITAS • This book is edited by FEPS with the fi nancial support of the European
    [Show full text]
  • Mehmet Yuksel the Representative to The
    MEHMET YUKSEL THE REPRESENTATIVE TO THE UNITED STATES OFFICE PEOPLE’S DEMOCRATIC PARTY (HDP) IN TURKEY. HOUSE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS, SUBCOMMITTEE ON EUROPE, EURASIA, AND EMERGING THREATS HEARING: “TURKEY’S DEMOCRACY UNDER CHALLENGE” APRIL 5, 2017 Dear Honorable Chairman Dana Rohrabacher and distinguished members of the House Subcommittee, It is an honor for me to testify today on a crucial development in Turkey. I would like to discuss a few major threats to democracy and rule of law in Turkey. The constitutional amendments that are proposed by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the ruling AK Party projects an authoritarian system of governance, whereby absolute power is held by a single person. Even though the proposed constitutional amendments have not been legally accepted, the amendments have been implemented and practiced under the State of Emergency Rule. Let me enlist several indications of this extralegal, single-person rule: Since the failed coup attempt in July 2016, the immunity of 55 out of 59 HDP law makers has been removed. Following this, 11 HDP deputies have been arrested, including the Co-Chair Selahattin Demirtas and Co-Chair Figen Yüksekdag. The freedom of speech that democracy supports and Turkey’s Constitution guarantees is the basic allegation against Co-Chair Demirtas for what he is subjected to over 500 years of detention. Between July 22, 2015, and March, 27 2017, 8,930 HDP members were detained; and 2782 party members have been imprisoned. 494 HDP offices have been attacked; burned or vandalized, including the party headquarters. HDP rallies were attacked and law enforcement’s support for these attacks have been widely documented, even on social media.
    [Show full text]
  • The Place of the Young Turk Revolution in Turkish History
    THE PLACE OF THE YOUNG TURK REVOLUTION IN TURKISH HISTORY. Prof. Dr. sı.. AKŞİN •• i. Introduciioa J'be Turu in History: The Turks of Turkeyarepan of the Tuılcic.pcoples who. back in history. were once concentrated in Central Asia. Central Asia can be roughly described as the region to the north and the north-west nf the China Wall. The China Wall was built to koopthe namadie peoples -ineloding the Tuikic peoples- out of China. The Wall also roughly corresponded to the frontler of feıtile iand wbere agriculture could be practised. In Centtal Asia the tand was generally not suitable for qriculıure. but could sustain the animal hents of the nomads. The fmt "state" of the Turlcicpeoples was the Empiıe of the Hmıs. for which the apprOximate dates 220 BC-216 AD are given. But whether or not this formatian can be considered a state or empire in the proper sense of the word is not clear. because the Hmıs did not use the written word. Probably this fonnatian was a coofederation of tribes. raiher' than a state. The same can probobly he said for the Göktürks (552-745). though at the end of their primacy they hegan to use writing. The third important poIitical formation of the Turkic peoples was the Uygur State (745-940). By the end of the 8th century. two important developments took place among the Turkic peoples. 1) A great number of them hegan to move west, Lo Transoxania and contiguous regions and 2) they began to . adopt Islam. It seems that the proces of Islamization was a rather loog.
    [Show full text]
  • Presidential Elections in Turkey Erdogan’S “New Turkey” and “New Challenges”
    AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR CONTEMPORARY GERMAN STUDIES n THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY AICGSISSUEBRIEF FEBRUARY 2015 Presidential Elections in Turkey Erdogan’s “New Turkey” and “New Challenges” 48BY M. MURAT ERDOGAN What are the implications Turkey’s election on 10 August 2014 was historic. After victories in three general elections of Turkey’s historic 2014 (2002, 2007, 2011), three local elections (2004, 2009, 2014), and two referenda (2007, elections for the future of 2010), Recep Tayyip Erdogan, leader of the Justice and Development Party (AKP), won the the country? country’s first direct presidential election, receiving 51.79 percent of the vote in the first round. After twelve years as prime minister, Erdogan will spend the next five years as the pres- ident of Turkey. Combining the prestige of being elected by popular vote and his political style, How will Erdogan’s Erdogan’s presidency is expected to exceed the symbolic borders of the classical parlia- political style and mentary system and usher in a de facto presidential/semi-presidential system. Thus, the elec- leadership shape the tion was not simply a presidential election but, rather, a selection of the regime that eventually role of the presidency? will have a significant impact on both domestic and foreign policies in Turkey. A direct presidential election is unusual in parliamentary democracies. In Turkey, however, the election is the result of democratic resistance to the political control exercised by the military- civilian bureaucracy established in the 1960s. The natural consequence of this was to control democracy via the state; in other words, the establishment of political tutelage.
