September 2018 10th Anniversary of small National Assemblies of Turkey

Please wrap up AS WE START Greetings,

We would like to express our happiness in sharing this 10th Year Report of the small Provincial Assemblies of Turkey (sPAT).

The report starts with an evaluation of the period between October 2017 and June 2018 with statistics of the same period. It then continues with the section where we explain different dimensions of the sPAT project.

Differing from our annual reports, we prepared an infographic on our ten-year journey in this report. This was the most practical solution we could find to reveal the start and the current destination of our ten-year journey.

A short introduction for those we’re meeting for the first time… (Even though it’s best to join an sPAT meeting and experience the work in person), let us attempt to imitate the meeting with an enactment for you:

“We bring together representatives of active NGOs, MPs and mayors together around a round table on the first weekend of every month to debate one local and one national/international topic that are priorly determined.

Both the general and the local agenda have to be topics that are on the concerning location’s current agenda as well, and we determine both agendas by receiving feedback from our participants. The Kitchen compiles and summarizes suggestions for the general agenda and prepares a presentation video on the topic that will be debated the most.

The monthly meeting starts with the screening of this presentation video and a short debate on the general agenda. In case a special guest is present in the meeting on the related agenda, there could be an explanation on the topic as well, which never exceeds ten minutes. In this explanation, our special guest has to share the general frame of the topic of debate, not his/her own opinions. And later, of course, the special guest is bound to the rules just like any other participant… NGOs always have the first call. MPs or in case they are absent, political party representatives share their opinions after the civil society.

A chronometer that is projected onto the screen works during the entire meeting with “traffic control” as its duty; planning the speech times and rounds as facilitator. Opinions expressed during the meeting is merged in a summary; the common denominator report obtained from the compilation of summaries arriving from all provinces is announced at the end of every month in the General National Assembly of Turkey (GNAT) with MPs and the press. sPAT meetings are those with strict rules. It is absolutely forbidden to make decisions, applaud, chant slogans or interrupt others’ speeches. The meetings begin exactly at the specified time and after three hours, any participant may leave the meeting even if the meeting continues.”

This enactment describes an ideal sPAT meeting. The technicals are the same for every meeting that is bound to procedural rules. We will not mention the attendance/absence rate specific to NGOs and political parties due to the report’s content; the interest in sPAT meetings will be explained further in the report.

When we started the sPAT project, we couldn’t find any work that is similar to it - neither in Turkey, nor anywhere else in the world. There is still no such quite-similar example! However, debates in the public and civil society with some pilot projects are accelerating in the US, Ireland, the Netherlands and many other democratic countries under the title, “acceleration of democratization in decision-making processes.” We insist that sPATs must be a civil platform that is suitable to Turkey’s subjective conditions while being well-planned and progressing continuously. A significant amount of experience is piled up with the ten-year experience and it continues to grow.

The sPAT doesn’t only have the function to “facilitate the participation of the civil society in decision-making processes and to strengthen the dialogue between politicians and citizens” specific to Turkey; it also makes an effort to “prevent social polarization,” which we think is at least as important as the participation. NGO representatives and political parties, who could never come together under different circumstances due to many reasons, are able to come together and debate national and provincial issues with maturity. Our followers will be able to see where the project could reach with a slight increase in the interest and collaboration of the political world, not to mention how little the costs are. The statistics on the 10th year infographic approve that there is a mutually dependent and harmonious relationship between both Turkey’s interest in democratization and the sPAT as well as the interest of politics and the sPAT.

The issues Turkish politics and society are facing and the capability to resolve them are topics of another debate. However, rationality tells us all that “the correct resolutions that could be produced are possible with discussion.”

We continue to believe that we will have, no matter how little, a contribution to the days when the political world and the civil society will meet in dialogue, consensus and collaboration to resolve issues.

sPAT KITCHEN 2018

October 2017- June 2018 “Openness and transparency” is one of the principles that constitutes the backbone of the sPAT and we defended it for the last ten years. Due to this principle, we paid attention to share every step we took, every progress we achieved with every setback as well with our partners. We have seen that it was also important to announce our period reports, serving as our annual voyage journals, at the end of each period. From this perspective, this report in your hands is “a summary of a long journey” instead of “new words.”

We will evaluate the period between October 2017 and August 2018 for the first time in this report.

