Party Closures As a Measure of Militant Democracy in Turkey

CEU eTD Collection Party Closures as aMeasure of Militant Democracy In partialIn fulfillment ofthe requirements for the degree Masterof Arts of Submitted to the Central European University European Central tothe Submitted Supervisor: Pr Department of Political Science Political of Department

Budapest, Hungary By Ozlem Ozcelik in Turkey of. of. Nenad Dimitrijevic (2014)

CEU eTD Collection ideologystate comp as uses Court the Turkey: in practice closure party Constitutional Turkish the by closed tha cases party three the of analysis making By Parties. Political on Law the and Constitution 1982 by offered prohibitions of range wide the ofsituation.thisreason socialist are and Islamist nationalist, Court Kurdish the by closed are that parties the of Most democracy. militant institutionalized h much closed the 1961, in establishment its After closures. party on focus the with Turkey, in democracy militant of practice and concept the explores thesis The First of all this study reveals that one of the reasons of the activism of the Court is Court the of activism the of reasons the of one that reveals study this all of First ge nme o pltcl ate ta ohr uoen onre that countries European other than parties political of number igher aredtoof assembly freedomassociation. and

Court A /communist part /communist bstract ,

this study shows another reason of the frequent the of reason another shows study this i

t represent three party categories frequently categories party three represent t

its power of interpretation to prioritize the prioritize to interpretation of power its

ies. This thesis aims to find out find to aims thesis This ies. Turkish

Constitutional Court Constitutional

the CEU eTD Collection workinginhumaneconditions. supportthisinprocess.continuous while contributionsvaluable findings. evaluatingmy rapporteur currently Arslan, Murat colleague Yildiz Ali and Akdag Emre havetoNenadD lucky s is it nobility, most the me for sufferings, ddct m tei to thesis my dedicate I I I all despite academia the in part take to us motivate that feelings the Among

would like to like would hn al y aiy ebr, ai Odmr n Mla vnvk for Ivanovska Milka and Okdemir Baris members, family my all thank omething imitrijevicsupervimy as

thank my thank ht can that noble one is one noble for encouraging my de my encouraging for

Acknowledgements 301

be colleagues Tulin Alpay, Arife Coskun, Levent Karabeyli Levent Coskun, Arife Alpay, Tulin colleagues

aey bevd I ti sne I osdr yef very myself consider I sense, this In observed. rarely ie workers mine “ compassion for others for compassion - ii ug o Trih osiuinl Court, Constitutional Turkish of judge

sor. cision to go abroad. Special thanks to my to thanks Special abroad. go to cision

h de i Sm, Manisa Soma, in died who

” . Like most of most Like .

the signs of signs the eas of because o his for

their its , CEU eTD Collection the in theJudgmeECHRofLight Read Court Constitutional Turkish the of Decisions Closure Party The 4: CHAPTER DemocracyMilitant3:EvolutionCHAPTER theof in theTurkish Constitutionalism ConceptThe2:ofCHAPTER Militant Democracy Introduction1:CHAPTER Acknowledgements Abstract 4.4. 4.3. CaseOZDEP 4.2. ProceduresLegal 4.1. Regulations Related and ClosuresParty with 3.2. Single Party 3.1. Period (1923 Closures Party as 2.2. Measure ofa Militant Democracy Militant Democracy 2.1. Theory in 4.5. 4.4.4. 4.4.3. 4.4.2. 4.4.1. 4.3.4. 4.3.3. 4.3.2. 4.3.1. 4.2.4. 4.2.3. 4.2.2. 4.2.1. 3.2.5. 3.2.4. 3.2.3. 3.2.2. 3.2.1. The Constitutionof3.1.2. 1924 3.1.1

...... Multi Party Peri Multi Party Conclusion TBKP Case The Refah CaseThe Party . Revolution, Its IdeologyRevolution,Its . theImportantMostand Measures

The Defense ofDefensethe RefahTheParty ChiefofProsecutorinIndictmentClaims the the ECHRJudgmentofThe the ofDecisionThe ofDefenseOZDEPThe ChiefofProsecutorinIndictmentClaims the the andPolitical Constitutional1982 developments ofMilitarycoup1980The theConstitution of and 1982 ConstitutionalMilitaryandCoupof Amendments1971 theMilitaryConstitutionofandCoup1961 1950 InstabilityPolitical The Judgment of the ECHRJudgmentofThe the DecisionThe TBKPofDefensethe The ChiefofProsecutorinIndictmentClaims the the ECHRJudgmentofThe the DecThe

......

...... ision ofisiontheConstitutional Court ...... od

...... nts oftheConstitutional Court

......

theConstitutionalCourt ......

...... TableofContents -

1946) ......

...... - 1960

......

...... iii ......

......

...... - ......

...... 2001 ......

......

81 80 78 77 75 75 72 69 68 64 63 62 58 58 55 54 48 45 39 32 30 22 21 21 18 15 15 15 10

ii 5 5 1 i

CEU eTD Collection Bibliography CONCLUSION5:CHAPTER

......

...... iv

......

87 83

CEU eTD Collection SenateThe ofTSR: theRep TBKP RPP: RP OZDEP NUC: SecurityNationalNSC: Council Party Justice JP: PartyDemocraticDP: AbbrevList of : Welfare

Republican People‟s PartyPeople‟sRepublican National : United Communist PartyofUnitedTurkey( Communist : FreedomDemocracy andParty( Party(

Unity CommitteeUnity

i ations Refah PartisiRefah

ublic

)

OzgurlukDemokrasivePartisi Turkiye BirlesikTurkiyeKomunist Partisi v

)

CEU eTD Collection :1258 2010) Sajo: (Oxford Andras and MichelRosenfeld 3 :235 2012) Letters Publishing: of (Rebublic Ellian ofTerror,ed.A. Time the in Democracy Militant 2 490 2012), 1 Turkeybyonits focusingin politicaland history. legal democracyimplementedmilitantof theconcept how explore like to would I question research freedom the restricting as such them towards techniques repressive implement to necessity a even regime. democratic destroy ultimately and aims antidemocratic freedoms and pluralism political abuse that parties antidemocratic the are threats such democracy. of principles basic the of some violating means it foc should ideologies totalitarian other and fascism of attacks the with faced democracy that argues Lowenstein Europe. in fascism of rise the by marked condition the in and Republic Weimar of collapse the after 1937 in can states conditions what the This democracy. majoritarian under from depart justifiably explains democracy militant of Theory importance. ofpartiesnumber c “ question: following the explore I thesis democracy. militant institutionalized that countries European other than parties Constitut the that fact the is point starting Prosecutor. Chief the by initiated requests prohibition 44 of total a with parties Clite Isik, Huseyin Murat. Anaya Mahkemesi Kararlarinda Devletin Resmi Ideolojisi, (Ankara: Adalet Yayinevi, Yayinevi, Adalet (Ankara: Ideolojisi, Resmi Devletin Kararlarinda Mahkemesi Anaya Murat. Huseyin Isik, ulr Jan Muller, ur, Paul. and Rijpkema, Bastiaan, The Foundations of Militant Democracy in The State of Exception and and Exception of State The in Democracy Militant of Foundations The Bastiaan, Rijpkema, and Paul. ur,

n hs epc, utfcto o pry lsrs n dmcai rgm gains regime democratic a in closures party of justification respect, this In 26 closed has Turkey of Court Constitutional the 1961, in establishment its After

f seby n fedm f peh n coig them. closing and speech of freedom and assembly of - ( enr Mltn Dmcay n h Oxford The in Democracy Militant Werner. es eily reo o sec ad reo o assembly of freedom and speech of freedom pecially omparedtheinpracticesEurope?” with

CHAPTERIntroduction1:

us on protecting itself by fighting those threats, even if even threats, those fighting by itself protecting on us Why did Turkish Constitutional Court close high close Court Constitutional Turkish did Why ional Court banned much higher number of political of number higher much banned Court ional 1

adok f oprtv Cntttoa Lw ed. Law, Constitutional Comparative of Handbook

ory was set forth by Karl Lowenstein Karl by forth set was ory Perhaps most prominent among prominent most Perhaps

2 3

hs i i jsiibe and justifiable is it Thus, o e be o nwr my answer to able be To )

o elz their realize to

Hence, in this in Hence, constitutional 1

Thus, my CEU eTD Collection Democratization Rights, of Court Human European relevant the of use 4 the by supplemented be will This Court. Constitutional Turkish beConstitutionalTurkish,Courtinwhichofonline the can in official web found inand frequenttheespeciallyparties?”political ofclosure Turkey in democracy militant of practice the in interpretation Court’s Constitutional rigidity. with prohibitions of list long this interprets Court Constitutional the that case the be might It account. into taken be to has that factor explanatory more one is there However, regulations. politic of closure frequent the of reasons the of one regulations, these on based decisions closure party its gives Court Constitutional Through Turkish of decisions the are as Court Constitutional well as regulations, These parties. political on restrictions nation,butbecauseterritoryandsocia alsoof the its with state the of integrity indivisible the of principle the infringed they only not closed were partiesSocialist/communist state. the of integrityindivisible the of principle the violated Kurd secularism. of principle the of violation of because closed were parties Islamist the that see can we practice, In Court. Constitutional viola The secularism. of principle and state the of integrity indivisible of principle the namely: protect to aim they that principles two mainly are there that said be can it closures, party with

Ozbudun, Ergun. Party Prohibition Cases: Different Approaches by the Turkish Constitutional Court and and Court Constitutional Turkish the by Approaches Different Cases: Prohibition Party Ergun. Ozbudun, in f hs picpe cnttts h bss f at coue eiin o the of decisions closure party of basis the constitutes principles these of tion

4 In responding to this ques this to responding In permissible of range wide provide Parties Political on Law and Constitution 1982 regulatiothe consider we If ec, n hs hss wud ie o ute explore: further to like would I thesis this in Hence, a (eie omsin ad scholars. and Commission) (Venice Law

ujc t te critic the to subject

tion, ns in the Constitution and Law on Political Parties relatedParties Political on Law Constitutionand the in ns

I will focus on the primary source, the judgments the source, primary the on focus will I al parties can be the lower threshold created by these by created threshold lower the be can parties al

17, no. 1(2010): 126 1(2010): no. 17, 2 s o Erpa Cmiso fr Democracy for Commission European of ism

listideology communistembrace. they s ntoait parties nationalist ish f e ae no con ta the that account into take we If

“ ht s h rl o the of role the is What ee close were - site ofthesite a they as d

CEU eTD Collection democ militant analyze will I Democracy” Militant of Concept isit the includealsowill I closure.party of reason a as secularism integrity nationalist differe for banned were parties These RP). Partisi, (Refah ( Turkey of Party Communist Freed namely: willusefulbein ECHR research addressingmy questions. i be could decision closure the of basis the provides that provisions legal if discusses and Court judgments free protect to aim c Islam the except Court Constitutional Turkish the of decisions the against ba party political concerning Turkey againstcasesnine heard hasECHR The Court.Constitutional Turkish the ofdecisions closure L and 1982Constitutionthe in statedregulations interpretto the possible itis whether of question onthe insightinformed anto hopefully me lead wouldThisregulations. regal the interprets An literature. academic nterpreted in a more liberal way. That is why I believe that a reference to the decisions of the of decisions theto reference a thatbelieve I why is That way. liberalmore a in nterpreted ase. It ruled It ase. relateddefendingwithorderconstitutional thethe against class aw onPoliticalliberal inparties moreaw way. a h tei wl poed n h floig anr I te is pr catr “The chapter, part first the In manner. following the in proceed will thesis The parties, political three regarding Court Constitutional the of decisions analyze will I party the about Rights Human of Court European of judgments the use also will I of the state. InRefah state. the of , the ECHR most of the time criticizes the reasoning of the Turkish Constitutional Turkish the of reasoning the criticizes time the of most ECHR the ,

p arty and in this case I will focus on the violation of the principle of the indivisiblethe ofprinciple the ofviolation the on focus will I case this in and arty that Turkey violated 10th and 11th articles of the European Convention which Convention European the of articles 11th and 10th violated Turkey that m n Dmcay at ( Party Democracy and om o o epeso ad reo o assemb of freedom and expression of dom I il nlz te esnn o te or t epoe o it how explore to Court the of reasoning the analyze will I d

Party case, I will be able to discuss violation of the principle of principle the of violation discuss to able bewill I case,Party uky Brei Kmns Partisi Komunist Birlesik Turkiye s y h Trih osiuinl or ad a ruled has and Court Constitutional Turkish the by ns zulk e eors Partisi Demokrasi ve Ozgurluk 3

t esn. ZE i a Kurdish a is OZDEP reasons. nt decision regarding the TBKP asTBKP the regardingdecision TK) n Wlae Party Welfare and TBKP) , y n ascain I its In association. and ly - based rule.based ay y ouig n its on focusing by racy ODP, United OZDEP), , s Welfare ist

Party

CEU eTD Collection threeparties aboutCourt mentioned Iabove. analysis. for background 1982 the with in part Political on Law and Constitution start closures party will with I related limitations Judgments”, legal ECHR the analyzing the and summarizing of Light The in Read Court Constitutional cha third the In Turkey. modern of militant history legal and political of genealogy the tracing by of Turkey in implemented was democracy concept the how explain will I Constitutionalism”, Turkish the of Evaluation se the In democracy. militant of measure a as problems the stress parties political of closure the also discuss also will I chapter this will In concept. this from stemming I and functions and justification its discover definitions, n hs chapter, this In

ies. My secondary aim in this section is to provide legalprovide to sectionis this in aim secondaryMy ies. tr “h Pr Coue eiin o te Turkish the of Decisions Closure Part “The pter,

wl aaye h dcsos f h Constitutional the of decisions the analyze will I

od hpe, Mltn Dmcay n the in Democracy “Militant chapter, cond CEU eTD Collection Resolve”?Rethinking Cannot Alone 6 5 Lastly, structures. democratic harm to society open and democracy t using are enemies these Thirdly, democracy. majoritarian pre take to mechanism prescribed aims. their realize system the overturn or destroy to want who those until wait to required not are states the and character preventive a has democracy militant Firstly, democracy. constitutional tolerant a from differs it how stress to democracy militant regime.democratic the destroying from means democratic with democracy subverting at aiming those prevent to i which regime democratic a of parties democratic anti of election the by character democratic own state‟s a of change the prevent to measures the within support population. as well as institutions democratic utilizing by outside from it destroy to want openly who those and within from it overturn to want who those against democracy as democracy militant of definitions all by agreed mutually Militan2.1. Muller, Jan Muller, 34 : 2011) European University, Central diss., (PhD Democracy, Militant Svetlana. Tyulkina, B mi define Nolte Georg and Fox H. Gregory democracy militant of definition universal a find to possible not is It - sd n hs dfntos Svetl definitions, these on ased Werner.Rethinking Militant Democracy: An Introduction: A “Practical Dilemma Which Philosophy Philosophy Which Dilemma “Practical A Introduction: An Militant Democracy: Werner.Rethinking ”

t Democracy Theory in CHAPTERThe2: Concept ofMilitant Democracy ” ” . 5 6

According to Jan to According

coas Ot Prsan fes n o te ot com most the of one offers Pfresmann Otto scholars.

Militant Democracy: An Introduction , Constellations19, Constellations19, , Introduction An Militant Democracy: s willing to adopt pre adopt to willing s -

mtv actions emptive -

“ Werner Muller militant democracy refers to refers democracy militant Muller Werner pltcl n lgl structu legal and political a n Tukn idcts or itnt etrs of features distinct four indicates Tyulkina ana 5

litant democracy narrowly as narrowly democracy litant - emptive, prima facie illiberal measures illiberal facie prima emptive, ,

iiat eorc dprs from departs democracy militant er ihs ie t te by them to given rights heir e ie a preserving at aimed re eody bcue of because Secondly, h am f militant of aim the no.4

(2012 prehensive “

setting of setting “ hc is which the idea the ): 537 ):

CEU eTD Collection 12 :230 2012) Letters Publishing: of (Rebublic Ellian ofTerror,ed.A. Time the in Democracy Militant 11 10 9 8 7 fascis from stems threat autocratic the far by are they contrary the on new; not are regimes autocratic that stresses He communism. Soviet also and fascism to refers also over power absolute an has persons of group or person wit control mutual of absence and powers of separation of lack the side. weaker the be to seems democracy which in battle existential their in autocracy by defeated be will democracy democracy. of defeat the as interpreted of collapse the of causes the explain to attempt an in published democracymeasuresmilitant their and justification. term the offer to one the with begin to sense makes It importance. gains theory constitutional in justification standard its why, is That concept. problematic rather con it that publicorder publicsecurity, andsafety. nationalfrom radically differs it and state the of nature democratic the secure to is democracy Ibid, 1 Ibid, 37Ibid, Tyulkina, Svetlana. Militant Democracy, (PhD diss., Central European University, 2011) : 2011) European University, Central diss., (PhD Democracy, Militant Svetlana. Tyulkina, Ibid,231 o Foundations The Bastiaan, Rijpkema, and Paul. Cliteur, 14Ibid,

the

Karl Lo Karl argued be can it democracy, militant by offered actions of course the consider we If uiil rnh Teeoe Lwnti ue atcay s bod aeoy which category broad a as autocracy uses Lowenstein Therefore, branch. judicial an absolutist system. Under autocracy h autocracy Under system. absolutist an

tradicts the nature of a liberal democracy and because of its preventive nature it is a is it nature preventive its of because and democracy liberal a of nature the tradicts 1937. wenstein introduced the term the introduced wenstein 9

These articles, titled “Militant Democracy and Fundamental Rights” wereRights” Fundamental and Democracy “Militant titled articles, These 11

According to Lowenstein, the main characteristics of autocracies are autocracies of characteristics main the Lowenstein, to According

“ iiat democracy militant

most m. He argues that fascism is not an ideology, but rather a rather but ideology, an not is fascism that argues He m. oiat om f government. of form dominant 7 10