    [Show full text]
  • A Survey of Turkish Politics Spring 2018 Türkiye'de Siyasetin
    European Union This project is co-funded by the European Union, Norwegian MFA, and Irish Aid / Bu proje Avrupa Birliği, Norveç Dışişleri Bakanlığı, ve Irlanda Yardım tarafından ortaklaşa finanse edilmektedir A Survey of Turkish Politics Spring 2018 Türkiye’de Siyasetin Topografyası Bahar 2018 Ali Bayramoğlu May/Mayıs 2018 This project is co-funded by the European Union, Norwegian MFA, and Irish Aid / Bu proje Avrupa Birliği, Norveç Dışişleri Bakanlığı, ve Irlanda Yardım tarafından ortaklaşa finanse edilmektedir European Union This project is co-funded by the European Union, Norwegian MFA, and Irish Aid / Bu proje Avrupa Birliği, Norveç Dışişleri Bakanlığı, ve Irlanda Yardım tarafından ortaklaşa finanse edilmektedir A Survey of Turkish Politics Spring 2018 Türkiye’de Siyasetin Topografyası Bahar 2018 Ali Bayramoğlu May/Mayıs 2018 3 Published by / Yayınlayan Democratic Progress Institute – Demokratik Gelişim Enstitüsü 11 Guilford Street London WC1N 1DH www.democraticprogress.org [email protected] + 44 (0) 20 7405 3835 First published / İlk Baskı, 2018 ISBN - 978-1-911205-22-7 © DPI – Democratic Progress Institute / Demokratik Gelişim Enstitüsü DPI – Democratic Progress Institute is a charity registered in England and Wales. Registered Charity No. 1037236. Registered Company No. 2922108 DPI – Demokratik Gelişim Enstitüsü İngiltere ve galler’de kayıtlı bir vakıftır. Vakıf kayıt No. 1037236. Kayıtlı Şirket No. 2922108 This publication is copyright, but may be reproduced by any method without fee or prior permission for teaching purposes, but not for resale. For copying in any other circumstances, prior written permission must be obtained from the publisher, and a fee may be payable. Bu yayının telif hakları saklıdır, eğitim amacıyla telif ödenmeksizin yada önceden izin alınmaksızın çoğaltılabilir ancak yeniden satılamaz.
    [Show full text]
  • DFAT COUNTRY INFORMATION REPORT TURKEY 10 September 2020
    DFAT COUNTRY INFORMATION REPORT TURKEY 10 September 2020 MAP This map is presented for information only. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade accepts no responsibility for errors or omission of any geographic feature. Nomenclature and territorial boundaries may not necessarily reflect Australian government policy. Provided by the Commonwealth of Australia under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia licence. DFAT Country Information Report Turkey SEPTEMBER 2020 2 CONTENTS ACRONYMS 4 GLOSSARY 6 1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE 7 2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 8 Recent History 8 Demography 9 Economic Overview 9 Political System 14 Human Rights Framework 16 Security Situation 18 3. REFUGEE CONVENTION CLAIMS 20 Race/Nationality 20 Religion 22 Political Opinion (Actual or imputed) 27 Groups of Interest 31 4. COMPLEMENTARY PROTECTION CLAIMS 40 Arbitrary Deprivation of Life 40 Death Penalty 41 Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment 41 5. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS 45 State Protection 45 Internal Relocation 49 Treatment of Returnees 49 Documentation 50 DFAT Country Information Report Turkey SEPTEMBER 2020 3 ACRONYMS AKP Justice and Development Party (the ruling conservative political party) AKS Address Registration System BTK Information and Communication Technologies Authority CAT Convention against Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment CEDAW Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women CHP Republican People’s Party (centre-left opposition political party) CMHC Community
    [Show full text]