The only way for us to explain the change in circumstances is by reminding the reader of the previous circumstances. As we left ten years behind, we would like to share an example of our shortsightedness (!): “If this project goes on for only a year, it’ll be good, it’ll be a success; it’s clear that we will row against the tide.” We could justify this pessimism of ours due to:

1- The traditions and conservatism in Turkish politics...

Both the Electoral Law and the Political Parties Act are controversial today in regards to the democratic criteria. “Charismatic leaders” in political parties are the heads of hierarchical structures within each party. Motivations of our political parties to render decision-making processes “more democratic, more transparent and more active” are way below a level that would allow any focus on civil society or other concerning entities. Our political world still tends to grow “conflicts and differences” instead of “consensus and collaboration.” It was also difficult ten years ago to say that the relationship established by the politics with citizens was leading the way to democratic principles.

2- The organization of the Turkish society and the power of civil society...

The area civil society covers in democratic societies and the power held by the civil society continuously increase in significance. No matter how different societies are, there is a proportion that would justify a generalization between the effective organization of civil society and the quality of democracy. It could very well be a fact that the importance of civil society in Turkey will not significantly change overnight due to reasons that are independent from the society as well. However, we have largely agreeing answers to the question of “how civil” the civil society is in Turkey, even though we most of the time don’t express these answers loudly. Political militancy is revealed the moment one digs deeper into many Turkish NGOs. The benefits of a civil society which reflects the sound of certain political minorities on both politics and the public area must be bravely discussed. Not to mention that NGOs and their volunteers face a significant amount of issues - from legislation to others related to restricted financial resources. 3- Mainstream media vs. local media

It could be seen as if traditional tools of media are losing their importance against the social media and the Internet. Nevertheless, it’s not realistic to claim that social media and the Internet are spread across the entire society. Not to mention, speed is everything on the social media; therefore all efforts have the potential to “evaporate” immediately. Principal actors that could influence the increase in the visibility of systematic and fameless projects like the sPAT are still the “traditional tools of media.” The examination of the Turkish media in regards to the principles of journalism is of course another debate. However, we still do not abstain from expressing that, “In case you don’t have large support from a political party or an investment group, you have very little chance in visibility on the mainstream media.” For appearing there once does not pose a meaning in today’s world, where everything disappears fast from focus. Therefore, the continuity of mainstream media’s interest in civil society projects must be close to the continuity of the work itself. This interest from the mainstream media was quite restricted concerning the sPAT, just like it happens with many other civil society projects. It is evident that we could not steer the interest of the media, broadcasting long “social polarization” discussions when needed, towards “a dialogue platform of people from different parts of society, having different opinions.” It would not be an exaggeration to say that the interest of the local media was the opposite of this. We could work in utmost harmony and understanding with the local media in almost all provinces where the project was ongoing. This contribution can not be ignored in the increase of the visibility of the sPAT. Hereby we are one of those in best appreciation of the value in our local media organizations.

We have pointed out these three decayed trivets for many times. We must also underline that we are a project that tries to survive and build roads on these trivets.

Events after the July 15 failed military coup attempt affected us greatly, just like it did everyone else. We must indicate that the increase in polarisation of the Turkish society was making its presence felt strongly long before the July 15. The only exceptional period - which we could observe - that led to an acceleration in the reverse direction was the short period following the failure of the July 15 military coup attempt. The expectancy of “a clean slate, inclusion, dialogue and collaboration” that could prevail during that time was the common denominator that was expressed the most in the extraordinary meetings we held following July 15.

Unfortunately, the Turkish politics directed once again towards a language and politics that would strengthen social polarization in a short time. No matter how reasonable the causes were, the participation of NGO representatives and opinion leaders in efforts of dialogue was more difficult under the circumstances of the State of Emergency (OHAL). The already restricted interest of politicians in civil society projects lost strength with each passing month.

Therefore, the question of how the sPAT could survive and continue its work is a question that must be answered.

The principal factor that gave the opportunity for this continuity was the NGOs and their representatives protecting the project. A group of our participants from all opinions and social circles “focused on the strengthening of dialogue platforms” independent of their political inclinations; paid effort in participating and strengthening sPAT meetings. They considered it important that no matter if MPs participate in the meetings or not, NGOs came together once a month on a healthy platform.