In the In 6 militant democracy in the s the in democracy militant

se articles Lowenstein expressed Lowenstein articles se ” the

e gives the examples of German and Italian and German of examples the gives e f Militant Democracy in The State of Exception and Exception of State The in Democracy Militant f and

8 arguments of Karl Lowens Karl of arguments

the o construct to the emr eulc hc cud be could which Republic Weimar xctv,lgsaiead often and legislative executive,

12 hin the administration. A administration. the hin sseie acut of account systemized a o hm i Erp this Europe in him, For eries of two articles two of eries 35

tein as he as tein

his fear t fear his

was hat CEU eTD Collection 18 17 MichelRo 16 15 :1257 2010) Sajo: (Oxford Andras and MichelRosenfeld 14 13 possibleeconomicofThethis exploitationof crisis. fl self of characteristic agreeable an is this conditions normal under Although structure. inherent its to on ideologi m democracies. state these to applicable is democracy aim might fundamentalism to order movements. totalitarian left and right extreme of emotionalism of that from far very not is fundamentalism religious totalitarian leadersthatcharismatic their manipulateemotionsinstincts. and by controlled be which provided conditions institutions. extraordinary democratic with emotionalism combining of techniques the compe never intellectual proper rule. to intention simple the with power grasping for technique political Ibid, 2264 Ibid, Review27, LawCardozo State thePreventive to MilitantFrom Democracy Sajo,Andras. Tyulkina, Svetlana. Militant Democracy, (PhD diss., Central European University, 2011) : 2011) European University, Central diss., (PhD Democracy, Militant Svetlana. Tyulkina, Jan Muller, : 2011) European University, Central diss., (PhD Democracy, Militant Svetlana. Tyulkina, Mu ks eorc vleal ad pn o h atcs f acs ad te totalitarian other and fascism of attacks the to open and vulnerable democracy akes the ller

- sees the people as masses who are not capable of thinking, all they could do w dotheycould ofall thinking, capablenot whoare aspeople masses the sees analysis of Lowenstein‟s arguments. First, democracy is governed by comp by governed is democracy First, arguments. Lowenstein‟s of analysis government, this search for compromise leads to indecision and inaction in the times the in inaction and indecision to leads compromise for search this government, , es. Cliteur and Rijpkema point out point Rijpkema and Cliteur es. senfeld and Andras Sajo (Oxford : 2010) : 1257 2010) Sajo: (Oxford Andras and senfeld nrs Sajo Andras Jan

- sals a irvril anti irreversibly an establish - Werner. Militant Democracy in The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Constitutional Law, ed. ed. Law, Constitutional Comparative of Handbook Oxford The in Democracy Militant Werner. Werner. te

with ntnt Ta i wy te cn e aiy oiae b dmgge and demagogues by dominated easily be can they why, is That instinct. content;

. iiat Democracy Militant 14

The secret success of the fascist movement stems from its mastering of mastering its from stems movement fascist the of success secret The utes oesens ruet n cam that claims and argument Lowenstein‟s furthers 15

hs ruet s ae o te supin f rw psychology crowd of assumption the on based is argument This

rather it relies on a kind of emotionalism whichemotionalismdemocraciesofkind could onrelies a rather it at

hs reesbe hf n ulmcutis hrfr militant Therefore countries. Muslim in shift irreversible this ” nh Ofr Hnbo oCmaaie osiuinl Law Constitutional ofComparative Handbook Oxford inThe 17

The totalitarian movement uses emotional politic in politic emotional uses movement totalitarian The

three reasons of vulnerability of democracy based democracy of vulnerability of reasons three - eortc ytm f oe. h Islamist The power. of system democratic 7

aw makesdemocracyaw vulnerable. 18

o i i iprat o id u what out find to important is it So, 16

13 no. “ mtoaim of emotionalism

14 14 acs hs no has Fascism

5( 2006): 2263 5( 2006):

romise due romise as feel orfeel as

ed. ,

by CEU eTD Collection 22 21 : 2010) Sajo: (Oxford Andras and MichelRosenfeld 20 235 2012): Letters Publishing: of (Rebublic Ellian ofTerror,ed.A. Time the in Democracy Militant 19 otherwise intolerant, are no should tolerance unlimited him, For tolerance‟‟. of disappearance tolera of paradox the paradox the andtolerance of paradox the paradoxes bringstwo PopperKarl Enemies Its Societyand Open The In time.of period same bebyrealizeddisciplinedcan ordemocracy.an authoritarian of loss the threaten even and office public to access control speech, and assembly of freedom the restrict repress democracynolongerpacifist,words,otherbe should becomeshould militant.it to needs democracy threat, its abandon autocratic prevent to Lowenstein, to according why is That technique fascist of application destroytopreached elections. after the Third, aims. antidemocratic cannot democracy their around themselves organize freedom to the parties antidemocratic and propaganda antidemocratic of dissemination use may who Ibid, 1258 Ibid, and Exception of State The in Democracy Militant of Foundations The Bastiaan, Rijpkema, and Paul. Cliteur, Tyulkina, Svetlana. Militant Democracy, (PhD diss., Central European University, 2011) : 2011) European University, Central diss., (PhD Democracy, Militant Svetlana. Tyulkina, Jan Muller, v tcnqe t anti to techniques ive Ideas similar to Lowenstein‟s were offered were Lowenstein‟s to similar Ideas and democracies Consequently, universal The opponents hostile most its to even freedoms constitutional offers democracy Second,

citizenship. As it is stated is it As citizenship. -

Werner. Militant Demo Militant Werner. passive attitude and take precautions against parties that threaten its survival. In survival. its threaten that parties against precautions take and attitude passive

hm o icei o vlf it vilify or discredit to them prevent these hostile parties from parties hostile these prevent nce is explained by Popper as Popper by explained is nce

ehiu o fsim efcl ue tee he wanse. The weaknesses. three these uses perfectly fascism of technique “

the tolerant will be destroyed and tolerance with them with tolerance and destroyed be will tolerant the

- eortc ocs sc a bnig parties. banning as such forces, democratic s cracy in The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Constitutional Law, ed. Law, Constitutional Comparative of Handbook Oxford The in cracy

makes the establishment of an autocratic regime inevitable. regime autocratic an of establishment the makes

by Lowenstein by

of democracy. Parallel with Parallel democracy. of elites who still believe in democracy, have to find to have democracy, in believe still who elites 1257 8

Fedm f peh a b ue fr the for used be can speech of Freedom .

“

“ in the works of other scholars during the during scholars other of works the in

unlimited tolerance unlimited access fire should be fought wit fought be should fire ing 21

the institutions that institutions the

t be shown to those who those to shown be t Lowenstein‟s argument,Lowenstein‟s f seby enables assembly of that 2 must lead to the to lead must 20 h fire h

19 ”

hy should They

. 22

According ” they , and thisand , have : CEU eTD Collection 25 24 23 rulingRefah dif a in is state the that argue to fair is it Turkey, of example democracyfacesmilitant o practice the that account into taken be to has It democracy. militant of dilemmas major practice. in effectiveness its and theory way tha argued further be can It dissolved. possibly be could and attacked being are structures basic its when passive democracy a in true behave remain and way can militant democracy if debatable is It establishment. its since criticized been has is secu to order in liberties democracyand rights limits it as concept militant degree certain a to all, of First jurisdictions. considered be to has that natureofthe toinherent democracy dissolve may that regime d justif be can democracy militant self that claims He theory. constitutional theispossibilitythatproblem Popper to mcay ae o mjrt rl mgt ie n potnt t te aoiy o sals a establish to majority the to opportunity an give might rule majority on based emocracy

Ibid, 13Ibid, Ib Ibid,41 id, 56 id, .

Secondly, there may be a difference between justification of militant democracy in democracy militant of justification between difference a be may there Secondly, co democracy militant the of justification the about critiques some are There in Sajo Andras by offered is democracy militant of justification Another ,

, paradox of democracy stems from the self the from stems democracy of paradox

the argument that can outweigh this critique is that democracy cannot afford to beto afford democracy cannot that is critique thisoutweigh canthat argument the

Partywhichsupportedis bynumberhighvoters. of dmcay s n self in is democracy t

democracy. various difficulties that can limit its effectiveness. If we considerthe weIf effectiveness.its difficultieslimit various that can

hl aayig h patc o mltn dmcay n various in democracy militant of practice the analyzing while

the to

itself. As it c it As itself.

majority e o ied 24 .

That is why is That 25 ti gon. iial to Similarly ground. this n - -

Otto Pfersmann defines this problem as one of the of one as problem this defines Pfersmann Otto otaito i i alw is nme t at n this in act to enemies its allows it if contradiction defense is the state‟s most natural characteristic and characteristicnatural most state‟s the is defense wouldbetobyruledtyrantday. decide aone an be observed from the definitions of militant of definitions the from observed be an 9

the aim of democratic self democratic of aim the - contradictions of the majority rule. The rule. majority the of contradictions re their existence. That is why is That existence. their re ficult situation while closi while situation ficult

opr e rus that argues he Popper a

self - preservation is preservation - contradictory

the idea the ng the ng 23 ncept

CEU eTD Collection Law4 Constitutional 29 28 27 26 antidemocratic control to implemented notthem explicitlyifUniteddo closeweStates or consider United Kingdom. mechanisms, legislative or constitutional establishing by parties antidemocratic Croatia, Turkey, as such countries anti these with parties deal should systems democratic anti highly be can They constitution. or system existing the of legitimacy the or democracy of idea the embrace not do parties political the of some However, systems. democratic contemporary of 2.2.MeasureMilitantParty as Closures a of Democracy procedure.partactivelytake inthe should judiciary the opponents, political their suppress to democracy militant of measures pol leading prevent to order In democracy. militant of justification the against argument serious a be can possibility This purposes. political for abused be can theofdegreedecide who judiciary the is the it that initiate is matter to this about conclusion authorized preliminary A is procedure. who and decision the gives who endangered, is democracy defi tohow that, is matter this about question main The democracy. militant Celep, Odul. The Political Causes of Party Closures in Turkey, Parliamentary Affairs (2012) : 3 (2012) Affairs Parliamentary Turkey, of in Closures Party Causes ThePolitical Celep,Odul. 58Ibid, 57Ibid, Mersel, Yigal. The Dissolution of Political Parties: ofPolitical Dissolution The Yigal. Mersel, . 28

s t s rud by argued is it As contesting electorally and existing Peacefully nature, political extremely its of because Fourthly, of measures the implement to moment right the define to difficult is it Thirdly, ifrn cutis ae on dfeet ouin t ti polm Wie some While problem. this to solutions different found have countries Different - eortc r stron or democratic , no. 1(2006):92 threatbytakingintoco account local

ivni Capadoci Giovanni

l anti gly 27

tl, emn, oad San n Fac close France and Spain Poland, Germany, Italy, nenl het t democracy, to threats internal - salsmn. hn h polm s o the how is problem the Then establishment. The problem of internal democracy, International Journal of Journal International democracy, ofinternal problem The 10

a aog ersie esrs ht a be can that measures repressive among ,

political parties are essential elements essential are parties political - nditions. ytmc r anti or systemic the

iiatdmcay concept democracy militant 26

tcl rus o s the use to groups itical at coue a be can closure party ne the point whenpoint the ne 29 - constitutionalist

some of them of some

should

CEU eTD Collection http://www.ptesc.ssc.upenn.edu/Paper_pdf/Capoccia%20part%201.html?action=show&person=125 2007 progress, 32 31 http://www.ptesc.ssc. inprogress 30 generally forces, independence regional with themselves align that parties on prohibitions or prosecution criminal to subject legal concerns. of set separate a raises banning faces. may political changing and co countries different that said be can It society. a within extremists pluralism. party of dynamic free the to regime. the the avoid to order in parties extremist the to measure preventive enjoyment the protecting of name the politicallibertydemocracysociety. andin in a done from is problematic it if is even which perspective expression, democratic and association of freedom restricts parties democr competingseveralparties. from government their freely choose citizens which in representation, democratic of process means no by and regime democratic itself. in a democratic of measure defensive radical most the as seen Celep, Odul. The Political Causes of Party Closures in Turkey, Parliamentary Affairs (2012) : 4 (2012) Affairs Parliamentary Turkey, of in Closures Party Causes ThePolitical Celep,Odul. work Europe, Western in Ban Party Rule: Democratic and Militancy Democratic 2007, Giovanni, Capadocia, apca Goan, Dmcai Mltny n Dmcai Rl: at bn n etr Europ Western in ban Party Rule: Democratic and Militancy “Democratic Giovanni, Cappocia, njunctures produce different extremists. What is seen as a threat t threat a as seen is What extremists. different produce njunctures not to be a threat tomorrow threat a be to not propagandistic acy and party closure do not reconcile with each other in principle. Closure of politicalofprinciple. Closure inother eachwith reconcile not dopartyclosure and acy Samuel Issacharof states Issacharof Samuel the Considering of ideas the because systems democratic for dilemma a create closures Party

This is what justi what is This

upenn.edu/Paper_pdf/Capoccia%20part%201.html?action=show&person=125 “ rns o troit r nurcinr gop ta ae independently are that groups insurrectionary or terrorist for fronts Party closures go ri go closures Party

elements of militant democracy militant of elements

” 30

fies the restriction of basic rights as well as the state the as well as rights basic of restriction the fies

“ three distinct three which is the difficulty that the literature on political party political on literature the that difficulty the is which First, there are the prohibitions on parties that operate as operate that parties on prohibitions the are there First,

eesv mltr oeain. eod tee are there Second, operations. military defensive hs en ta tee s ne fr dniyn the identifying for need a is there that means This 31 ght to the heart of both political pluralism and the and pluralism political both of heart the to ght

esn of reasons discussed above, party closure is a is closure party above, discussed

at poiiin ah f which of each prohibitions party “ harm oday to a specific country specific a to oday ”

that party can do to do can party that

‟

s intrusion s ” wr in work e”,

of CEU eTD Collection 35 34 33 Islamic parties majoritarian antidemocratic the Among electorate. national the within from power seizing of capability their of because categories party other with compared democracy scopeproperpoliticalthe ofbeyond debate asbecanTurkey. itinseen are boundaries territorial their that declare can states Second, violence. or force through state parties. separatist of closure theof reasons distinct two are There aims. separatist promoting party nonmilitarypolitical the comp has state democratic a conditions, these In citizens. its or state democratic the of security the threatens t the of Most determination. regi distinct a to over hold majority their continue the of will political the challenge to seek they rather and citizens of majority an have not do They state. the of form preexisting of lack their despite order usepoliticalifthe capital,theyelectoral their arenaillegal defending for activities. political the threaten can parties These category. this within Uni the in parties third all including world, the in parties minor Many their advertising lesser andgreater to extentspower through claim majoritymandatethe in a elect to is objective whose but democracy liberal of values core the to challenge sustained a for integr territorial continued the opposing stance political a take that distinctions ethnic or religious on premised Ibid, 1438 Ibid, Ibid1433 , Issacharof,Samuel nieortc aoiain ate rpeet mr sros chal serious more a represent parties majoritarian Antidemocratic align parties Separatist of purpose the for elections participate to seek may parties Insurrectionary

elling reasons to protect itself against armed insurrection and may seek to closeto seek may and insurrection armed againstitself protect to reasons elling ity of the country. Lastly, there are prohibitions on parties that seek a platformseeka parties onthat prohibitions arethere Lastly, country. the of ity . FragileDemocrac . iw wtot n ra itnin o eiul cmee o pltcl office. political for compete seriously to intention real any without views

ime the separatist movement has movement separatist the ime “

First they may serve to provide legal cover f cover legal provide to serve may they First ies, Harvard Law Review120, no.6(2007): Review120, Law Harvard ies, themselves on of the country. They often ask for democratic self democratic for ask often They country. the of on 12 ih movem a with

y realistic aim of gaining the support the gaining of aim realistic y n wih is o hne the change to aims which ent

a paramilitary component that component paramilitary a 1432 ted ” 35

States can be placed be can States or attacks on the on attacks or oralarena. 34 eg for lenge

of a of ” 33 -

CEU eTD Collection 36 courts the that mean harm. equivalent other some or country, a in democracy of an persistence the represents for risk party immediate the whether and question in party extremist the the of that characteristics said be can It critical. becomes interpretat Court„s party Constitutional the of actions and ideology the of particularlystrongenables and laws targeted laws, neutral the from Different actions. or ideology party‟s the of analysis an through it violating actually is party the that show to have would it then behavior; or actions that „object‟ protected the of definition a establish first to have Nazism.Fascism and/or Targete state. the of order‟ constitutional the and sovereignty „the as such wordings different by expressed be can This allowed. not is dissent which on core‟ „constitutional a words other in values “ bebanned,„legalparadigms‟:Giovannidistinguishestwocan generalCapocciapartybetween a which for reasons of number large very a establish principle in may countries different of arrangements legal the on based Court, Constitutional Turkeydemocracy. experiencesdramaticthemost difficult and this challenge aboutissue. c imposing of purposes the for status majority seek may parties neutral Ibid, 1442 Ibid,

” Moreover, violation Moreover, definition and law neutral the of interpretation court„s constitutional why, is That would courts the laws, neutral on based party a ban not or whether deciding While by closed are parties political closure, party on rules with countries most In

and and d paradigm identifies the extremists in „positive‟ terms by their ideology such as such ideologytheir by terms „positive‟ in extremists the identifies paradigmd “ targeted

will ”

A . necessarily avail themselves of the option of closing them. As theAs them. closingof option the of themselves avail necessarily

“ of certain legal criteria by extremist political parties does not does parties political extremist by criteria legal certain of

neut straightforward (instraightforwardterms)reasoning. relativelegal ions of the legal text may differ depending on size and size on depending differ may text legal the of ions ral ”

aaim eemns oe osiuinl bet and objects constitutional some determines paradigm 13

which identify extremists. While laws While extremists. identify which

the party is violating with its with violating is party the eia lw y abolishing by law lerical

