'Civil Society'?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
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.