Another factor allowing the continuity of the sPAT was that even though the political world lacked support in the project, it also did not hinder it. The question we faced the most during the first years of the project was the classical speculatory approach, that basically meant “whose Trojan Horse we were.” We think that the sPAT’s unchanging principles and the application in many provinces with transparency resolved this trust issue to a certain extent. Nevertheless, it is still a must for the sPAT to achieve the support and collaboration of political institutions in order to progress further.

As this juncture, we would like to share a striking scene on this matter. We have requested our first appointments from the political party leaders having groups in the Parliament in the year 2009. The first appointment was accepted by Democratic Society Party (DTP) (which could be considered the predecessor of today’s People’s Democratic Party (HDP)) Co-Chair Ahmet Türk and the second acceptance came from Justice and Development Party (AKP) leader and Prime Minister R. Tayyip Erdoğan. Following the meetings, DTP Central Executive Council (MYK) informed its provincial organizations and MPs on the project with a circular letter, encouraging participation. Prime Minister Erdoğan assigned the AKP Group Deputy Chairman to the matter, allowing us to develop collaboration with the Election Coordination Center and the Local Administrations Unit. We also had initiatives from the Republican People’s Party (CHP) and Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) through their deputy chairs and group deputy chairs; we have even met CHP Group Deputy Chairman of the time, Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, for the first time. This close interest of the political world that went on for two years made it possible for the sPAT to start in many other provinces and reflected on the increase in number of participants in the ongoing provinces as well. It is evident on the infographic with statistics from the ten years how the slightest interest of the political world has created such difference.

As we start, we preferred to look at the empty side of the glass for the most part. However, despite these opposing circumstances, we deem it a story of success for the sPAT to leave ten years behind with opportunities of continuity.

In which provinces the project is ongoing? small Provincial Assemblies of Turkey is able to continue its work in 14 provinces; Ardahan, Batman, Diyarbakır, Elazığ, Eskişehir, Iğdır, Kayseri, Kocaeli, Malatya, Mardin, Muğla/ Bodrum, Sakarya, Ankara ve Istanbul by June 2018. We still have initiatives in 42 provinces.

Even though we gave a break for the last three years on our effort to spread and grow due to the reasons expressed above, we have never refused any initiator that took a step forward and said, “Let’s do this in our province as well.” Ardahan joined the team under such circumstances at the end of the 2017-2018 period. Preparations for the establishment of Trabzon and Yozgat small Provincial Assemblies continued for the entire summer and is predicted to start holding meetings by September 2018.

Realisation

How many meetings we were supposed to held; how many meetings we were able to hold? In other words, what is the ratio of our “outage” with the meetings that could not be held due to political tensions, armed clashes, natural disasters or simply inadequate participation?

We must indicate that Ardahan sPA has held only a preparatory meeting before the June 24 elections. There is no initiative that started its meetings at the beginning of the session and didn’t continue further. Since the meetings in May and June 2018 were held with the agenda of the elections, some provinces held only one of the two meetings - the ratio for meeting realisation within the sessions are otherwise successful. We must also remind our readers that the entire annual session passed under the conditions of the State of Emergency (OHAL). Participation

Let’s first give short information on the percentages in the tables below...

NGO Participation: Our experiences have shown the lower limit for NGO representatives present in a meeting must be 15 and the upper limit be 25 for healthy meeting and representation. We see the rate of NGO participation vertically on each column on the table. The percentages indicated are results compared with the optimum number, 20, for every meeting. (For example, if a total of 135 people participated in the meetings held in one province in nine months, the rate of participation would be 135/180= 75%)

Number of NGOsParticipated Rate of Participation NGO PARTICIPATION

94 October' 17 %4.270 86 November' 17 %3.990 106 December' 17 %3.910 101 January' 18 %4.200 100 February' 18 %4.160 102 March' 18 %4.250 100 April 18 %4.630 85 May 18 %3.540 100 June' 18 %4.540

0 27,5 55 82,5 110 MP Participation: This is the ratio between the number of MPs in one province with the number of MPs participating in the meetings. In other words, how many MPs among those we invited are participating in the meetings? Of course, the same comparison works for mayors as well.