36 the

CEU eTD Collection http://www.ptesc.ssc.upenn.edu/Paper_pdf/Capoccia%20part%201.html?action=show&person=125 2007 progress, 37 the Constitutional Court. of power the legitimates that democracy protecting of aim the is it as account into take to factor another is democracy to benefits and cost decision„s the party, the of closure society. the within elements various between relations as well as dynamics, internal situation, political current and historical th taken, is parties political the close to decision the before decisions, costly are bans party apca Goan, Dmcai Mltny n Dmcai Rl: at bn n etr Erp” wr in work Europe”, Western in ban Party Rule: Democratic and Militancy “Democratic Giovanni, Cappocia, ere

are going to be numerous points to take into account, such as the costs and benefits, and costs the as such account, into take to points numerous be to going are

t s motn t srs ta while that stress to important is It 14

eiig o the to deciding

CEU eTD Collection Court 40 39 2 (Ashgate:2009), 38 official announced meanin founding founded ( 3.1.1 3.1. 1980.1960inandcoups Turkish the follows Constitution p the are Constitutions 1982 and 1961 the 1924 and 1923, in Revolution The 1982. and 1961 1924, of Constitutions the as,respectively constitutions different threeby governed beenhas Republic Turkish the 1923, on foundation its Since changes. radical these after written are that constitutions broke constitutionalthat continuity. Turkish the as such po authoritarian modernization, changes and revolution political radical certain by guided been has development Cumhuriyet Varol, Ozan. Varol, Oder, Bertil Emrah. Turkey in The Militant Democracy Principle in Modern Democracies, ed. Markus Thiel Markus ed. Democracies, Modern in Principle Democracy Militant The in Turkey Emrah. Bertil Oder, Belge, CHAPTERMilitant3: Democracy i Single Party Period(1923 of Turkey, Law & Society Review 40, no. 3no.(2 40, Review &Society LawofTurkey, . Revolution,ItsandIdeologytheImportant Most Measures .

g policy. Ceren.

ful From the analyzing by democracy militant of concept the of traces the follow to try will I co has democracy Militant by

elite.

the distinction Mustafa

The Democratic Coup d‟Coup TheDemocratic Halk

red o te Cou the of Friends

39 63

the “This congruency During

Par founding

Kemal meant

tisi, between

single

RPP

that, Ataturk, of between

rt: The Republican Alliance and and Alliance Republican The rt:

party )

the

governed for E tat - Constitutionalism

1946) 38 Republic

party

, Harvard International Law Journal 53, no. 2 no. (2012):323 53, LawJournal International Harvard , example,

the

rule - the eemnd h Trih oiia prdg, whose paradigm, political Turkish the determined

first

and

of state Turkey 006): 659

the in

15 President

the the

litical culture and also the two military coups military two the also and culture litical

1923

structure RPP

n theEvolution ofthe Turkish state. governor

to between

40 single of

1950, In

Turkey, and

eetv Activ Selective of 1936, -

party

the the

1923 province

Prim

and roducts of the two military two the of roducts Republican

party framework.

and

e the

ism of the Constitutional Constitutional the of ism

Minister

would organization 1950,

rest

People‟s of

The automatically there

İsmet the 29 October 29

RPP

nation‟s

was

İnönü Party

was

the no

CEU eTD Collection 49 48 47 46 161 1 no.(2010): 65, Journal 45 44 43 Court 42 41 theirdisagreementgroupsexpressing thewith secularistpolicies. planned as reforms. bottom time of period scho and society the in positions and jobs their lost leaders influential many process this During script. Latin the by replaced was script Arabic the 1928, religionofsystem.In neutralizeinto legalthe the the effect 1926 in codes Commercial Italian an German and Code, Penal Italian Code, Civil Swiss the byreplaced and abolished was law Islamic importantly, More 1926. in one solar Western the to calendar lunar Islamic the from Islamicofsymbol domain. private the to it confine and sphere public from Islam of exclusion was which of intention main the top of series a with economic, that positions established be : (2012) Affairs Parliamentary Turkey, of in Closures Party Causes ThePolitical Celep,Odul, History, Modern a Turkey Jan. Erich Zürher, Tyulkina, Svetlana. Militant Democracy, ( Democracy, Militant Svetlana. Tyulkina, Jung, Dietrich. “Secularism”: A Key to Turkish Politics, Intellectual Discourse 14, no. 2( 136 2006): no. 14, Discourse Intellectual Politics, Turkish KeytoA “Secularism”: Jung,Dietrich. ( Democracy, Militant Svetlana. Tyulkina, 122 2007), Press, University Syracuse NY: Syracuse, ( Turkey, ofMemoryin Politics The Esra, Ozyurek, Belge, Kuru, Ahmet. Review of Islam and Secularism in Turkey: Kemalism Re Kemalism Turkey: in Secularism and Islam of Review Ahmet. Kuru, Varol

the

was of Turkey, Law & Society Review 40, no. 3 659 no.(2006): 40, Review &Society LawofTurkey,

, Ozan. ,

head Ceren.

time of period short a in context political Turkish new the to applied was Secularism . 42 based

48 social

Moreover

the

of which became clear after the tra the after clear became which The Democratic Coup d‟Coup TheDemocratic

red o te Cou the of Friends

46 the 45 RPP on

47 modernization,

h sgs f hs oiy a b se i te abolis the in seen be can policy this of signs The t a asmd ht h pplto would population the that assumed was It

leadership)byAssemblyGeneral1924well of asin the changecalendar as

However, - “Kemalism” RPP to ,

, - and

bottom refor bottom during

branch

members

Kemalist reforms did not did reforms Kemalist

single rt: The Republican Alliance and and Alliance Republican The rt:

in national and E

tat ms. his

, Harvard International Law Journal 53, no. 2 no. (2012):323 53, Law Journal International Harvard , Ph of party Ph f ollowed

(London: Tauris, 2004), 2004), Tauris, (London:

44 D diss. D D diss. D province.” the

Kemalism embraced assertive version of secularism of version assertive embraced Kemalism unity,

rule,

party , Central European University, 2011) : 2011) European University, Central , , Central European University, 20 University, European Central , nsition to the multi the to nsition 16

Mustafa and

the

41 filled

most state‟s As

a penetrate deeply into Turkish society Turkish into deeply penetrate both Kemal

importantly result,

eetv Activ Selective ideology 177

as eae lieae n short a in illiterate became lars bureaucratic

ligion and Nation State, Middle East Middle State, Nation and ligion

rdal acp tee top these accept gradually

Ataturk‟s - 49 Turkey‟s

party system, with different with system, party

was

secularism. h et f aiht (the caliphate of ment ism of the Constitutional Constitutional the of ism

11) : 214 11) the

views founding and

214 party‟s 11

governmental

elite

political, ideology

that - to d

CEU eTD Collection 54 no. 48, Studies 53 no.2 52, (2012):244 Law ofInternational Journal 52 51 constitutional 50 every of drafting the during role dominant a had military the elites, state de a developed have elites state the parties, political by represented currents two these by posed order. threats these minimize secular the to threat existential an as revivalism Islamic perceive and politicalthe elite. by represented interests particularistic the against interest national the of guardians legitimate parliament. bureaucrats elite multi the to transition after cleavages orperiod.duringignoredsuppressed this Turkish citizenship.” of thanidentitiesotherthe fact that due to exclusionistTurkish nationalismwasof understanding understanding European the to a create to aimed nationalism ofnationalism. understandingThisAtaturkwith accordancenationalism‟ „Turkishin been has Turkey modern of principles fundamental the of one purpose, this For times. Ottoman the of differentlythesense,understamodern the from in Celep, Odul, The Political Causes of Party Closures in Turkey, Parliamentary Affairs (2012) :11, 12 :11, (2012) Affairs Parliamentary Turkey, of in Closures Party Causes ThePolitical Celep,Odul, ofClos Party Causes ThePolitical Celep,Odul, Shambayati, Aslı. Bali, Ibid,12 -

the unelected state bureaucracy consisting of the military officers, judges, high judges, officers, military the of consisting bureaucracy state unelected the -

Sunni As a result, the state elites see Kurdish nationalism as a threat to Turkis to threat a as nationalism Kurdish see elites state the result, a As deep created Turkification and secularization of projects engineering social These “ Moreover, the early Republican elite aimed to create a new „Turkish‟ nation (millet)nation„Turkish‟ new createRepublicantoa aimed theelite early Moreover, The P The 52

1(2012):109 Hootan. -

h saeeie re elites state The - n te oiia eie nldn eetd oiiin, oiia pris ad the and parties, political politicians, elected including elite political the and Mus erils of Judicial Independence: Constitutional Transition Constitutional Independence: Judicial of erils 53

i iett sc a Krih n non and Kurdish as such identity lim The T The

urkish Const urkish

fense mechanism in the form of form the in mechanism fense

cont gard themselves as the heirs of the Kemalist legacy and the and legacy Kemalist the of heirs the as themselves gard emporary, democratic notion of citizenry of notion democratic emporary, itutional Court and and Court itutional - party period concernin period party

51 ures in Turkey, Parliamentary Affairs (2012) :11 (2012) Affairs Parliamentary Turkey, ures in

nding of the old Muslim/Islamicoldthe community of nding the Justice and Development Party Development and theJustice 50

However “ militant democracy militant - ulm dniis ee largely were identities Muslim g the balance between the state the between balance the g and the Turkish Example Turkish the and ,

h ery Republican early the

in Turkey, similarTurkey, in ” , Middle Eastern Middle , . nationalismh 54

n re to order In Among the Among

, Virgina , - level CEU eTD Collection International 58 no.3(2013) 11, Law Constitutional 57 Turkey, 56 International 55 to According others. of liberties and rights the of interest the in imposed those are liberty on limitations only the that stated is it and birth at endowed right natural a as regarded is liberty Constitution, the of 68 Article of Rights the of Declaration French the on modeled freedoms bypromulgatedmilitarythe coupselected elites followingagainstcivilian governments. an 1961 the than authorship civilian of virtue by qualities liberal semi under written was Constitution 1924 the though freedom. relativeof atmosphere an in place tookdebates constitutional TurkishGrandNationalbythe appointedAssembly. parliament of members of consisted that commission a by drafted was Constitution 1924 The 19 of Constitution the approved that Assembly (1920 Assembly the of the by stronglycontrolled were in elected Assembly National Grand Turkish the by approved be to ConstitutionThe3.1.2. 1924 of supraconstitutional actor. o understanding This principles. Kemalist self its to reference with justified it which document zuu, ru ad ecaa Oe Frk Dmcaiain n te oiis f osiuin aig in Making Constitution of Politics the and Democratization Faruk, Omer Genckaya, and Ergun Ozbudun, Bâli Isiksel Isiksel A , ( True.ewe Tx ad C and Text Turkuler.Between , True.ewe Tx ad C and Text Turkuler.Between , Budapest: CEU Press, 2009), 11 2009), Press, CEU Budapest: l. ors n Cntttoa Tasto: esn fo te uks C Turkish the from Lessons Transition: Constitutional and Courts sli. h 12 Cnttto psesd bif n sml sye n em o rgt and rights of terms in style simple and brief a possessed Constitution 1924 The t Kemalists, by dominated completely almost was legislature new the As constitution first the was 1961, until force in stayed which 1924, of Constitution The

Journ Lawno.3 11, (2013) ofConstitutional Journal al of Constittuteutional Lawno.3 11, (2013) ofConstittuteutional al - 1923) had been elected. For this reason, the Turkish Grand National Grand Turkish the reason, this For elected. been had 1923) 55

: 669

RPP

ril 7, nilblt o pro,fedm f conscience, of freedom person, of inviolability 70, Article

and none of the deputies from the first legislative sessionlegislative first the fromdeputies the of none and ontext:Turkey’ ontext:Turkey’ is w rl md te uks mltr a military Turkish the made role own its f 18 24 was dominated almost entirely by the by entirely almost dominated was 24

713 Trad s Taiin f uhrtra Constitutionalism Authoritarian of Tradition s :712

- uhrtra cniin, t a more had it conditions, authoritarian to o Atoiain Constitutionalism, Authoritarian of ition srbd urinhp oe vr the over role guardianship ascribed

Man and of the Citizen. the of and Man d 1982 Constitutions, both Constitutions, 1982 d 1923.The 1923 elections 1923 1923.The ase 56 ,

It is argued that eventhat argued is It International

ora of Journal 57 RPP

he In , . CEU eTD Collection 66 67 2012), Yayinlari, Hareketi Fund,Ari ( Marshall 65 2009), Press, CEU Turkey,(Budapest: 64 63 Pres CEU Turkey,(Budapest: 62 67 2012), Yayinlari Hareketi Fund,(Ari Marshall 61 12 2009), Press, CEU Turkey,(Budapest: 60 59 i in powers executive and legislative the both embodied Assembly the that account into take we If review. judicial of power the with judiciary independent an of lack the was powers argues rightly law. the with accordance in constituted tribunals independent by Assembly superviseto power a President. the by and elected Ministers of Council it by elected Republic the of President the through authority executive its exercise National Grand the in centered and nation. legislature on sovereignty vested which Constitution 1924 indivisibleinfallible.and isabsolute, it and g any as regarded Turks. of are rights natural association and assembly property, private labor, travel, press, thought, The 1924 Constitution The1924 Constitution The1924 70, 5 sec. 68, art. Constitution, The1924

za, he. Compar Ahmet. Ozcan, za, he. oprtv Cntttoa Cek ad Balan and Checks Constitutional Comparative Ahmet. Ozcan, zuu, Ergun Ozbudun, Ergun Ozbudun, Dem Faruk, Omer Genckaya, and Ergun Özbudun, enera 62

In addition, Article 8 states that the judicial power is exercised in the name of the of name the in exercised is power judicial the that states 8 Article addition, In nation of will general the that argues sovereignty popular of reading Kemalist The hs acrig o ril 5 bt telgsaieadeeuie oesae vested are powers executive and legislative the both 5, Article to according Thus,

l orlspecificrestrictions cannot

ht h mjr ekes f h 12 Cnttto i trs f eaain of separation of terms in Constitution 1924 the of weakness major the that n Gnky, mr Faruk Omer Genckaya, and Faruk Omer Genckaya, and

andtheCouncilof changeMinisterswhenevernecessary. itit found e eiiaey iie, o i wud en etitn te il f the of will the restricting mean would it for limited, legitimately be , art. 8, sec. 1 sec. 8, art. , 1 sec. 5, art. , tv Cntttoa Cek ad aacs n Tre , Poet f h German the of Project A , Turkey and Balances and Checks Constitutional ative 59 s, 2009), 11, 12 11, 2009), s,

Having declared the basic rights of the citizens, it did not include not did it citizens, the of rights basic the declared Having

11 .

Assembly. , ,

eortzto ad h Pltc o Cnttto Mkn in Making Constitution of Politics the and Democratization in Making Constitution of Politics the and Democratization 60

19 This can be understood from the Article3ofunderstood thethe be This from can caiain n te oiis f osiuin aig in Making Constitution of Politics the and ocratization 64

Furthermore, the Assembly had the exclusivethe had Assembly the Furthermore, 63

ril 7 tts ht h Asml ws to was Assembly the that states 7 Article h pol wtot n condition. any without people the e ad uky A rjc o te German the of Project A Turkey, and ces 66

he Özcan Ahmet 65 61

tself,

The CEU eTD Collection 70 PartySyste 69 12 2009), Press, CEU Turkey,(Budapest: 68 Hareket Fund,Ari ( Marshall 67 disagreement created law this However, peasants. landless to land redistribute would which fixed at products before ofproductionprices, was compl amounts fixed sell to required were they that fact the to due polices economy new the by affected negatively were peasants the Especially labour. forced impose the with economy the of policies economic and economy Turkish on War World Second the of effects negative the to War. World Second the of beginning the at population Turkish the of majority the by unpopular deeply become had power. absolute Atatürk Kemal Mustafa one the dismantle to decided ofoppositionparties. the formation period multi the to transition after problems major created balances and checks constitutional implem to RPP the enabled authority poorlywererightsbasic left protected. constitutional deficiency, this of result a As serious. more even becomes lack essential this Zürher, Erich Jan. Turkey a Modern History, (London History, Modern a Turkey Jan. Erich Zürher, Multi Formationofthe the and İnönü İsmet ofTurkishDemocracy: ofPolitics “The Review Sabri. Sayarı, Ergun Ozbudun, za, Ahmet Ozcan, the 68 RPP government. In this period this In government. RPP

as a result of important decimportantresult ofa as In order to gain support of peasants, the RPP government proposed a land reformproposedlaw land peasants,the a support RPPofgovernment gain to order In multi the to passing Before of concentration such period, party single during Özbudun, by argued is it As m, 1938 m, Cmaaie osiuinl hcs n Blne ad uky A rjc o te German the of Project A Turkey, and Balances and Checks Constitutional Comparative .

and - 1950” by John M.JohnVanderl by1950”

Genckaya, Omer Faruk, Democratization and the Politics of Constitution Makingin ofConstitution the Politics and Faruk, Democratization Omer Genckaya, “ National Defence Law Defence National 70 i Yayinlari, 2012), 2012), i Yayinlari,

This opposition increased during the Second the during increased opposition This

- at sse wih a gvn isl ad his and himself given had which system party

ision of President İsmet İnönü Presidentofİsmetision eted. - party period, it is important to important is it period, party 67 ippe(Albany, State University of New York Pres, 2005 ):1 Pres, York ofNew University State ippe(Albany, the 67