Number of MPs Participated Rate of Participation MP PARTICIPATION

1 October' 17 %150

1 November' 17 %150

1 December' 17 %120

0 0,375 0,75 1,125 1,5

The October 2017 - June 2018 period was one of the periods with the lowest rate of MP participation. We think that the political polarisation since the June 1 General Elections and the developments at the GNAT have influenced this situation. Debates on the “Presidential System” as well as the ongoing State of Emergency (OHAL) caused visible decrease in GNAT work as well.

The reason for the absence of data from the year 2018 is an absolute shame. We allocated the May and June 2018 meetings to June 24 electoral candidates, just like we do prior to every election.

We invited the political party representatives to the meetings in 12 provinces held in May 2018, as the Presidential candidates were not announced. 31 political party representatives and many MP candidates for nomination participated in the meetings. We record the meeting of different political parties around one table under such political circumstances in Turkey at the time as an important success.

We invited MP candidates to the last meetings before the 24 June elections in June 2018.

Candidates participating in the meetings on the first week of June 2018 are as following:

In Batman small Provincial Assembly: Necdet İPEKYÜZ, Kısmet ÇELİK, Burhan BARAN, Beyhan ÖZGENER, Leyla SOYUVAL and Ayhan IŞIK

In Kayseri small Provincial Assembly: Taner YILDIZ, Mahmut ARIKAN and Ali DOMANİÇ

In Elazığ small Provincial Assembly: İbrahim HACIBEKİROĞLU and Mahmut ŞAHİN

In Istanbul small Provincial Assembly: Cihangir İSLAM, Turan HANÇERLİ and Celal ALPHAN

In Bodrum small Provincial Assembly: Mürsel ALBAN, Metin ERGUN, Sultan ÖZCAN, Ömer ULUDAĞ and Günal DAL came together with NGO representatives. The meeting of Bodrum small Provincial Assembly was broadcasted live on local channel Kent TV.

Candidates participating in the meetings on the second week of June 2018 are as following:

In Ankara small Provincial Assembly: Filiz KERESTECİOĞUL, İshak KOCABIYIK, Gülşah Deniz ATALAR and Mahmut KONUK

In Eskişehir small Provincial Assembly: Kerem KESKİN, Nurten ULUCEBİ, Fesih BİNGÖL and Nazif AYAZ

In Kocaeli small Provincial Assembly: Alaattin ENÜL and Suca OMURCAN

In Malatya small Provincial Assembly: Hulusi PORGALI and Yusuf BOZKUŞ In Mardin small Provincial Assembly: Mehmet Ali KILIÇ, Mahmut KILINÇ, Kadir GÜMÜŞ and Mahmut AKTAŞ

In Sakarya small Provincial Assembly: Haydar EROL and Ali GÜRLER

No additional graph was made due to the absence of mayors in the meetings, despite the significant local agenda handled during the meetings in the related period.

Which ‘civil society’?

NGO participation rate in the sPAT meetings show parallelity with the general demography of local NGOs.

The largest rate is on complete NGOs (associations, foundations and initiatives) with 86% participation rate.

Professional unions are ranked second with 8%, followed by professional chambers with 5%.

Professional organizations are, despite their low number, stronger in terms of their financial resources. They have greatly contributed to the sPAT by opening their doors to host the meetings, especially in smaller provinces.

Association/Foundation/Initiative Professionel Chambers Unions

%8

%5

PARTICIPANT NGO CONSTITUENTS

%86 We insist on using municipal halls for our meetings in accordance with our principles, stating that the province “owns these halls.” If we haven’t insisted, the professional organizations are still ready today to host the majority of our meetings. The only negative point on professional unions is that they are more affected by polarisation due to the stronger politicisation within; on professional chambers is that availability and collaboration rates decrease especially in larger provinces and that this interest is reversely proportional to the size and financial power of such chambers. Hosts of meetings

The low rate of NGOs and professional organizations opening their doors to host the meetings do not stem from their disinterest. We suggested stronger relationships to be established with local municipalities to use the municipal assembly halls in every province, since the location belongs to the province’s civil society. Our efforts concretising under our principle, “Municipalities are All of Ours,” gave fruit.

However, the participation rate of mayors never reached the desired level in none of the previous sessions - with this session being zero. Municipalities covering the majority of the host graphics in previous reports regressed into second placement in this session. Of course, this situation is only one other reflection of the disinterest of politics in the matter.