69 n mdriain eom. oee, h lc of lack the However, reforms. modernization ent

RPP put additional taxes and increased it increased and taxes additional put RPP RPP government under leadership of İsmet İnönü İsmet of leadership under government RPP 20 : Tauris, 2004), 208 2004), Tauris, : ” , which g which ,

ave it full authority to fix prices and prices fix to authority full it ave

at the end of 1945permittothe end at of analyze

World War years, due years, War World

why İsmet İnönü İsmet why predecessor, s role in role s

- party - CEU eTD Collection 2005): RoutledgeCurzon, 77 76 75 74 73 72 2005): RoutledgeCurzon, 71 two votes. which in elections 3.2.1. 3.2. morewithyearsdissatisfiedthanof twenty authoritarian republicanrule leave to forced been or left RPP. which Four‟ the of „Memorandum the of signatories established. Four the as known is which Group, Assembly RPP the to proposal a submitted ofpolitic the formation a and liberalization political of degree a allow to decided he Therefore indefinitely. it suppress of policies the with dissatisfaction Presi state. the with together party the at directed was dissatisfaction this system, party one under apparatus state the with identification close Turkey. postwar in opposition political owners land and notables local the among Zürher, Erich Jan. Turkey a Modern History, (London: Tauris, 2004), 217 2004), Tauris, (London: History, Modern a Turkey Jan. Erich Zürher, Jung, Mod a Turkey Jan. Erich Zürher, Ibid, Zürher, Erich Jan. T Jan. Erich Zürher, luıı, eia el ad ü, Özlem Tür, and Benli Meliha Altunısık, Challenges Turkey Özlem, Tür, and Benli Meliha Altunısık, -

at sse with system party 74

210 76 Dietrich. “Secularism”: A Key to Turkish Politics, Intellectual Discourse 14, no. 2( 2006): no. 14, Discourse Intellectual Politics, Turkish KeytoA “Secularism”: Dietrich. hrl atr t foundation, its after Shortly Multi Party Period Political Instability1950Political Until 1960, despite the existence of a number of other political parties, there was a was there parties, political other of number a of existence the despite 1960, Until h DP The Menderes Adnan including deputies four passed, been had law reform land the After

” akn fr h Trih constitution Turkish the for asking , 73 Later, on 1946 the Democratic Party ( Party Democratic the 1946 on Later,

ae o oe udr h laesi o Ann edrs fe te 1950 the after Menderes Adnan of leadership the under power to came urkey a Modern History, (London: Tauris, 2004), Tauris, (London: History, Modern urkeya it won the 408 seats of a total of 487 seats by gaining the 52.7% of the of 52.7% the gaining by seats 487 of total a of seats 408 the won it

25 26

the al oppositionsafetyasal a valve.

ern History, (London: Tauris: 2004), 211 2004), Tauris: (London: History, ern P n oe and power in DP

- 1960 the the

72 , Turkey Challenges Challenges Turkey , P i scey n ke ta i i nt osbe to possible not is it that knew and society in RPP

Erich Jan Zürcher claims that because of the RPP‟s the of because that claims Zürcher Jan Erich P eae ce a became DP 71 and it played a crucial role in role crucial a played it and 21

th to dent Inonu was well aware of the growing the of aware well was Inonu dent e Demokrat Parti Demokrat e imp be P i opposition. in RPP

tr f l te poiin forces opposition the all of nter eetd n ul n democracy and full in lemented 208 f otniy n Cag, (USA: Change, and Continuity Of (USA: Change, and Continuity Of

, DP) was formed by four by formed was DP) , . “ 75 the Memorandum of Memorandum the 77

t s motn to important is It the emergence of emergence the 136

the

CEU eTD Collection International 83 Court 82 81 Court 80 20 Press, CEU Turkey,(Budapest: 79 78 elites state of unity a was there bureaucracy, state the and scene political the both dominated the of reason a as account into leader top its executed and 1960 in government DP the overthrew it thus, and project Kemalist the to threat a as opponents 3.2.2. bemilitarytobureaucracycontinuedloyaltheto when was RPPiteven nolonger in campaign. asset financial the to laws passed retirement, early into professors and RPP the suppressed students. and intelligentsia, the bureaucracy, the groups, support (1950 power in least at or suppress to powers vast their use to partythemajority leaders ofthe theenabledlegislature majorityin lopsidedproduced a which the constituency While menti

Belge, Belge,

Varol, Ozan. Varol, Ozan. Varol, zuu, Ergun Ozbudun, Isiksel DP implemented policies by using the Ministry of Finance and Parliament to reduce the reduce to Parliament and Finance of Ministry the using by policies implemented DP DP. of Turkey, Law & Society Review 40, no. 3no.(2006): 40, Review &Society LawofTurkey, 3no.(2006): 40, Review &Society LawofTurkey,

on that on

the Military CoupMilitary1961 andthe Constitution of Ceren. Ceren. Turkuler.B , “ The Military regarded the DP‟s growing power and its suppression towards political towards suppression its and power growing DP‟s the regarded Military The during obvious became Constitution 1924 the of problems The h ursrie caatr f eiltv pwr culd iha eetrl system electoral an with coupled power, legislative of character unrestrained The

81 RPP was representing the secular elite, elite, secular the representing was RPP Journal of Constitutional Lawno.3(2013) 11, ofConstitutional Journal .

TheDemocrati d‟Coup TheDemocratic 78 The reason of this suppression was reasonable fear of fear reasonable was suppression this of reason The the red o te Cou the of Friends Cou the of Friends s of s

– n Gnky, mr Faruk Omer Genckaya, and RPP and RPP 1960), ten et n C and Text etween the - friendly press, friendly RPP which significantly restrained its capability to mount an election an mount to capability its restrained significantly which RPP h D implemented DP the c Coup d‟Coup c

the 09): 13 09):

DP were representing different cultural and political fault lines. fault political and cultural different representing were DP rt: The Republican Alliance and and Alliance Republican The rt: and Alliance Republican The rt: s. E E 83

90 op I te ige at pro, as period, party single the In Coup. 1960 tat tat

There is one more explanatory factor that should be taken be should that factor explanatory more one is There forced disobedient government officers including judges, including officers government disobedient forced , Harvard International Law Journal 53, no. 2 (2012): 324 2 no. (2012): 53, Law Journal International Harvard , 2 no. (2012): 53, Law Journal International Harvard , ontext:Turkey‟ , eortzto ad h Pltc of Politics the and Democratization 22

harass the opposition. the harass

ersie oiis gis te P ad its and RPP the against policies repressive 660 659 :

713 s Tradition of Authoritarian Constitutionalism, Constitutionalism, Authoritarian of Tradition s

the

suppress P a spotd y lrey rural largely a by supported was DP eetv Activ Selective Activ Selective

political opposition. political the 80 ” 79

For example, example, For

ism of the Constitutional Constitutional the of ism Constitutional the of ism During their 10 years 10 their During DP that the civil and civil the that DP osiuin aig in Making Constitution the ten year ten the the

323

Moreover power. P had RPP

- the rule of rule DP 82

CEU eTD Collection Constituti 88 3 735 no.(2013): 87 86 no.4 62, Quarterly Research TurkeyPolitical , 85 2005) RoutledgeCurzon, 84 rule. civilian transitionperiod.duringthe country wh (NUC) Committee Unity National the declaration, the to According election. the to of winners and resulting the possible”to power the as transfer quickly as elections free and fair “hold to committed Forces Armed unfortunate the from democracy Turkish the “rescue ofdeathtothesentenced DP threemembers cabinet, theyandwere then executed. Highdown. shut was party thereason this for and court, that Associations of Accord procedural. was measure this of justification the coup, 1960 the of regime military the was closure DP‟s the for reason major the although that note to interesting is It time. ( that project modernization the continue duringtheDPinterrupted theinof opinion rulethestate elites. to and elites state the and political camps. rival became elites political and naa sie uu Mahkemesi Hukuk Asliye Ankara Affairs Parliamentary Turkey, of in Closures Party Causes ThePolitical Celep,Odul, Bâli Shambayati, Hootan and Kirdis, Esen, In Pursuit of ''Contemporary Civilization'': Judicial Empowerment in Empowerment Judicial Civilization'': ''Contemporary of Pursuit In Esen, Kirdis, and Hootan Shambayati, Varol, Ozan. The Turkish Model of Civil of Model Turkish The Ozan. Varol, Altunısık, Meliha Benli and Tür, Özlem, Turkey Challenges Challenges Turkey Özlem, Tür, and Benli Meliha Altunısık, the Al. ors n Cntttoa Tasto: esn fo te uks C Turkish the from Lessons Transition: Constitutional and Courts Asli. ,

All mem All onal Law 11, no.3(2013)11,Law onal DP had failed to hold conventions every year was taken into account by the civilian the by account into taken was year every conventions hold to failed had DP h NC eie t aot nw n dmcai cnttto bfr rtrig to returning before constitution democratic and new a adopt to decided NUC The to was coup the of intention the that declared Forces Armed the power, seizing After 1960 June In

elites. After the rule of rule the After elites. 88

bers of the DP cabinet, all the DP parliamentary representatives were arrested. were representatives parliamentary DP the all cabinet, DP the of bers ”

h NC nie fv lw rfsos o rpr a e constitution new a prepare to professors law five invited NUC The

all political parties were obliged to hold a convention every year. The fact The year. every convention a hold to obliged were parties political all : 30 the ,

84 Shambayati argues that the aim of the 1961 coup is to reunify thereunify to is coup 1961 the of aim the that argues Shambayati P a bne b Akr Cvl or o Gnrl Jurisdiction General of Court Civil Ankara by banned was DP : 669

a te osiuinl or ws o etbihd t that at established not was Court Constitutional the as ) 87 - the

Military Relations, International Journal of Constitutional Law 11, Law Constitutional of Journal International Relations, Military (2009) ich consisted of thirty eight officers would govern the govern would officers eight thirty of consisted ich DP

:770 the 23

“ unity of the elite the of unity situation in which it found itself.” The itself.” found it which in situation Justice Board ( Board Justice f otniy n Cag, (USA: Change, and Continuity Of 85

”

was broken was ase Yüksek Adalet Divanı AdaletYüksek , (2012): 6 (2012): International

and these two these and

” ing to ing 86

a been had

ora of Journal This . “ Act ) CEU eTD Collection 770 (2009): 62 ResearchQuarterly 91 20 Press, CEU Turkey,(Budapest: 90 Court 89 collect it which theRPP.of etc.) ind and commerceof chambers unions, trade representatives, youth associations, traders‟ and artisans‟ associations, veteran judiciary, organizations. society civil certain and 79 Party, Nation political Peasant Republican and existing RPP the two parties, of representatives 75 (5) (4) provinces, Ministers, from of elected Council indirectly the members of members (3) NUC, by selected members eighteen b elected members Ten (1) members: following the of other. consisted the as representatives civilian of compromised wing two of comprised nottherepresentativesmajorityof could constitute the members. party elected freely that provide to system quota a with divided be Assembly Constituent the parties.political of representatives the of composed final the assembly elected directly writeprefer not did Comission Feyzioglu The constitution. the would of version which Assembly, Constituent the for rules election the determine a chair to appointed was Feyzioglu) (Turhan credentials Republican strong his for known is who professor law a draft, the completed Commission Constitutional the After draft. the into military the of views the incorporated Commission Constitutional hmaai Hoa. n usi o 'Cneprr Cvlzto': uiil moemn i Tre, Political Turkey, in Empowerment Judicial Civilization'': ''Contemporary of Pursuit In Hootan. Shambayati, Belge, Ozbudun, Ergun. Ergun. Ozbudun, ” of Turkey, Law & Society Review 40, no. 3no.(2006): 40, Review &Society LawofTurkey, 90

Ceren. According to one estimate, 200 of the 265 members of the Assembly were members were Assembly the of members 265 the of 200 estimate, one to According The 1961 Constitution was adopted by the Assembly and ratified by a referendum in referendum a by ratified and Assembly the by adopted was Constitution 1961 The a by prepared was Constitution 1961 the result, a As 91

red o te Cou the of Friends ed n Gnky, mr Faruk Omer Genckaya, and 61.71% of the popular vote. As t As vote. popular the of 61.71% s: the NUC the s:

09), 14, 15 14, 09),

rt: The Republican Alliance and and Alliance Republican The rt: as one and an indirectly elected House of Representatives of House elected indirectly an and one as

ustry, teachers‟ associations, agricultural organizationsagricultural associations, teachers‟ustry, , Democratizati ( ersnaie o te rs, nvriis and universities press, the of representatives 24

660, 661 660,

Instead, he recommended that the seats of seats the thatrecommended he Instead, he Constituent Assembly was dominated was Assembly Constituent he n n te oiis f osiuin aig in Making Constitution of Politics the and on

eetv Activ Selective

“ members chosen by professional by chosen members h Hue f Representatives of House The 89

y the head of the state, (2) state, the of head the y commission that would that commission osiun Assembly Constituent ism of the Constitutional Constitutional the of ism CEU eTD Collection 768 (2009): 62 ResearchQuarterly 96 3no.(2013): 95 International 94 93 Turkey, 92 Constituti parties. political close permanently to authority profound the with Court Constitutional the authorized by the and laws of Court strengthening capture partisan to subject as viewed senators. mem former the (3) Republic the of Presidents former appointed members 15 (1) include members elected members. elected non and ballot general by elected members 150 of composed was Turkey, of Assembly grantingservants includingautonomy andadministrativeto public judges certain agencies. civil of security job improving courts, administrative the strengthening laws, the of review balances. and checks of system effective an creating by assemblies elective and politicians of distrust a reflected also Constitution to the rights citizens, social extensive granting and liberties civil expanding greatly while that argues Ergun them. of interests and values political basic the reflects Constitution 1961 the and professors) university and bureaucracy, the military, (the elites state by largely hmaai Hoa. n usi o 'Cneprr Cvlzto': uiil moemn i Tre, Political Turkey, in Empowerment Judicial Civilization'': ''Contemporary of Pursuit In Hootan. Shambayati, Civil of Model Turkish The Ozan. Varol,

Ozbudun, Ergun. The Constitutional System of Turkey 1876 to the Present (US: Palgrave Mcmillan, 2011), 59 2011), Mcmillan, Palgrave (US: Present 1876toof Turkeythe System TheConstitutional Ozbudun,Ergun. Isiksel zuu, Ergun Ozbudun,

was established. The Constitution empowered the Court to review the constitutionality the review to Court the empowered Constitution The established. was ( True. ewe Te Between Turkuler. , 95 Budapest: CEU Press, 2009), 16 2009), Press, CEU Budapest: 93 h itnin f h faes a t lmt h pwr f h lgsaue wih they which legislature, the of power the limit to was framers the of intention The bicameralism embraced Constitution 1961 The

onal Court oe coas nldn Hoa Shambayati Hootan including scholars Some

Journal of Constitutional Lawno.3(2013) 11, ofConstitutional Journal

738 judicial and other bureaucratic agencies. bureaucratic other and judicial

n Gen and -

l byusinghegemonicpreservationHirschl‟s thesis. w o te uks Gad ainl seby Te osiuin also Constitution The Assembly. National Grand Turkish the of aws into the National Assembly and t and Assembly National the into ky, mr Faruk Omer ckaya,

t n C and xt

- Military Relations, International Journal of Constitutional Law 11, Law Constitutional of Journal International Relations, Military ontext:

n tu a a het o eait rdmnne by predominance, Kemalist to threat a as thus and Dmcaiain n te oiis f osiuin aig in Making Constitution of Politics the and Democratization ,

Turkey‟ 25

: 714 Taiin f uhrtra Constitutionalism, Authoritarian of Tradition s

94 he Senate of the Republic (TSR). TSR (TSR). Republic the of Senate he y h Peiet o 6 er () the (2) years 6 for President the by “ For the same aim, the Constitutional the aim, same the For es f NUC of bers ch These n i dvdd h Gad National Grand the divided it and xli te salsmn o the of establishment the explain cs nldd h judicial the included ecks

96 h bcm life became who

Ozbudun the

- Non RPP, time ” 92 -

CEU eTD Collection 100 11,Law Constitutional 99 C 98 Court 97 Co Bâli experience elected were than preferences policy military‟s the with aligned be to likely more were members whose judiciary, unelected the to given was Court Constitutional the on members the of majority the by Presid the by two two and Parliament, Senate, by three Accounts), of Court and Court, High State, of (Council courts appellate other byselected be wouldmemberspermanent the fifteen ofEight members. valuesinterestsstatethe andprotectingof the elites p is it privileg defend Court Constitutional the of establishment the that by privileges acquired previouslyrig themtransforming into their secure to elites threatened of attempt conscious onstitutional Revolutions, Revolutions, onstitutional Ran Hirschl, Bâli Belge, Varol, Ozan. Varol, nstitutional Law 11, no.3(2013)11,Law nstitutional Al. ors n Cntttoa Tasto: esn fo te uks C Turkish the from Lessons Transition: Constitutional and Courts Asli. , Al. ors n Cntttoa Tasto: esn fo te uks C Turkish the from Lessons Transition: Constitutional and Courts Asli. , of Turkey, Law &Socie LawofTurkey, and i te et eae, h Cntttoa Court Constitutional the decades, next the in lanned,

Ceren. “ argu Bali Aslı process, making constitution Turkish to thesis this implementing By operatingnotare their toadvantage. decisi majoritarian when even preferences policy their secure to and hegemony their preserve to forces sociopolitical hegemonic for way institutional J that argues Hirschl dca epwret hog te otfcto o rgt my rvd a efficient an provide may rights of fortification the through empowerment udicial h Cntttoa Cut con Court Constitutional The ,

. the military supported the formation of a sympathetic Constitutional Court as they Courtas Constitutional sympathetic a of formationthe militarysupportedthe The Political Origins of Judicial Empo ofJudicial Origins Political The The Democratic Coup d‟Coup TheDemocratic

political actors. political red o te Cou the of Friends es against democratic reversal through courts and constitutional provisions. As provisions. constitutional and courts throughreversal democratic against es no.3(2013) Law & Social Inquiry 25, no.1 (2000): 95 no.1(2000): 25, Inquiry & Social Law ty Review 40, no. 3 657 no.(2006): 40, ty Review

hts. : : ”

670 670 97 100 ent of the Republic. the of ent transferring rt: The Republican Alliance and and Alliance Republican The rt:

ToquoteHirschl: Ozan Varol and Hootan Shambayati argue that after that argue Shambayati Hootan and Varol Ozan

E tat , Harvard International Law Journal 53, no. 2 no. (2012): 53, LawJournal International Harvard ,

itd f ite praet n fv substitute five and permanent fifteen of sisted oe t a ih or cn e nepee a a as interpreted be can court high a to power 98 werment through Constitutionalization: Lessons from FourfromLessons Constitutionalization: through werment 26

is the part of the strategy to strengthen and strengthen to strategy the of part the is ” .

As it can be seen, be can it As

eetv Activ Selective

lyd n motn rl in role important an played ase ase “ , , ism of the Constitutional Constitutional the of ism the power to select a select to power the on International International - making processes making

329

ora of Journal ora of Journal

the DP es

CEU eTD Collection TechnicalUni East Middle 105 104 34(2003) Relations ofInternational TurkishYearbook 103 102 ResearchQuarterly Hootan. Shambayati, 101 relatively a enshrined it and Constitution German 1949 the and Rights, Human of Declaration t including revolution, rights 20th of documents the from inspiration gained Constitution 1961 the rights, basic of terms In constitutions. Turkish the all of liberal most the as regarded be can Constitution during established is that Assembly Constituent account di Constitution:the1961 regime. the of guardian and system political the of actor an NSC). tim first the for role political elites. be to likely are which elites, state as interests and values their preserve to wanted rectly involved in the governing of the country as gover as country the of governing the in involved rectly Ete, Hatem, The Legal, Political and Sociological Roots of Tutelary Regime in Single Regimein ofTutelary Roots and Sociological Political Legal, Hatem,The Ete, The Uzgel, 245 2004), Tauris, (London: History, Modern a Turkey Jan. Erich Zürher, Ozan. Varol, 1961 102

İlhan. theNSC.decisionsbytakenthe t s ut pzln ta ee tog te 91 osiuin a datd y a by drafted was Constitution 1961 the though even that puzzling quite is It getmilitarytothe foreliteit made 111Articlehad possible defined inNSC of Duties national to related decisions andsecurity coordination. making the in assisting of purpose the with Ministers re the Council Security communicate National shall The Minister. Prime the by discharged be will function this absence his in and Council Security National the over preside shall Republic the the law, by provided as General ministers the of Chief of consist shall Council Security National The mi the legitimized NSC of establishment The constitutional a military the gave Constitution 1961 the that note to important is It Constitution The Democratic Coup d‟Coup TheDemocratic Between Praetorianism and Democracy: The Role of the Military in Turkis in Military the of Role The Democracy: and Praetorianism Between 101

62(

n usi o ''Contemp of Pursuit In 2009 , art. 111, sec. 2 sec. 111, art. , b establishing by e

versity, 2012):2 versity, ):768

Staff and representatives of the armed forces. The president of president The forces. armed the of representatives and Staff e uoen ovnin n ua Rgt, h Universal the Rights, Human on Convention European he

E 104 tat ust fnaetl eomnain t te oni of Council the to recommendations fundamental quisite

, Harvard International Law Journal 53, no. 2 (2012): 329 2 no. (2012): 53, LawJournal International Harvard ,

rr Cvlzto': uiil moemn i Turkey in Empowerment Judicial Civilization'': orary

105 ainl euiy oni ( Council Security National

: 27 181

iiay eie te nta fr o the of form initial the regime, military litary's active involvement in politics aspolitics in involvement active litary's nments were obliged to take into take to obliged were nments 103

codn t Atce 1 of 111 Article to According il Gvni Kurulu Guvenlik Milli - Party Period (PhD diss., diss., (PhD PartyPeriod h Foreign Policy Policy Foreign h

threatened

, - century Political Political The , CEU eTD Collection 110 109 108 no.3(2013): 107 713 Lawno.3(2013): 11, ofConstitutional Journal International 106 limitations. of th freedom to as exceptions any contain not did article this Since article. this in included were rules restrictive No opinions. and thoughts his disclose to coerced be should individual disse and express to free was he that freely, think and opinions own his have to entitled was individual every that others.overclass re communist and antidemocratic of establishment the prohibited class or group person, one any to delegated be not could sovereignty such exercise to right the that stated which Constitution, the of 4 Article in provision the Likewise, rule. rights. human on based law, rule by governed state social and secular democratic, nationalistic, a is Republic Turkish principles general the c the of section in effect this to as provisions some are there Firstly, Constitution. societyorganizationsautonomous civil politicalparties. and strengthened Th assembly. and speech of freedoms the and strike, to right the and rights individual character “universalistic” of rights individual of list wide uh, t a age ta ti fedm a aotd n h cnttto wtot any without constitution the in adopted was freedom this that argued was it ought, The Civil of Model Turkish The Ozan. Varol, ske, uklr Bten et n Cnet Tre‟ Taiin f uhrtra Constitutionalism, Authoritarian of Tradition Turkey‟s Context: and Text Between Turkuler. Isiksel, Hakyemez, Yusuf Sevki. Militan Demokrasi Anlayisi ve1982 Anay Anlayisi MilitanDemokrasi Sevki. Yusuf Hakyemez, 140 2009), Seckin, (Ankara: ve1982 Anayasasi, Anlayisi MilitanDemokrasi Sevki. Yusuf Hakyemez, 1961 In Article 20 of the 1961 Constitution concerning freedom of thought, it was stated was it thought, of freedom concerning Constitution 1961 the of 20 Article In 1961 the in democracy militant the of traces the see to possible is it However,

Constitution 736

the right to freedom of association, which led to the establishment of numero of establishment the to led which association, of freedom to right the

onstitution. 110

, art. 111, sec.1 111, art. ,

iae i togt ad pnos hog vros ei ad ht no that and media various through opinions and thoughts his minate liberties, expressly recognizing the right to privacy, the right to travel, to right the privacy, to right the recognizing expressly liberties,

108 ”

109 For example, i Forexample,

This provision excluded all kinds of totalitarian of kinds all excluded provision This

- Military Relations, International Relations, Military t is stated in Article 2 of the Constitution thatConstitutionthe of 2Article in statedis t 28

ie ta avct sproiy f a of superiority advocate that gimes asasi, (Ankara: Seckin, 2009), 140 2009), Seckin, (Ankara: asasi, ” 107 106

“

Journal of Constitutional Law 11, Law Constitutional of Journal h Cnttto expanded Constitution The 1961 e

osiuin also Constitution

and religious and

“ the us of CEU eTD Collection 115 114 113 112 111 57Articlethought, thisof limited freedom politicalforparties. parties. political of activities the thistoarticle:According over restrictions the determines which Constitution ofspecificofformathought. expression concerningreligiousrestrictionsbeliefs expressionofopinions. andAccording tothe article: articles Rights entitled Constitution 1961 the of 11 Article scholars, the of majority freedo and rights fundamental regarding limitations overall of causes the The The Hakyemez, Yusuf Sevki. Militan Demokrasi Anlayisi ve 1982 Anayasasi, (Ankara: Seckin, 2009), 145 2009), Seckin, (Ankara: ve1982 Anayasasi, Anlayisi MilitanDemokrasi Sevki. Yusuf Hakyemez, Se (Ankara: ve1982 Anayasasi, Anlayisi MilitanDemokrasi Sevki. Yusuf Hakyemez, 142 2009), Seckin, (Ankara: ve1982 Anayasasi, Anlayisi MilitanDemokrasi Sevki. Yusuf Hakyemez, 1961 1961 ” .

Accordingto this article: s ie gaate hc dtrie te iis f etitos ttd n h other the in stated restrictions of limits the determines which guarantee a like is As it can be seen, although Article 20 Article although seen, be can it As shallprovisionsbeto conformthesepermanently down. closed itsprinciplewithindivisibilitynation.thePartiesstateterritoryof of failing basic and democrat of principle the with accordance in be shall parties political of activities and programs statutes, The found be can parties political for devices Militant iswhich thought,religious of expression the safeguard to aims article this seen, is As dogmas. the basing partially social, even fundamental for or power, gaining for or of benefit, purpose personal the or for political whatsoever manner any in religion by sacred considered things sha person No someArticle20,which ofgovernedArticle19 included thought,freedom from Apart public upholding of purpose the for applied is it morals interest, when even not liberty or right any of essence the upon infringe not shall law The Constitution. the of spirit the and fundament The stating article an involve not did Constitution 1961 the Constitution, 1982 the Unlike Constitution Constitution 112

, art. 19, sec. 1 sec. 19, art. , 1 sec. 20, art. , l e loe t epot n aue eiin r eiiu feig or feelings religious or religion abuse and exploit to allowed be ll letter the with conformity in only law by restricted be shall rights al and order,socialand andwell as justicenational security. as

cnmc pltcl n lgl re o te tt o religious on state the of order legal and political economic,

ic and secular republic which is based on human rights and rights human on based is which republic secular and ic 113

did not contain any exceptions as to freedom to as exceptions any contain not did 115

in ril 5 o te 1961 the of 57 Article “ 114 The Essence of Basic of Essence The ms. As agreed by theby agreed As ms.

ckin, 2009), 142 2009), ckin, 111

CEU eTD Collection International 121 3no.(2 120 International 119 118 3 no.(2013): 117 Ju 116 Constitution. 1961 RPP opposition the ( Party Order NationalPartisi the by led movement Islamist rising a and workers, unrest, social recession, left economic between violence an experienced Turkey 1970s, early and 1960s late JP the governments, coalition several democracyTurkey. in electio ( TurkeyParty New ( Party Peasants National ( Party Justice the while vote the 1961, in ratification popular dem Constitution‟s the After 1960s. the of the conditions to refer political to essential is it amendments, these of motivation underlying the understand natu liberal 3.2.3. risdiction of the European Court of Human Rights, Mediterranean Politics 7, no.2(2002) 7, Politics Mediterranean Rights, ofHuman Court ofEuropean the risdiction

Varol, Ozan. The Turkish Model of Civil of Model Turkish The Ozan. Varol, Ibid,739 Civil of Model Turkish The Ozan. Varol, Isiksel Isiksel aymz Svi n Agn Brl Lmttos n h Fedm f oiia Pris n uky and Turkey in Parties Political of Freedom the on Limitations Birol. Akgun, and Sevki Hakyemez, ocratic elections for Parliament were held in October 1961 October in held were Parliament for elections ocratic

013): s te NUC the ns, ). Military CoupMilitaryAmendmentsandofConstitutional 1971 True.ewe Tx ad C and Text Turkuler.Between , Turkuler.Betwee , uue alaetr eetos als elections parliamentary Future 120 Constitutional amendments adopted in 1971 following the 1971 coup changed the changed coup 1971 the following 1971 in adopted amendments Constitutional

Journal of Constitutional Law 11, no.3(2013): 715 Lawno.3(2013): 11, ofConstitutional Journal 715 Lawno.3(2013): 11, ofConstitutional Journal 738

741 The social unrest and political instability experienced in this period, led the JP, the led period, this in experienced instability political and unrest social The e f h 16 Cnttto i fvr f authoritarianism. of favor in Constitution 1961 the of re

121

Yeni Turkiye Partisi YeniTurkiye ad h mltr t bae hs tobe o te emsiees f the of permissiveness the on troubles these blame to military the and , eeae pwr o eortcly lce laes rsoig procedural restoring leaders, elected democratically to power delegated

According to Tim Jacoby Tim to According - 117 ig Islamis wing, Tx ad C and Text n

uhryti ol Mle Partisi Millet Koylu Cumhuriyetci

dlt Partisi Adalet , n ntoait rus pritn srks y factory by strikes persistent groups, nationalist and t, - - Military Relations, International Journal of Constitutional Law 11, Law Constitutional of Journal International Relations, Military 11, Law Constitutional of Journal International Relations, Military ontext:Turkey‟ ontext:Turkey‟ –

the successor of DP of successor the ) receiving 13.7 percent of the popular vote. After vote.popularthe receivingof )percent 13.7 cetd ek olto governments. coalition weak created o 30

“ JP , civilian and military leaders made common made leaders military and civilian Taiin f uhrtra Constitutionalism, Authoritarian of Tradition s Constitutionalism, Authoritarian of Tradition s

wnig 48 ecn, h Republican the percent, 34.8 winning ) -

otiig 4 perc 14 obtaining ) came to power in 1965. in power to came . Th

e RPP e

116 got 36.7 percent of percent 36.7 got :

o e be to able be To il Nizam Milli n, n the and ent, 118 119

In After

the the CEU eTD Collection 128 127 126 International 125 Constitut 124 3 no.(2013): 123 122 the against state individual. the protect to intended was that one became 11 Article of form original 11 Article freedoms. and rights fundamental for ground restriction general a into article ame important most Constitution. 1961 the by promised liberties civil the of expense the at order public performtoestablishmentmilitary a political the of outside from technocrats of cabinet a selecting with charged was who Erim, military a by replaced was and resigned Demirel Süleyman Kemali with government the directing was military the by delivered memorandum by “coup the as known ultimatum ill could Turkey luxury a afford. [as] constitution 1961 the of liberality the attacking in cause The Civil of Model Turkish The Ozan. Varol, Bâli Hakyemez, Yusuf Sevki. Militan Demokrasi Anlayisi ve 1982 Anayasasi, (Ankara: Seckin, 2009), 143 2009), Seckin, (Ankara: ve1982 Anayasasi, Anlayisi MilitanDemokrasi Sevki. Yusuf Hakyemez, ve1982 Ana Anlayisi MilitanDemokrasi Sevki. Yusuf Hakyemez, Publishers, Cass Frank (London: State. Turkish the and Power Tim.Social Jacoby, Isiksel Al. ors n Cntttoa Tasto: esn fo te uks C Turkish the from Lessons Transition: Constitutional and Courts Asli. , 1961 ” ional Law 11, no.3(2013)11,Law ional 122 True.ewe Tx ad C and Text Turkuler.Between , hs te betv o poetn te niiul gis te tt a sae i the in stated as state the against individual the protecting of objective the Thus, security, otherin articlesstatedof the national republic, the nation, and territoryspecif orpublicpublichealth,moralityforand publicinterest, order, public its with state theindivisible the of protecting of integrity purpose the for constitution the of spirit and word w the accordance in law by restricted be only can freedoms and rights Fundamental tighten to amendments constitutionalof series a governmentadopted Erim Nihat The an by resign to Demirel Suleyman Minister Prime forced Forces Armed The (2)

Constitution

128 Journal of Constitutional Law 11, no.3(2013): 715 Lawno.3(2013): 11, ofConstitutional Journal

741 : t rnils r ae iiay intervention. military face or principles st

det a md i Atce 1 n te ups hr ws o un this turn to was here purpose the and 11 Article in made was ndment , art. 11, sec. 1 sec. 11, art. ,

668

- backed programofreforms backed

- constitution. Military Relations, International Journal of Constitutional Law 11, Law Constitutional of Journal International Relations, Military ontext:Turkey‟ 31

127 Taiin f uhrtra Constitutionalism, Authoritarian of Tradition s ”

n 2 ac 1971. March 12 on

to restore law and order in accordance in order and law restore to

yasasi, (Ankara: Seckin, 2009), 143 2009), Seckin, yasasi,(Ankara: n epne o h memorandum, the to response In - . eetd iiin edr Nihat leader, civilian selected 124

ase

2004), 138 2004), , International 123 126 h ultimatum The

Accordingto ic reasonsic

ora of Journal 125

The ith

CEU eTD Collection Turkey, 133 7,no.2(2002) Politics Mediterranean Rights, ofCourt Human ofEuropean the 132 136 no.2(2008): Turkey10, Insight Turkey, 131 130 International 129 followed referendum the 1982 opposed the who views, their those express that to fact able were the constitution to due atmosphere free relatively a in place took NSC. the by appointed were members its all as predecessor its than representative less was Assembly the prepare in to government military the constitution. by appointed was Assembly Consultative the were parties perform allowedtotheir political years activities tenthe after 1980c by banned were and conflict wing left and right of result a as turmoil Partisi including parties political The Council Security National the and 1980, of coup the in culminated 3.2.4. 1961Constitution,whichobviousthe led antolaxity of constitutionaldiscipline. m the coup, 1980 the to way the paving years the In changes. the with satisfied were 1970s the during country the ruled that governments civilian the nor military the neither Constitution, of spirit the violated that policies repressive implemented governments civilian and ilitary Hakyemez, Sevk Hakyemez, zuu, ru ad ecaa Oe Frk Dmcaiain n te oiis f Cons of Politics the and Democratization Faruk, Omer Genckaya, and Ergun Ozbudun, aymz Ysf ek. otiig h Pltcl pc, at Coue ad h Cntttoa Cut in Court Constitutional the and Closures Party Space, Political the Containing Sevki. Yusuf Hakyemez, which one of the chambers was the NSC itself. But the civilian chamber of the Consultativethetheitself.ofcivilianNSC chamberthe was onethe chamberswhich Butof Ibid,716 Isiksel

) and th and ) ( The Military coup ofcoupConstitution Military1980The andtheof 1982 Budapest: CEU Press, 2009), 19 2009), Press, CEU Budapest: True.ewe Tx ad C and Text Turkuler.Between , The constitutional draft was put to a referendum in 1982. While the 1961referendum the 1982.While referendumin a toput draftwas constitutional The the and suspended was Constitution 1961 the 1980, in coup military the After shift of inability The spite In 133

Journal of Constitutional Law 11, no.3 (2013): 715 Law no.3 11, (2013): ofConstitutional Journal