Municipalities Professional Chambers Unions NGOs What was debated?

As we always say: “We debate whatever Turkey is debating, we don’t evade!”:

Our October 2017 agenda was “New Demands of Independence.” The referendum decision made by the Federal Iraqi Kurdistan Region as well as increasing voices of independence in Catalonia and Italy corresponded to those days.

Our general agenda in November 2017 was the expression of President Erdoğan, “We betray our cities” and following debates.

December 2017 was the month of tensions on S400 rocket systems, therefore “Relations Between Turkey and NATO” was debated.

The agenda of the first meetings of the new year in January 2018 was another title that would stay in the agenda for an entire year: “Statutory Decrees, GNAT and Legislation.”

Our agenda in February 2018 was determined as, “Afrin Operation and Turkey’s Security Strategy”

Our March 2018 meetings correspond to the same days with March 8, World Women’s Day. As women’s organizations announce “Male Violence in Turkey” reports one by one, we couldn’t stand far from them...

Our April 2018 meetings were determined with Demirören Group’s purchase of Doğan Media Group. Therefore, we debated “The Turkish Press.”

We allocated our May & June 2018 meetings to the upcoming elections. We hosted political parties’ provincial chairmanships in the meetings of May and MP candidates in June.

You may follow common denominator reports of all meetings as well as meeting summaries from all provinces on www.tkmm.net. Residue of 10 years…

September 2008/June 2018 The first trial meetings of the small Provincial Assemblies have been held in five provinces in June 2008: Bursa, Diyarbakır, Gaziantep, Konya and Trabzon. After the summer months passed with preparations, regular meetings have started with the opening of the session at the GNAT. Even though the desired participation could not be obtained in some provinces, the number of participant provinces continuously increased. By June 2009, the sPAT had regular monthly meetings ongoing in 18 provinces. We launched our first report with the standard data of the year 2009, followed by the start of out first high-rank meetings with political parties. The meetings were held in 29 provinces by June 2010, followed by 22 provinces by June 2012 and 21 provinces by June 2013. The meetings continued in 16 provinces by June 2016 and are ongoing in 14 provinces by June 2018.

So, what has the results of the ten-year experience shown us?

First, the numbers:

10-Year Summary

Number of planned meetings 1717

Number of helf meetings and rate 1410 82,1%

Number of expected NGO participants 28200

Total NGO participants and rate 16388 58,1%

Expected MP participants 9329

Total MP participants and rate 437 4,6%

Expected mayor participants 1410

Total mayor participants and rate 86 6,09%

Number of host municipalities 858 60,08%

Number of host professional chambers 193 13,6%

Number of host professional unions 74 5,2%

Number of host NGOs 285 20,2%

Participant professional chambers 1290 7,8%

Participant professional unions 1905 11,6%

Participant associations, foundations, initiatives 13193 80,5% What do these numbers show?

Still a lot of time and effort is needed for the decision mechanisms in Turkish politics, that works “from above towards below,” to move “from below towards above.”

MPs feel like they owe to party chairmen for including their names in the candidate list instead of feeling responsible towards the citizens who voted for them.

Even though the expression to “pay attention to hold regular dialogue with the civil society” is widely used, the situation is different when the matter is participating in the meetings; they participate “only when they can find the time between their busy schedule.”

Provincial chairmen regulating the programs of MPs in the election regions usually share the same perception. It is even experienced that MPs assigned by the Group Deputy Chairmanship was assigned to another duty by the provincial organization.

Of course, we exclude many MPs, who willingly participate in the meetings and leave them with pleasure, from these statements. However, when we consider the rate of MP participation (the rate between the expected total MP participants and actual number of MP participants) remaining at 4.6%, it shouldn’t be considered an exaggeration to say that “the political world does not take the civil society seriously in general and sees such projects as works of fantasy.”

The remainder…

The polarisation created in the society is developing towards more dangerous dimensions in time. The political institutes can be part of both the resolution and the lack of it. The prevention of social polarisation and to regress it to the point of no recurrence is of course not only the duty of the politics.

In order for democracy to diffuse in every area of our social lives and for it to institutionalize are only possible with the collaboration and dialogue of politics with the civil society. We must oppose this polarisation everywhere if we don’t want to enter a process of hostility like we did in the second half of 1950s, when even the coffee houses in villages were separated; if we don’t want to fall into the trap of left vs. right politics of the 1970s.

The sPAT is one of the projects that has this purpose, let us protect it. New methods are necessary! Responsibility of politics

Here are our concrete demands from the Party Chairs, Provincial Chairs, MPs, Mayors and the Presidency:

1. The ten-year sPAT work must have already revealed what it is and what it isn’t, by now. In case you find this work positive and beneficial, please openly announce this in the public - and more importantly, to your organization. For we still fight suspicions like, “This project is supported by this and that person, who would be benefiting if we participated in this?” In places where this suspicion is surpassed, MPs and party organizations think, “Alright, there is no obstacle in our participation. We can participate as long as there is time left from our own duties” and approach the project passively due to their view of it as ‘fantasy work’. Yes, what we are trying is to bring new traditions and methods.

2. We chose the first weekend of every month for the meetings, because they neither coincide with Parliamentary work nor the previously-determined schedule of political parties. We of course do understand extraordinary situations, as long as MPs (and provincial administrations) pay attention not to receive/assign another duty on the first weekend of every month - except in extraordinary circumstances. Otherwise, we look like a foreign guest who is invited by everyone in a full room but nobody is moving to make space for her in the environment of politics.

3. The opinion, “We do take the pulse of the society already with our party organization,” is a widespread opinion in the politics even though it is not often openly expressed. The high rate of votes are also considered evidence for this. However, no, this opinion is not correct. For the meetings organized by parties - which are mostly aimed at being crowded shows of strength - are only for those supporting the same view, to cheer each other on. Either those with different opinions don’t participate in such meetings (in order not to increase the number of this show of strength) or refrain from speaking even if they are present. If it was possible to take the pulse of the society just from these meetings, where only applauses take place, giant political parties once determining Turkey’s destiny would not vanish in history. Opposing views may not be always right and may not always be pleasing to hear, but aren’t they the only mirror in which we can see our wrongs and the opportunity to right them?

4. The sPAT is dependent on the voluntary collaboration of the civil society with the politics in order to exist. It is impossible for this work to proceed one-sided, for a ‘dialogue’ is not possible with the participation of one party; that would be a ‘monologue.’ Just like you can’t organize a strike together with the boss, for it’s a one-sided organization; this dialogue can not be organized with the participation of one party. Willful and conscious contribution, collaboration of both parties is mandatory. Of course, you may criticize the sPAT as much as you want; just please don’t forget that you are also the receiver of such criticisms. We must correct what needs to be corrected altogether, not by blaming each other for them. Dimensions of the sPAT Joint Study Groups Another branch of the project is the GNAT Joint Study Groups, initially forming in 13 branches as unofficial and symbolic groups coming together with the names of MPs listed one after another under a specific topic they feel sensitive about. But the actual shaping in flesh and bones happened in a different format.

NGOs working on a specific issue come together in workshops, determining their ‘Common Denominators’ on that matter. Then these denominators are carried to a common meeting with MPs interested in the subject - usually those in related commissions - to search for “common denominators” between the civil society and MPs. Distribution of tasks is made for the application of obtained resolution and action is taken.

The topic for the initial three-workshop series was “Civil Society - What must the principles of GNAT Common Studies be?” Quite positive results were obtained and the regulation on the matter was changed. Some matters were facilitated, but bureaucratic obstacles could not be diminished entirely.

The second workshop series was on the “Human Rights Institute Draft Law,” which was on the GNAT agenda, reaching until the Constitutional Subcommission. Results of three workshops bringing together NGO representatives in Batman, Ankara and Istanbul and surrounding provinces were combined by participants selected voluntarily, making up the common denominators of the civil society on the matter. Constitutional Commission Chairman Prof. Burhan Kuzu and five commission-member MPs participated in the common workshop held the next day with a series of common opinions obtained as results. However, when the commission report was launched, we sadly realized that some of those ‘common opinions’ were forgotten. (?)

The third series of workshops under the topic of “Internet Bans” was held with workshops at Istanbul Bilgi University and Ankara University ATAUM in September and October. The last session was scheduled in time and location, approved by MPs. However, their schedules were changed last minute and they cancelled. All schedule, together with the booked hotel reservations and plane tickets, had to be cancelled.

… and thus the 23rd Legislative Session ended. The drafts became obsolete, which meant that the road had to be walked over from the start.