Asresult,state atheelitesmore ConsultativeA had weight in 132 e Nationalist Action Party ( Party Action Nationalist e

Similarly to the 1960 the to Similarly i and Akgun, Birol. Limitations on the Freedom of Political Parties in Turkey and Jurisdiction and Turkey in Parties ofPolitical Freedom on the Limitations Birol. Akgun, i and f hs xesv sprsin f h lbrl aeurs f h 1961 the of safeguards liberal the of suppression extensive this of

ing coalition governments to sustain the peace during the 1970s the during peace the sustain to governments coalition ing

h RP J, h Ntoa Slain at ( Party Salvation National the JP, RPP, the

1961 Constituent Assembly, its structure was bicameralwas structure its Assembly, Constituent 1961 ontext:Turkey‟ Milliyetci Hareket Partisi Hareket Milliyetci 32

s Tradition of Authoritarian Authoritarian of Tradition s

: 55

) held responsible for the for responsible held )

(NSC) ssembly.

seized power. seized

iuin aig in Making titution Constitutionalism, NSC il Selamet Milli oup. 129 one a

Political . 131

- sided 130

CEU eTD Collection 137 264 (Ashgate:2009), 136 126 1(2010): no. 17, Democratization Rights, of Court Human European 135 134 to shifted emphasis the whereas law, of rule democratic and freedom ontheprinciples based specified theinpreamble. repu the of characteristics the lists which Constitution, the of 2 Article Finally, Constitution. the interpreting while importance more th underlying principles and views fundamental Constit the of 176 p and legal embody interpreta the C in regarded be to are which resolutions legalpouvoirpoliticalinspirationsconstituant,ofalsoclarifybutbeliefs andthe the ideas, and p “ predecessor. its than democr militant of concept the embraced 91.73 voters.of the percent by approved was Constitution the result, a As indefinitely. continue would regime the rejected, was draft the if that implies which Evren Kenan General of presidency the of endorsement an also was Constitution the for vote Yes election. presidential the with combined was referendum constitutional 1982 the Moreover, campaign. The 1982 Constitution sets forth the constitutional boundaries for i for boundaries constitutional the forth sets Constitution 1982 The reamble th reamble onstitution. The

Oder, Berti Oder, Ibid,20 zuu, ru. at Poiiin ae: ifrn Apoce b te uks Cntttoa Cut and Court Constitutional Turkish the by Approaches Different Cases: Prohibition Party Ergun. Ozbudun, 1982 The chief emphasis in the preamble to the 1961 Constitution was on independence, on was Constitution 1961 the to preamble the in emphasis chief The the of wording The Constitutions 1982 the and 1961 the both although that agreed generally is It

Constitution l Emrah. Turkey in The Militant Demoracy Principle in Modern Democracies, ed. M ed. Democracies, Modern in Principle Demoracy Militant The in Turkey Emrah. l rough both juridical and meta and juridical both rough ”

olitical choices stated in the p the in stated choices olitical , art. 4, sec. 1 sec. 4, art. , to, h p the ution, 134 135

It is possible to see traces of traces see to possible is It

p eml rls that rules reamble

eml i icue i the in included is reamble blic, states that The Republic of Turkey is a republic a is Turkey of Republic The that states blic, - c, h lte wn mc ute i ta direction that in further much went latter the acy, juridical references. These boundaries do not only not do boundaries These references. juridical 33 e Constitution. Therefore, the P the Therefore, Constitution. e

137 reamble. “

h cnttto sol b udrto to understood be should constitution the this concept starting from the from starting concept this ” 136 in n implementat and tion

Moreover, according to Article to according Moreover, osiuin n sae the states and Constitution

ainl euiy Council Security National deological pluralism in its in pluralism deological indivisibility, national indivisibility, reamble gains reamble o o the of ion p arkus Thiel arkus reamble. CEU eTD Collection 140 139 138 Atatürk. of nationalism the to loyal and rights human respecting law; of rule the by governed state social and secular democratic, R Turkish the of characteristics fundamental the th and anthem national flag, language, official integrity, the on 3 Article in sections the and state the char the establishing 2 Article in provision the republic, a is state the of form the state.the protecting e was provisions irrevocable proposed. be even not could scope this within amendments constitutional the that stated was it and extended was provisions irrevocable t In provision. irrevocable an as kept democraticunitarystate,ofstatesecular and state. exp of freedoms of limits the regarding Constitution 1982 the in embodied as democracy militant of approach that: preamble Constitution. 1982 the in state of protection and solidarity

Hakyemez, Yusuf Sevki. Militan Demokrasi Anlayisi ve 1982 Anayasasi, (Ankara: Seckin, 2009), 163 2009), Seckin, (Ankara: ve1982 Anayasasi, Anlayisi MilitanDemokrasi Sevki. Yusuf Hakyemez, 1982 163 2009), Seckin, (Ankara: ve1982 Anayasasi, Anlayisi MilitanDemokrasi Sevki. Yusuf Hakyemez, e capital city of the state can state the of city capital e Constitution According to Article 4Articleoftothe According1982Constitution,the 1 Articlestatingprovisionin that was republic a was state the of form the that rule the only Constitution, 1961 the In the with line in clues give to suffice may alone preamble the in statement this Even politics whatsoeve interference no be shall there secularism, of principle the by required as that, and Atatürk of modernism and reforms principles, nationalism, the or values moral and historical Turkish territory, indivisibil the of principle the interests, national Turkish to contrary activity an to accorded be shall protection No

. ression and organization of various movements that contravene the principles the contravene that movements various of organization and ression 139

tne ws ht hs osiuin ce o te mus of impulse the on acted Constitution this that was xtended not be amended. Thus, Article 2 of the Constitution took Constitution the of 2 Article Thus, amended. be not

Article 3 of the Constitution, on the other hand, heavily hand, other the on Constitution, the of 3 Article e 92Cnttto, n h ohr ad h soe of scope the hand, other the on Constitution, 1982 he t o te xsec o Tre wt is tt and state its with Turkey of existence the of ity r by sacred religious feelings in state affairs and affairs state in feelings religious sacred by r 34

140

n iprat esn h te cp of scope the why reason important One

epublic 138

It is stated in Paragraph 5 of the of 5 Paragraph in stated is It ne src protection strict under acteristics of acteristics i.e. ,

a CEU eTD Collection 143 3 Studies East Middle 142 141 in those than restrictive more much been have particular in freedoms individual on and why is That politicians. civilian towards army the of distrust deep the protecting reflecting authority than state rather the of groups encroachments and against individuals citizens its against authority its and state the protect ofkindsdictatorships. all and class, a of sovereignty at aiming parties prevent to intends 6 Article classes, and persons power. divine a from sovereignty theocra establish to impossible is it nation, the to unconditionally belongs sovereignty that fact the to due article, this to According class. or group individual, whil theConstitutionwillemanating fromplay.into come regime political safeguardits to state the of right the then crossed, is limit thisIf Constitution. state the preci More state. the of duties and aims fundamental the among Turkish the of integrity democracy asthein1982 embodiedConstitution. laws. of set new of means b restricted were Kurdish, including languages, certain article, this on based and Turkey of declared indivisibility the protects Watts, Hakyemez, Yusuf Sevki. Militan Demokrasi Anlayisi ve 1982 Anayasasi, (Ankara: Seckin, 2009), 169 2009), Seckin, (Ankara: ve1982 Anayasasi, Anlayisi MilitanDemokrasi Sevki. Yusuf Hakyemez, Ibid,169 e clause 3 states 3 clause e Nicole. Allies and Enemies: Pro Enemies: and Allies Nicole.

t s gen is It 6 Article Constitution, the of 5 Article of part first the In that Turkish is the mother tongue (as opposed to the official language) of all citizens all of language) official the to opposed (as tongue mother the is Turkish that will not allow ideas and organizations that cross the ideological limits stat limits ideological the cross that organizations and ideas allow not will

(1) rly rud ht h bsc hlspy f h 18 Cnttto ws to was Constitution 1982 the of philosophy basic the that argued erally 1, no.4 1,

states that sovereignty is vested fully and unconditionally in unconditionally and fully vested is sovereignty that states that the right to exercise this sovereignty shall not be delegated to any to delegated be not shall sovereignty this exercise to right the that

(1999): nation 143

142 f h sae ih t trioy n nation. and territory its with state the of

Therefore, these provisions reflect a typical aspect of the militant the of aspect typical a reflect provisions these Therefore,

635 ” ,

“

the indivisibility of the nation and the republic the and nation the of indivisibility the Moreover, - Kurdish Parties in Turkish Politics, 1990 Politics, Turkish in Parties Kurdish

i 35 t can be said that by prohibiting sovereignty of of sovereignty prohibiting by that said be can “

its articles on basic human rights in general in rights human basic on articles its

“ safeguarding the independence and independence the safeguarding sely, while fulfilling its duties its fulfillingwhile sely, tic administrations deriving administrations tic 141 - 94

, oevr Atce 3 Article Moreover, International Journal International ”

the nation the was listed was ed by the by ed

of y CEU eTD Collection 148 Turkey, 147 146 International 145 ofHum Court ofEuropean the Jurisdiction 144 of rights fundamentalabuse and freedoms: freedoms:Accordingandinitialrightsof formthis to article: notmustandgosolidarity andbeyond. justice national peace, public of concepts the of limits the within remain to has respect this rights, t within rights human of limits the account, into taken are rights‟ human „respecting phrase the before 2 Article of provision the in statements the When rights. human respecting justice, and b law of rule the by governed the oneinconstitutionorwayanother. by supported and sanctioned are they is, that constitutional; are 1982 since Turkey in constitutions. previous he 1982 Constitution can be understood. Although the Republic of Turkey respects human respects Turkey of Republic the Although understood. be can Constitution 1982 he

zuu, ru ad ecaa Oe Frk Dmcaiain n te oiis f osiuin aig in Making Constitution of Politics the and Democratization Faruk, Omer Genckaya, and Ergun Ozbudun,

Ibid,58 MilitanDemokras Sevki. Yusuf Hakyemez, Isiksel aymz Svi n Agn Brl Lmttos n h Fedm f oiia Pris n uky and Turkey in Parties Political of Freedom the on Limitations Birol. Akgun, and Sevki Hakyemez, ( Budapest: CEU Press, 2009), Press, CEU Budapest: True.ewe Tx ad C and Text Turkuler.Between , theseideas.conceptson and other basis any by establishing of or sect, the or religion on discrimination creating or others, over class social of control of and rights existence fundamental the endangering of integ indivisible the violating of aim the be shall Constitution the in embodied liberties and rights the of None the regarding provision following the includes 14 Article of text original Moreover, public peace, public order, public security, publichealthinterest,publicmorality. and national republic, the national nation, sovereignty, and territory its with state the of unity indivisible the protecting of conformity in and law relevantarticle the in reasonsmentioned the with by only restricted be can freedoms and rights Fundamental Constitutheof 13 Article

codn t Atce o te osiuin Te eulc f uky s … state … a is Turkey of Republic The Constitution, the of 2 Article to According

Journal of Constitutional Law 11, no.3(2013): 720 Lawno.3(2013): 11, ofConstitutional Journal

an individual or a group of people, or people, of group a or individual an ” 144

Bulent Tanör argues that argues Tanör Bulent

earing in mind the concepts of public peace, national solidarity national peace, public of concepts the mind in earing

iete, f lcn te oenet f h Sae ne the under State the of government the placing of liberties, tion determines the principles for restriction offundamental restriction forprinciples determines the tion

” an Rights, Mediterranean Politics 7, no.2(2002) 7, Politics Mediterranean Rights, an 145 148

ontext:Turkey‟ i Anlayisi ve 1982 Anayasasi, (Ankara: Seckin, 2009), 153 2009), Seckin, (Ankara: ve1982 Anayasasi, i Anlayisi

36 146 h Trih tt ad eulc destroying Republic, and State Turkish the

rity of the of rity Taiin f uhrtra Constitutionalism, Authoritarian of Tradition s 147

“ the majority of human r human of majority the

means a system of government basedgovernment of system a means s of the Constitution for the purposethe Constitutionfor the of s

establishing the hegemony of hegemony the establishing State with its territory and nation, and territory its with State

: f agae race, language, of

ights violations ights

exercised with exercised

one CEU eTD Collection 152 151 150 Thiel(Ashgate:2009) 149 end political, onstateof the order legal and social, economic the basing at aimed efforts prevent to intended is Constitution, 1982 the of context secularism. the in belief religious of freedom of limits the determines 24 Article of clause eve 24(1), Article According conscience. and religion of freedom regulates which 24, Article o characteristics basic integritythe indivisiblesafeguardingthe state. of the safety, public and order public security, Article the of clause second by regulated grounds or pictures in seen be could democracy militant of Implications inmedia. other through or writing in speech, by opinion and thoughts his disseminate to and right express the has everyone that indicates Constitution the of 26 Article While restrictions. ev that states 25 Article thought. disseminating and expressing of freedom the regulates Constitution the of 26 Article whereas opinion and thought of freedom the regulates Constitution the of Hakyemez, Yusuf Sevki. Militan Demokrasi Demokrasi Militan Sevki. Yusuf Hakyemez, The 174 2009), Seckin, (Ankara: Anayasasi, ve1982 Anlayisi Demokrasi Militan Sevki. Yusuf Hakyemez, dr Bri Erh Tre i Te iiat De Militant The in Turkey Emrah. Bertil Oder, yn hs h rgt o reo o cncec, eiiu ble ad ovcin Te last The conviction. and belief religious conscience, of freedom to right the has ryone . 152 1982

roe a te ih t fedm f huh ad pno wtot n specific any without opinion and thought of freedom to right the has eryone This provision, which is the most important basis for the principle of secularism in secularism of principle the for basis important most the is which provision, This economic, social, fundamental, legalpolitical, andorder onreligiousthetenstate of the basing partially even or for personal of or purpose influence, the political for whatsoever, manner any in religion, by sacred held religion abuse or exploit to allowed be shall one No is thought of freedom the to related closely is that Constitution the in article Another is thought of Freedom Constitution 150

Toquote: , 284 , , art. 20, sec. 1 sec. 20, art. ,

regulated in two articles of the 1982 Constitution. Article 25 Article Constitution. 1982 the of articles two in regulated

Anlayisi ve 1982 Anayasasi, (Ankara: Seckin, 2009), 174 2009), Seckin, (Ankara: Anayasasi, ve1982 Anlayisi religious rules, and religiousreligiousandrules, oay rnil i Mdr Dmcais e. Markus ed. Democracies, Modern in Principle moracy 37

”

149

ic te include: they since ets. or religious feelings, or things or feelings, religious or 151

abuses performed to thistoperformedabuses te eulc and Republic the f “ qualified restrictionqualified rtcig national protecting

CEU eTD Collection Turkey, 155 no.48, Studies Eastern 154 153 binding. is Council of decisions the that means which Ministers”, of Council the by that stressed and Council ArticleNationalofform 118increasedthetheininitialmilitarymembersSecuritynumbers of judges of procedure appointment the in role no has Parliament Constitution, Education Higher of Council the and courts, high military two the including courts, high other the by nominations on based Republic the of consists i to According Court. Constitutional the of members the of procedure appointment the about was them of One Constitution. 1961 quote: To 68(4):Article the inidentified are politicalparties for Boundaries law. the and constitution activities their pursue to obligation under are they while permission, prior without formed be can life‟, political democratic of elements

Ozbudun, Ergun and and Ergun Ozbudun, Shambayati, The

1982 Constitution, art. 68, 69, sec.4 69, 68, art. 1982Constitution, ( Budapest: CEU Press, 2009), Press, CEU Budapest: Moreover 1982 Constitution brought some changes to the institutions established by established institutions the to changes some brought Constitution 1982 Moreover regulated boundaries constitutional the violate party political the of programme and statute the that established is it when decided be to is party political a of dissolution permanent a of filing the after Constitutional Court the bydecidedfinally is parties politicalof dissolution The 69(4) statesArticle that: norshalltheyincitekind, crime.to citizens t aim not shall theyrepublic; secular and democratic the of principles the nation, the of sovereignty and territory in pol of activities the as well as programmes, and statutes The „indispensable as parties, political that 68 Article in recognizes constitution 1982 eleven permanent and four substitute member both appointed by the President of President the by appointed both member substitute four and permanent eleven conflic

Hootan.

in Article 68(4).Articlein wt te needne f h sae is niiil in indivisible its state, the of independence the with t 1(2012):

ecaa Oe Frk Dmcaiain n te oiis f osiuin aig in Making Constitution of Politics the and Democratization Faruk, Omer Genckaya, h T The

o protect or establish class or group dictatorship or dictatorship of anyof dictatorship or dictatorship group or class establish orprotect o ain hmn ihs te rnils f qaiy n rl o law, of rule and equality of principles the rights, human nation, suit by the office of the Chief Public Prosecutor of the Republic. The Republic. the of Prosecutor Public Chief the of office the by suit

“the decisions of the Council should be given priority consideration priority given be should Council the of decisions “the 110 rih osiuinl or and Court Constitutional urkish

153

iil om f h Article the of form nitial

in accordance with the provisions set forth in the in forth set provisions the with accordance in 38 A i cn e en dfeet rm h 1961 the from different seen, be can it As .

h Jsie n Dvlpet Party Development and Justice the

4 t 146 itical parties shall not be not shall parties itical e osiuinl Court Constitutional he . 154 ert wt its with tegrity Secondly, the Secondly, Middle , 155

By CEU eTD Collection 2005), RoutledgeCurzon, 160 159 Thiel(Ashgate:2009) 158 103 1999), Strasbourg, ofPublishing, Europe (Council Union, European to Accesion 157 436 no.3(2004): Review38, 156 alth minister, prime became Ozal toenterthe„permission‟ elections. the and votes, leftist the channel ( Party Populist the generals, by founded ( Party Democracy Nationalist the namely, elections par 12 vetoed and process election the into intervened military the However, 1983. November 3.2.5. RelatedandProcedures Regulationswit Legal under Constitution 1982 the and Parties Political on Law the between controversies below. explain will I Amendments 2001 until review constitutional from had Constitution 1982 the of 15(3) Article Provisional more even are they that Constitution. stating1982 than freedoms and rights fundamental criticisms towards authoritarian to subject are Parties Political on Law and such lawsthese of SomeAssembly. elected newly the of meeting first the of day the 1983 December 6 and coup the between passed regulations legal 600 through country the of s further governing the in Council Security National the of role the changes, these Zürher, Erich Jan. Turkey a Modern History, (London: Tauris, 2004), 2004), Tauris, (London: History, Modern a Turkey Jan. Erich Zürher,

dr Bri Erh Tre i Te iiat eoay rnil i Mdr Democ Modern in Principle Demoracy Militant The in Turkey Emrah. Bertil Oder, Kocacioglu E luıı, eia el ad ü, ze, uky hlegs f otniy n Chang and Continuity Of Challenges Turkey Özlem, Tür, and Benli Meliha Altunısık, ties among 15 parties founded before elections. before founded parties 15 among ties rpa Cmiso fr eorc truh a (eie omsin, osiuinl mlctn of Implicatons Constitutional Commission), (Venice Law through Democracy for Commission uropean

Political andConstitutionaldevelopmentsPolitical 1982 trengthened The The 6 as date election the announced and rule civilian to return to decided military The system political new a created had Council Security National coup military the After , Dicle , MotherlandParty , 300 , . Progress Unity and Democracy: Dissolving Political Partiesin Turkey, Law and Society and Law Turkey, Partiesin Political Dissolving Democracy: and Unity Progress . . 156

wonthebygettingelections 160

uh h mltr rpeetd y S kp a close a kept NSC by represented military the ough

ohrad at ( Party Motherland hPartyClosuressection. akı Parti Halkcı 39

159 As a result a As ilyti eors Partisi Demokrasi Milliyetci

exempted the laws made in this period this in made laws the exempted ta i encouraged is that ) - nvtn Partis Anavatan

2001 45 perthevote centof45 Turgut and 282

only three parties entered theenteredparties three only

as Law of Associations of Law as 158 i ta ws given was that ) I will discuss the discuss will I ais e. Markus ed. racies, y eeas to generals by 157 In addition, In wih is which ) , (USA: e, CEU eTD Collection Turkey, 166 2005), RoutledgeCurzon, 165 440 no.3(2004): Review38, 164 Turkey, 163 2005), RoutledgeCurzon, 162 161 ( Party Populist Democrat 27 gaining by elections principleof secularism.to threata asperceivedthem it asparties theseCourtclosed Constitutional Theprayer. public on headscarves wearing women on bans from issues of variety a questioned and sphere public from Islam of exclusion the challenged groups political Islamic southeastern and/or to related organically integrity national and territorial the against Kurdish taken the challenging thereby tongue mother in education to right the as such rights minority for asked nati Kurdish amendments. 1982 Turg speeches his In amendments. interruption. watch. 2004), Tauris, (London: History, Modern a Turkey Jan. Erich Zürher, zuu, ru ad ecaa Oe Frk Dmcaiain n te Pol the and Democratization Faruk, Omer Genckaya, and Ergun Ozbudun, in Making Constitution of Politics the and Democratization Faruk, Omer Genckaya, and Ergun Ozbudun, Kocacioglu luıı, eia el ad ü, ze, uky hlegs f otniy n Chang and Continuity Of Challenges Turkey Özlem, Tür, and Benli Meliha Altunısık, Cont Of Challenges Turkey Özlem, Tür, and Benli Meliha Altunısık,

Constitution should be given a chance to function for a time before considering making considering before time a for function to chance a given be should Constitution ( ( 161 Budapest: CEU Press, 2009), 34 2009), Press, CEU Budapest: 31 2009), Press, CEU Budapest:

re ah at ( Party Path True post the from starting that mention to important is It nationalist parties closed down by the Constitutional Court Constitutional the by down closed parties nationalist - h rl o te ohrad Party Motherland the of rule The for , Dicle , 162

nls prevd s ukys ot motn calne. uds movements Kurdish challenges. important most Turkey‟s as perceived onalism 163 uky ewe te uks am ad h Krih eaait urla forces.” guerilla separatist Kurdish the and army Turkish the between Turkey - rne cnetos f mnlti nto gvre b te uks state. Turkish the by governed nation monolithic a of conceptions granted

uig t rl te ohrad Party Motherland the rule its During

. Progress Unity and Democracy: Dissolving P Dissolving Democracy: and Unity Progress . 50 46

ecn o votes. of percent

164 Sosyal Demokrat Halkci Parti Halkci Demokrat Sosyal or Yl Partisi Yol Dogru

nraig h spot ae o te arme the for base support the increasing

t zl tesd ht h nw ntttos rae b the by created institutions new the that stressed Ozal ut 165

t omd a formed It f h country. the of ld y uemn eie wn h 1991 the won Demirel Suleyman by led ) otne utl h 19 eetos without elections 1991 the until continued

i nt tep t mk constitutional make to attempt not did ). olitical Partiesin Turkey, Law and Society and Law Turkey, Partiesin olitical

166 olto gvrmn with government coalition 282

Although both parties promised parties both Although

in public sphere to restrictions to sphere public in

These parties were seen “as “as seen were parties These - 1980s tc o Cnttto Mkn in Making Constitution of itics

niy n Chang and inuity based on their activities their on based oiia Ilm and Islam political srgl in struggle d , (USA: e, (USA: e, Social

CEU eTD Collection 2005), RoutledgeCurzon, 171 Aff 170 2005), RoutledgeCurzon, 169 83 airs 168 167 clerical for divinityof primary schools of closure demandingthe decisions included Islam. political of rise the against policies certain implement to government which 1997 coup. a of possibility the RP the remind to Ankara secularism large military the of side the on worries created RP the of policies These country. the to order sharia bring to will their stating speeches public made his to impo leaders More Ramadan. order during dinner religious for residence some invited Erbakan offices. public and universities in prime Islamist headscarf the wear to women first allow to attempted It sphere. public to enter to started Turkey‟s symbols became Erbakan Necmettin RP,minister. the of leader and Inassembly.formedaunicameral1996 it c June 158 and vote popular the of cent per 21.4 gaining by parliament in constitutional 1995fundamentalrightsof and freedoms. the campaigns, election bel were theiramendments in changes constitutional radical Ibid, 40Ibid, Jenkins, Gareth. Gareth. Jenkins, Jenkins, Gareth. Gareth. Jenkins, luıı, eia el ad ü, ze, T Özlem, Tür, and Benli Meliha Altunısık, Özlem Tür, and Benli Meliha Altunısık, airs 83 airs . , no. 2 (2007): 345 2 no.(2007): , 169 , no. 2no.(2007): ,

168 h rato o t of reaction The ( Party Welfare the elections 1995 After

During its rule the RP the rule its During was harsh. On 4 February the military the February 4 On harsh. was a ltr ae n kona te “post the as known and named later was Conti Conti

345

nuity and Change: Prospects for C for Prospects Change: and nuity 60 ut ad hne Popcs o C for Prospects Change: and nuity ow expectations as they brought no improvements regarding protection regarding improvements no brought they as expectations ow 57

e iiay gis te hleg o te P o h cnet of concept the to RP the of challenge the against military he

challenged the challenged 167

Tre Calne O Cniut ad Chang and Continuity Of Challenges Turkey , re Calne O Cniut ad Chang and Continuity Of Challenges urkey 41

oalitiongovernmentwithTruePath the Party concept of secu of concept Refah Partisi Refah - diverted a column of tanks of column a diverted bureaucratic elite and the secular groups at groups secular the and elite bureaucratic ivil 170 tnl, raa ad ebr o te RP the of members and Erbakan rtantly, ivil – At the meeting of NSC on 28 February 28 on NSC of meeting the At Military Relations in Turkey in Relations Military - – modern coup” the military asked the asked military the coup” modern iiay eain i Tre International Turkey in Relations Military , RP) became the largest party largest the became RP) , larism and Islamic dress and dress Islamic and larism

et i te 5 seat 550 the in seats 171 on the streets of streets the on International Aff International The measures The perso , (USA: e, (USA: e, nnel ,

CEU eTD Collection 178 177 Turkey, 176 no.1(2004): 175 174 2005), RoutledgeCurzon, 173 83 airs 172 amendmen before Courts Constitutional the by used being were principles these of both Although proportionality. of principle the and rights fundamental of essence the of protectionthe of principle the brought it also but textinitial the in restriction grounds freedoms. and rights fundamental of restriction seenwere rule. their during enacted was Constitution 1981 the in modification Party Action Nationalist p th TheCourtsecularism. theonthe closedpartysame16January ground on 1998. applying by closure of procedure of principle the undermine to attempting was RP thethe that grounds the on Court Constitutional started Prosecutor Chief the 1997 May 22 postponement. some despite and Schools) Hatip (Imam r et f h votes the of cent er The Gareth. Jenkins, zuu, ru ad ecaa Oe Frk Dmcaiain n t and Democratization Faruk, Omer Genckaya, and Ergun Ozbudun, Ibid,51 Ibid,62 oec Lvn. h 20 Aedet to Amendments 2001 The Levent. Gonenc, luıı, eia el ad ü, ze, Turk Özlem, Tür, and Benli Meliha Altunısık, , no. 2no.(2007): , 1982 ( Budapest: CEU Press, 2009), 49 2009), Press, CEU Budapest:

for restriction. for s t a b se te mnmn nt ny blse te eea gons f grounds general the abolished only not amendment the seen be can it As the and order social democratic Republic,secular of requirements the the ofConstitution, the of articles spirit the relevant the in restrictio stated These essence. their upon impinging reasons the on solely the and of law by onlybasis restricted be may liberties and rights Fundamental which 13 Article changed Amendments 2001 The ( Party Left Democratic

89 Constitution prerequisiteofa as

Conti

345 , art. 13, sec. 1 sec. 13, art. ,

nuity and Change: Prospects for C for Prospects Change: and nuity 60

n i fre a olto gvrmn wt the with government coalition a formed it and 177

. 174

To quotetheamendedTo text: and the principleproportionality.and theof

173 h 20 Aedet cniee a te ot comprehensive most the as considered Amendments 2001 The

ub o te sait media. Islamist the on curbs

meeting the politicalmeetingEU the the criteria for candidacy.

However, this move did not change the fate of the party. the of fate the change not did move this However,

Demokratik Sol Parti Sol Demokratik

h 18 Cnttto o Tre, naa a Rve 1, Review Law Ankara Turkey, of Constitution 1982 the 42 y hlegs f otniy n Chang and Continuity Of Challenges ey

h 20 aedet eee te general the deleted amendment 2001 The ivil – ) won the 1999 elections by gaining 21 gaining by elections 1999 the won )

Military Relations in Turkey in Relations Military ns

shall not conflict with the letter and letter the with conflict not shall 172 e oiis f osiuin aig in Making Constitution of Politics he 178 raa sge te proposals the signed Erbakan t, their explicit constitutional explicit their t,

euae te rnils for principles the regulates 175 ohrad Party Motherland

osiuin without constitution

hs amendmen These

International Aff International 176

, (USA: e,

and On or ts e CEU eTD Collection Turkey, 184 183 182 Turkey, 181 180 p of Turkey, freedom with related 179 prohibitions extensive brings which Parties Political on most Law review to Court Constitutional the of inability the of reason the is 15 Article Provisional of one been had which 15, cont Article Provisional of abolishment is process account. bringing by difficult more originalversion theunder of theArticlewere eliminated. protectivegenerala article. liberties. and rights fundamental of protection the for guarantee additional an provides recognition The The Ozbudun, in Making Constitution of Politics the and Democratization Faruk, Omer Genckaya, and Ergun Ozbudun, in Making Constitution of Politics the and Democratization Faruk, Omer Genckaya, and Ergun Ozbudun, Ibid,58 oesa ise sne 1983. since issues roversial 1982 1982 ( ( ( Budapest: CEU Press, 2009), 61 2009), Press, CEU Budapest: 52 2009), Press, CEU Budapest: Pre CEU Budapest: 182

nte aedet osdrd n motn se frad n h democratization the in forward step important an considered amendment Another whe only decided be may 68 Article determinesConstitutional Court hasthatitbecome of focal pointsuch a activities. of paragraph fourth the of provisions T parties political of dissolution the make to intended 69(6) Article in Amendment rights of abuse an constituted which conditions the of many amendment this With with conflict in areprovisionsbyprescribedthese activities undertake who those against applied more be to them sanctions restricting The of aim the with activity theinConstitution.thanextensivelystated is an in engage or Constitution, the embo freedoms and rights fundamental the destroy to individuals or State the enable would that manner a in interpreted be shall Constitution the of provision No Republicbasedonsecularhumanrights. nati and territory State its the of with integrity indivisible the violating of aim the with undertaken activities for exercised be shall Constitution the in embodied freedoms and rights the of None Afte

After this amendment Article 13 ceased to be a general restrictivegeneral became bearticle and a After this to Article13 ceased amendment

e islto o a oiia pry n con o is ciiis otay o the to contrary activities its of account on party political a of dissolution he Constitution Constitution According to ArticletoAccording 69(6): ru ad ecaa Oe Frk Dmcaiain n te oiis f osiuin aig in Making Constitution of Politics the and Democratization Faruk, Omer Genckaya, and Ergun

rthe2001Amendments 14Articleis regulated as follows:

, art. 69, sec. 4 sec. 69, art. , 1 sec. 14, art. , ss, 2009), 51 2009), ss,

179 fcl on ciei” ht h Cntttoa hs o ae into take to has Constitutional the that criteria” point “focal

184

n ad nagrn te xsec o te eortc and democratic the of existence the endangering and on,

hs mnmn gis motne f e osdr that consider we if importance gains amendment This

law. 43 180

181

died in died olitical the n 183

CEU eTD Collection Thiel(Ashgate:2009) 185 after Constitution the in time same the amendments. at coexist tendencies illiberal and liberal that shows democracy‟ „militant Turkish the of analysis constitutional the general, In association. dr Bri Erh Tre i Te iiat eoay rnil i Mdr Dmcais e. Markus ed. Democracies, Modern in Principle Demoracy Militant The in Turkey Emrah. Bertil Oder,

185

, 307 ,

CEU eTD Collection 126 1(2010): no. 17, Democratization Rights, of Court Human European 188 187 490 2012), 186 rigidity. excessive with Parties Political on Law the and Constitution the in prohibitions of practicethe ofpartyexplainfrequent closu to able be to account into taken be also should Parties Political on Law the and Constitution theof interpretation Court‟s the fact, this with togetherthat argue Iparties. politicalof closure of range wide a reasons the of one be might provide This parties. political on prohibitions permissible Parties Political on Law the and Constitution Closures, Party ideologycommunist e they socialist the of because also but nation, and territory its with state the of integrity indivisible the of principle the infringed Kurdis they because only of not closed were parties closure socialist/communist the of reason the was nation and territory its with state the of integrity indivisible the of principle the of Violation secularism. Prosecutor. Chief reques prohibition 44 of total a with parties 26 closed Court Constitutional Court. Constitutional the of decisions closure party the on i democracy “ ht s h rl o te osiuinl or‟ itrrtto i te rcie f militant of practice the in interpretation Court‟s Constitutional the of role the is What

Celep, Odul, The Political Causes of Party Closures in Turkey, Parliamentary Affairs (2012) : (2012) Affairs Parliamentary Turkey, of in Closures Party Causes ThePolitical Celep,Odul, Yayinevi, Adalet (Ankara: Ideolojisi, Resmi Devletin Kararlarinda Mahkemesi Anaya Murat. Huseyin Isik, Ozbudun, Ergun. Party Prohibition Cases: Cases: Prohibition Party Ergun. Ozbudun, ConstitutionalCourt Read thein Light oftheECHR Judgments CHAPTERThe4: Party Closure Decisions of t Turkish Constitutional Court is subject to the criticisms that it interprets the long list long the interprets it that criticisms the to subject is Court Constitutional Turkish with Related Regulations and Procedures Legal the on section the in showed I As question research my to answer an find to like would I thesis my of part this In

n Turkey and especially in frequent closure of the political parties?” by focusing by parties?” political the of closure frequent in especially and Turkey n 186

h Ilms pris ee lsd s hy iltd h picpe of principle the violated they as closed were parties Islamist The

mbrace.