… and then, to our surprise, the government activated the ‘Human Rights Institute’ draft once again; and not only in the amended version that passed the Constitutional Commission last session, in its initial form - without those amendments.

Unavoidably, all motivation on this dialogue is destroyed. We have done so much work, identified common denominators with the civil society and shared them with the Constitutional Commission. Some of those were agreed upon and some weren’t - some that were agreed upon were crossed out by the Commission later.

The latest CSG Workshop was held at the end of the year 2015 with the title, “Expectations of Civil Society from GNAT and Political Parties.”

Three workshops were organized initially:

One in Diyarbakır on September 2, 2015; one in Istanbul on September 10, 2015 and one in Ankara on September 16, 2015. NGO representatives with their headquarters in these regions participated in the workshop that was in the closest province to their location. In these workshops, held with the method of “Teleconferencing,” NGOs debated the participation of civil society in decision-making processes and determined their common denominators.

Opinions resulting from those three workshops were combined in the latest workshop held on September 17 in Ankara. Three voluntary participants elected in accordance with the principles of representation in all three workshops combined the results to obtain the resolution text.

The resolution report obtained was shared with all MPs and personally handed to GNAT Groups.

More importantly, this workshop series became the precedent for the following GNAT-Civil Society Meetings. Dimensions of the sPAT

Civil Society- GNAT Meetings and April 23 GNAT

Visits MPs and citizens hand in hand…

We realised the first “Civil Society-GNAT Meeting” in 2015 with the aim to bring together elected MPs with civil society representatives in each legislative session.

Among the guests of the meeting held at Demonti Hotel on December 16 were the MPs of the 26th Legislative Session, sPAT Porters, NGO representatives, Ankara representatives of media organizations and representatives of foreign countries.

The resulting report, “10 Demands of Civil Society from Politics and the GNAT” from the workshops in three provinces - Diyarbakır, Ankara, Istanbul - in September 2015 was announced in the meeting. 25 MPs and 48 NGO representatives were both our hosts and guests in the meeting.

The resulting report of Common Study Groups held during September was shared with the participants. The entire report, entitled, “10 Demands of Civil Society from Politics and the GNAT” may be read on our website.

Here are the participants of the meeting which included data on sPAT TV and other sPAT work:

NGO representatives: ADO, AEGEE-Ankara, AKKAY, Alevi Thought Organization, Alternative Informatics Association, Anatolian Women’s Association, ANGIKAD, Capital Women’s Platform, CEID, CISST, Çankaya Provincial Council, Environmentalists Association, DDA, Natural Life Association, Correct Nutrition Association, Initiative for Freedom of Expression, Erzurum Entrepreneur Women’s Association, HAK-İŞ, Helsinki Citizens Association, Human Rights Association, IHOP, ILKDER, Istanbul Is All of Ours Initiative, Istanbul Politics Center, Caucasus Associations Federation, Development Workshop Cooperation, KAOS GL, Red Umbrella, Liberal Europe Association, the Association for Human Rights and Solidarity for the Oppressed (MAZLUMDER), NDI, Vote and Beyond, SPoD, STAD-Der, Nonviolent Society Association, Turkish Journalists Association, Turkish Women’s Union, TEPAV, Human Rights Foundation of Turkey (TIHV), Flying Broom, International Children’s Center, Transparency International, UZYED, YASADER, Yoruk Nomads Association, YU-Der

MPs: Ali İhsan Yavuz (Justice and Development Party - AKP Sakarya), Ayhan Sefer Üstün (Justice and Development Party - AKP Sakarya), Aytuğ Atıcı (Republican People’s Party - CHP Mersin), Celal Doğan (People’s Democratic Party - HDP Istanbul), Ceyhun İrgil (Republican People’s Party - CHP Bursa), Dengir Mir Mehmet Fırat (People’s Democratic Party - HDP Mersin), Didem Engin (Republican People’s Party - CHP Istanbul), Dursun Çiçek (Republican People’s Party - CHP Istanbul), Filiz Kerestecioğlu (People’s Democratic Party - HDP Istanbul), Gaye Usluer (Republican People’s Party - CHP Eskişehir), Hüda Kaya (People’s Democratic Party - HDP Istanbul), Hüseyin Çamak (Republican People’s Party - CHP Mersin), Mehmet Bekaroğlu (Republican People’s Party - CHP Istanbul), Mehmet Erdoğan (Nationalist Movement Party - MHP Muğla), Meral Danış Beştaş (People’s Democratic Party - HDP Adana), Mustafa Şentop (Justice and Development Party - AKP Istanbul), Nurettin Demir (Republican People’s Party - CHP Muğla), Okan Gaytancıoğlu (Republican People’s Party - CHP Edirne), Serdal Kuyucuoğlu (Republican People’s Party - CHP Mersin), Şenal Sarıhan (Republican People’s Party - CHP Ankara), Utku Çakırözer (Republican People’s Party - CHP Eskişehir), Yıldız Seferinoğlu (Justice and Development Party - AKP Istanbul), Zülfikar İnönü Tümer (Republican People’s Party - CHP Adana)

Foreign institutions and representatives: EU Turkey Delegation, Embassy of the Netherlands, Embassy of the UK, Embassy of Switzerland, Embassy of Canada, Embassy of Norway, Civil Think EU Programme

The second Civil Society-GNAT will be held in Ankara on October 17, 2018.

However, with a different name…

With the change in the system that became official with the June 24 elections, the Presidential Complex has become part of the reception. On every April 23 in Ankara… IT IS THE ELDERLY, we are the youngster!

We have a much older tradition that involves coming together with Parliament members. Every year on April 23rd, the sPAT Porters and the Kitchen come together in Ankara with visits at the GNAT. The first day of the two-day meeting is like our annual council meeting, involving the evaluation of the past year with the planning of the upcoming session.

We also have special guests, depending on the flow of our schedule. We organize workshops with the participation of experts on needed matters in the direction of demands we receive from the porters and attempt to perform applications to achieve technological innovations.

We allocate the second day of our annual meeting to the GNAT visit. We visit all political party groups for the GNAT- sPAT Greeting Exchange. The seventh visit was made in the year 2017.

Entrances to the GNAT, which was made more difficult for a long time due to the State of Emergency and other security reasons, also hindered our future in terms of these visits. Unfortunately, we couldn’t visit GNAT groups in our 2018 meeting.

Solutions are endless in democracies: We continued our 2018 meeting schedule by visiting the First Parliament Building, which is now a museum. Dimensions of the sPAT PEOPLE’S TURN TO SPEAK! The GNAT work is being pushed in front of our faces through newspapers and televisions, no matter if we want or not. The expressions - and of course, the speaking styles - of leaders during group meetings on Tuesdays are being repeated in every corner of Turkey by party organizations starting from the next day.

Turkish Radio and Television (TRT) Parliamentary TV broadcasts live from the general assembly on certain hours of the day, thus we are informed on some of the press statements of MPs. It is a fact that these broadcasts, which lasts for hours on end, do not have a high rating of viewers.

We wonder, how well does an average person walking on the street knows about the structure and working procedure of the GNAT? How are all the commissions, sub commissions, group chairmanships, parliamentary general assemblies, special sessions etc.; whose names are often heard everywhere in the mainstream media, perceived by the average person? sPAT TV started its work through these questions. We started preparing a 10-15 minute show in which we summarize opinions of parties of prominent debates as well as the weekly schedule of the GNAT. The name of the show is: “People’s Turn to Speak.”

The content of the show includes sections that explain how the GNAT and sPATs work. We also introduce national or foreign NGOs working across Turkey as well as our initiators in local provinces - all in one-minute modules.

The first episode of “People’s Turn to Speak” was broadcasted on September 6, 2013. The shows we previously prepared were on air on one national and four local channels. sPAT TV is now making its own broadcast on the Internet. Our followers and those interested can easily find all 250 episodes we prepared with a connection on YouTube and on the main page of our website, www.tkmm.net.

Perhaps we are the first NGO to broadcast weekly regular TV and radio shows.

In case other NGOs want to do the same thing, we are ready to share our knowledge, experience and our technical resources with everyone.

There are channels that open their screens for us regularly. We share the common denominators announced in the last week of every month with our followers on the screens of YOL TV. small Provincial Assemblies of Turkey Initiative www.tkmm.net

Mimar Sinan, Uncular Cd. 28/2 ÜSKÜDAR

(216) 492 05 04 [email protected]