187

ifrn Apoce b te uks Cntttoa Cut and Court Constitutional Turkish the by Approaches Different res inres Turkey. 45

ntoait ate. Interestingly, parties. nationalist h After its establishment in 1961, the 1961, in establishment its After

heTurkish ts initiated by the by initiated ts of the frequent the of

188

CEU eTD Collection 713 Lawno.3(2013): 11, ofConstitutional Journal International 191 2010 University, 190 Studies 189 ofJurisdiction European the and Turkey in Parties Political of Freedom the on Limitations Birol. Akgun, and Sevki Hakyemez, the from different Parties Political on Constitutional Court. Law the and Constitution the in regulations the is there if discover to like would I Moreover, way. liberal more a andin understood be can programmes parties political the theof activities from stemming threats the if light shed will Court the of reasoning web official the in online found be can which language, Turkish in published Court Constitutional the of decisions the sources, parties. banning of process the in reasoning its using by ideology triespreserve tothewhichstate ideologyKurdish nationalism from Islamic and revivalism. military, with together apparatus, elites state the of institutions important most the of one Turkish Cour the Constitutional the of that insight the Evolution as summarized the be can which in Constitutionalism, Democracy Militant on section the through followed think reasoning. its „ideology in uses it Court‟sdefinitions and references historical the the in apparent that is paradigm stating Arslan, of argument the furthers Bayir positi a reflect to and state „ideology as this calls Arslan Zuhtu ideology. state the to contrary view a expresses or defends that party political any dissolve C the of rigidity the of reason the that argue Scholars

Arslan, ai, ey. eaig iest: ioiis n Nationa and Minorities Diversity: Negating Derya. Bayir, Isiksel this criticism gains even more importance if we take into account the argument that we that argument the account into take we if importance more even gains criticism this 11 , no.1(2002): 11 no.1(2002): , , n hs at wl so i ad o te osiuinl or act Court Constitutional the how and if show will I part this In Zuhtu. uklrBten et n CnetTre‟ Taiin f uhrtra Constitutionalism, Authoritarian of Tradition Context:Turkey‟s and Text Turkuler.Between Court of Human Rights, Mediterranean Politics 7,no.2(2002) Politics Mediterranean Rights, ofCourt Human ) : 235 : Con

fl cig Pa icting

vist, one dimensional, monolithic, and authoritarian outlook. Derya outlook. authoritarian and monolithic, dimensional, one vist, - radigms: Political Political radigms: within the Turkish constitutional order constitutional Turkish the within - site of the T the of site - ae‟ aaim hc hs e te or t fvr the favor to Court the led has which paradigm based‟ Right 46 s in the Turkish Constitutional Constitutional Turkish the in s

urkish Constitutional Court. Discussing the Discussing Court. Constitutional urkish

im n uks Law, Turkish in lism onstitutional Court is that it decides to decides it that is Court onstitutional :

54 I will focus on the primary the on focus will I -

a possibility to interpret to possibility a ( Ph Court, Court, t peev state preserve to s ds. Qen Mary Queen diss., D

- Middle Eastern Middle ae‟ legal based‟ 190 is t 191 189

CEU eTD Collection 193 2010):50 University, UkraineKharkov 192 Partisi Demokrasi ve ( Party Democracy and Freedom namely: parties, political three regarding decisions 2 sections In Parties. Political on Law and Constitution the in part take society as such rights these to (2) 10 Article with restrictions associati of freedom to and ofdeterminesthisthe limitstates10(2)it freedom that: as frontiers.” of regardless and authority public by interference without ideas and t information and opinions hold to freedom include shall right This expression. 11ththeand10thviolated of the European articles Convention. to outpointed ECHR the Especially, Case. Party Refah Islamist the except cases all in Court Constitutional Turkish the of decisions the against ruled has and closures party political concerning Turkey against cases nine heard has ECHR The legal on and focus mostly will I and judgments procedure its giving while ECHR the the of regulations follow not will I Court, is Constitutional part Turkish this the in of focus decisions my As Court. Constitutional Turkish the of decisions closure party European Convention on Human Rights onHuman Convention European blaem Fhl The Fahil. Abulkareem, ‟,„ This chapter consists of consists chapter This assembly peaceful of freedom to right the has “[e]veryone that states 11(1) Article are …crimeormaintainingforor theauthorityimpartialityof andthe judiciary. as society democratic penalties a or in national necessary restrictions are conditions, and law formalities, by such prescribed to subject responsibili and duties be it with may carries it since freedoms, these of exercise The of freedomto right the has Convention“[e]veryone the of 10(1) Article to According

wl as ue h jdmns f h Erpa Cut f ua Rgt aot the about Rights Human of Court European the of judgments the use also will I beingoftheininterestsnational security security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorde of prevention the for safety, public or integrity territorial security,

uoen or o Hmn ihs n te uget aant uky (A diss. (MA , Turkey against Judgments the and Rights Human of Court European ZE) Uie Cmuit at o Tre ( Turkey of Party Communist United OZDEP),

on with others...” Article 11(2) Article others...” with on

4 sections. Section one I will point out point will I one Section sections. 4

‟

and publicsafety. and

the Turkey‟s it concluded that Turkey that concluded it Turkey‟s the

„

en ncsay n democratic a in necessary being of the Convention brings simila brings Convention the of 192

193 rcie n impart and receive o

legal regulations that regulations legal i te neet of interests the in , -

Turkiye I il analyze will I 4

its criticisms. its Ozgurluk

Birlesik ties, r r

CEU eTD Collection 196 195 C between 194 c such of authorities. nature political prosecuting to the due Commission to the only to According given be not should procedure closure initiate evidence. the is it but action take to eval byprocedure the initiate to decide finallywill who Prosecutor Prosecutor Chief the from ask may parties political and JusticeofMinistry Theofficio. exinitiate cases to ProsecutorChief the authorizes Political party. the against procedure closure the initiates Prosecutor Chief the after Court Constitutional the by decided finally is parties political of closure the adopted Parties Political on Law the and Constitution the in found be can Court Constitutional 4.1.LegalProcedures and Regulations Related withParty Closures ons focusing class against regulations the regarding approach Court‟s the discuss to able be closure.party ofreason asecularism as of principle the of violation section third the In nation. and territory its with state the of integrity indivisible the of principle the of violation alleged the on focus will I section, this In party. nationalist Kurdish a is which OZDEP about decision Court‟s secti second the In regime. constitutional Turkish the of principles founding three the of protection militant and interpretation on focus they straightforward: Partisi Komunist

Algan, Bulent. Bulent. Algan, The Law on Political Parties, art. 99 art. Parties, Law onPolitical 1982

under theundermilitary1983.in regime ourt and The Parliament The and ourt h Vnc Cmiso ciiie ti poeue run ta te oe to power the that arguing procedure this criticizes Commission Venice The the by parties political of closure the for grounds legal the and procedures The 196

Constitution

ocialistTBKP Dissolution of Political Parties by The Constitutional Court in Turkey: An E An Turkey: in Court Constitutional by The Parties Political of Dissolution TK) n Wlae at ( Party Welfare and TBKP) , , art. 69, sec. 4, cl. 4 4, cl. sec. 69, art. ,

, AUHFD ,

, no. 4 ( 4 no. , 194 will I According to Article 69(4) of the Constitutionof69(4)Article to According 48 2011

ea Partisi Refah ) : 812 ) ou o Ilms RP Islamist on focus

R) Te hie f ae is cases of choice The RP). , 195 uating if there is enoughis thereif uating

ril 9 of 99 Article In the fourth sectionthefourth In ss iiito o the of initiation ases, n I il nlz the analyze will I on,

ae I il discuss will I case. verlasting Con verlasting

- based rule based a on Law I willI flict

by CEU eTD Collection C between 201 11, Dergisi Bilimleri 200 199 17, Democratization Rights, of Court Human European Ozbudun, C between 198 7 Turkey, in Parties of Political 197 prohibitions. constitutional these close be can parties political accordingly parties. political the to related Constitution P with thewithapparentlyconstitution,I contradictwill as some analyzeof them below. political of closure the about rules restrictive include Constitution 1982 the of provisions the although that argue Ozbudun Ergun and Algan Bulent Parties. Political on Law and Constitution orindirect direct democratic control. of element ensure to balance or check democratic and political be should There criteria. legal certain of fulfillment the of consequence legal automatic the be not should procedure Algan, Bulent. Algan, Parties onLawPolitical Prohibi the to Relevant Provisions Legal and Constitutional The on Opinion 2009, Comission, Venice The Algan, Bulent. Bulent. Algan, Yargic, Sinem. The Need Need The Sinem. Yargic, (iv) (iii) (ii) (i)

oliticalParties”it and consistsofcategories, four namely:

other prohibitions.other the and characte reforms and principles Ataturk) Kemal (Mustafa Ataturk„s of protection theofprotection of characteristicsthe nation state relatedprohibitionsthetoofprotection democracy

ourt and TheParliament ourt and ourt and TheParliament ourt and rils 8 n 6 o te 92 osiuin r te an rvsos f the of provisions main the are Constitution 1982 the of 69 and 68 Articles Related Prohibitions “The called is Parties Political on Law the of part fourth The Constit The Ergun. Ergun.

parties, the Law on Political Parties includes even more restrictive ones, which ones, restrictive more even includes Parties Political on Law the parties, Dissolution of Political Parties by The Constitutional Court in Turkey: An E An Turkey: in Court Constitutional The by Parties Political of Dissolution Dissolution of Political Parties by The Constitutional Court in Turkey: An E An Turkey: in Court Constitutional The by Parties Political of Dissolution risticsofthesecular state at Poiiin ae: D Cases: Prohibition Party no.

21 toa Cut eie o coue bsd n h rgltos n the in regulations the on based closures on decides Court utional

(2013): to Amend Turkish Legislation to to Legislation Turkish Amend to

199 , AUHFD , AUHFD ,

207

201 197 hl tee rils osiue h mi constitutional main the constitute articles these While

60 60

, no. 4no.( , 4no.( , ifferent Approaches by the Turkish Constitutional Court and and Court Constitutional Turkish the by Approaches ifferent

d by the Constitutional Court as a result of violating of result a as Court Constitutional the by d 49 2011 2011 no.1 ( no.1 200

) : 812 ) : 812 )

2010 hy ete ue aot at closures, party about rules settle They Ensure Political Participat Political Ensure ): 128 ):

i on in Turkey in on verlasting Conflict Conflict verlasting verlasting Conflictverlasting 198

, Yö netim tion CEU eTD Collection 205 Bili 204 203 in2009 Turkey, Parties Political 202 ofsuchexecution activities. Thisdescribes what article also quest in party the the that when determines Court only Constitutional rendered be may 68(4) Article of provisions the violating activities to pr the violate party political the of programme and statute the that established is it when decided 68(4). 69(5) Article 149(1). three by taken are decisions these and Republic the of Prosecutor Public Chief the of office the by suit a of filing the afterCourt Constitutional oftheactivitiespoliticalas shallpartiesnotin bewith: conflict the of articles other withConstitution, the to relation in seen be must they prohibition, party on provisions The The Yargic, Sinem. The Need Need The Sinem. Yargic, eie omsin Oiin n the on Opinion Commission, Venice mleri Dergisi 11, mleri Dergisi ovisions ofovisionsthe68(4).Article 1982 1982 204 (vii) (vi) (v) (iv) (iii) (ii) (i) Under Article 69(6) Article Under closur The that: states 69(4) Article wellprogrammes,statutes asand Constitution“The 68(4)Article the of to According codn t ti article this to According

h stain s hrd mlcty r xlcty y h gad oges general decision congress, central grand the the or by chairmanship explicitly or implicitly shared is situation only the memb actions the by such intensively of out carried centre are the actions becomesuch when to deemed be shall party political A Constitution Constitution

the prohibition ofprohibitionthe establishingorclassgroupdictatorship ofprinciplesthedemocratic the republic secular and ofprinciples of equalitythe rulelaw and rightshuman independenceofthethe state sovereigntythenation of itsintegrityitsindivisiblet with no.

which they are closely related.arewhichclosely they

, art. 69, sec. 4, cl. 4 4, cl. sec. 69, art. , 4 sec. 68, art. , 21 as u ciei fr h coue f oiia pris y eern to referring by parties political of closure the for criteria out lays (2013): to Amend Turkish Legislation to to Legislation Turkish Amend to

17 207 “

the decision to dissolve a political party permanently owing permanently party political a dissolve to decision the

” 205 osiuinl n Lgl rvsos eeat o h Poiiin of Prohibition the to Relevant Provisions Legal and Constitutional “ h praet lsr o a oiia pry s o be to is party political a of closure permanent The

e of political parties is decided finally by the by finally decided is parties political of e 50 erritory and nationerritoryand

202 - aig r diitaie ras f that of organs administrative or making

Ensure Political Participat Political Ensure - its aoiy codn t Article to according majority fifths

o hs eoe cnr fr the for centre a become has ion “ becominga centre

ers of that party or or party that of ers 203

i on in Turkey in on ”

means: , Yönetim

CEU eTD Collection 17, Democratization Rights, of Court Human European 209 208 Ri Human of Court European ofthe Jurisdiction 207 206 territorial the of principle the that argued be can it because is This Constitution. the of mandate the beyond principle new a or principle constitutional the of extension simple Turkishisthe which Republic founded,norcarry ofpursuitinsuch onactivities an aim.” on state unitary the of principle the change to aim not shall parties :“Political 80 Article specified further is integrity territorial The integrity. national the and integrityterritorial the headings: two under analyzed be can proposingtheireven amen non the to belong articles These entity”. indivisible an is nation, and territory its with state, Turkish “the which to is Turkey of Republic “the that states which secularism and nation, and territory its with withcommitted enoug activities such of center the become has party that approve to has Court Constitutional the 68(4), to contrary being activities its on based party political a of closure the decide one the programmeon or statuesits on The Ozbudun, Ibid, art. 69, sec. 4, cl. 6 4, cl. sec. 69, Ibid, art. aymz Svi n Agn Brl Lmttos n h Fedm f oiia Pris n uky and Turkey in Parties Political of Freedom the on Limitations Birol. Akgun, and Sevki Hakyemez, 1982 ru Obdn ihl age ta i i debatable is it that argues rightly Ozbudun Ergun nation and territory its with state the of integrity indivisible the of principle The Th In other words, the Constitution differentiates between dissolving a party based party a dissolving between differentiates Constitution the words, other In

rn Ntoa Asml o we tee ciiis r crid u in out carried are activities these when or bydeterminationthe above Assembly National Grand Tur the at board executive group or meeting general group‟s the by or party

Constitution Ergun. cr poetd rnils of principles protected core e at Poiiin ae: ifrn Apoce b te uks Cntttoa Cut and Court Constitutional Turkish the by Approaches Different Cases: Prohibition Party , art. 2, 3,1 4, sec. 2, art. , h frequency and determination.h frequencyand

- dment. amendable provisions of the Constitution as Article 4 prohibits 4 Article as Constitution the of provisions amendable

208

- mentioned partydirectly.organs mentioned hand and its activities on the other hand. In order toorder In hand. other theon activitiesits andhand

ghts, Mediterranean ghts,Mediterranean n h Lw n oiia P Political on Law the in ril 68(4) Article a …secular state” and Article 3 (1), according(1), 3 Article and state” …secular a – 51

no.1 ( no.1 are restated in Article 2 of the Constitution the of 2 Article in restated are

20 10 207 ): 128 ):

- Politics 7, no.2 ( no.2 7, Politics

niiil itgiy fte state the of integrity indivisible

hte ti poiin s a is provision this whether arties 206 2002

. 209 ): 59

codn to According

kish

CEU eTD Collection Legal and 214 17, Democratization Rights, of Court Human European 213 212 211 17, Democratization Rights, of Court Human European 210 on Law the of 81 Article that argue Report Commission Venice the and Ozbudun Both decisions. judicial “minori recognize by banned conversely, or parties political by created superficially be can they that fallacy the on based is Parties Political on Law the of 81 Article minorities”creating C Constitutional the of rulings prohibition many for basis theprovideswhich81Article one isimportant most The Parties. LawPolitical onof the 83 68(4)Articleinstated of not are that parties political to restrictions new bring to seems Parties Political on Law the of provision this Therefore, government. of forms regional or federal with reconciled requ necessarily not does state the of integrity

European Commission for Democracy through Law through Democracy for Commission European Ozbudun, Ozbudun, Law on Political Parties Law onPolitical Ibid,129 Provisions Relevant to the Prohibition of Political Parties in Turkey, (2009): 18 in(2009): Turkey, Parties of Political to the Prohibition Relevant Provisions If we take into account that minorities that account into take we If and 82, 81, Articles in specified state the of integrity national the of principle The

a foreignlanguageprohibitedanotby law. into translated be may programs and statutes their However, others. by perpetrated pu gatherings, actions those toindifferent remain they cannor activities;propaganda halland meetings closed or open congresses, programs, and statutes their of publishing and writing the in Turkish than other languages in written declarations and brochures tapes, video and audio placards, posters, distribute or use Cannot c) culture. o language Turkish the protecting, than other through cultures and languages Turkey spreading or developing of Republic the of territory the in minorities creating of way by unity national harm to activities in engage or of aim the Republic pursue Cannot b) the of territory the in minorities basedondifferencesofTurkey, national orreligious culture, are there that maintain Cannot a)

Ergun. Ergun. at Proh Party and Court Constitutional Turkish the by Approaches Different Cases: Prohibition Party

ties” without regarding them as threatening the “integrity” of the state. the of “integrity” the threatening as them regarding without ties”

211 . Accordingthisarticle:. to , art. 81 art. , the Constitution.the

bto Css Dfeet prahs y h Trih osiuinl or and Court Constitutional Turkish the by Approaches Different Cases: ibition

210

no.1 ( no.1 ( no.1 (The Venice Comission), Opinion on The Constitutional The on Opinion Comission), Venice (The ire the principle of unitary state as it can be can it as state unitary of principle the ire

are sociological realities, it is fair to argue thatargue to fair is realities,it sociological are

“ Political parties:Political 2010 2010 212

): 130 ): 128 ): ourt entitled “the prevention of prevention “the entitled ourt

race,or

213

language.

ay states Many

blic 214 r

CEU eTD Collection 219 1 Democratization Rights, of Court Human European 218 217 K Partilerin 216 18 Turkey,in(2009): Parties Political Th 17, Democratization Rights, of Court Human European 215 ones.” race, language, religion, a of name the socialist‟, „national or „theocratic‟ „fascist‟, „anarchist‟, „communist‟, ofReligiousPresidency (Art.89).” Affairs t of preservation the and 88), (Art. demonstrations religious of prohibition 87), (Art. religion by sacred held things and religion of exploitation the of prohibition the Mus allof headspiritual and (temporalkhilafat of return the of advocacythe of prohibition the and secularism of principles the of protection 85), (Art. Ataturk for respect 84), (Art. reforms and Parties.onLawPolitical “These the article: cons of freedom of limits the determinesit as important is 24(4) Article Especially68(4). Article with together Constitution the of (4) 68 Article than further Constitutio goes that prohibition a introduces Parties Political Law on Political Parties onLawPolitical The Ozbudun, Ozbudun,

Vnc Cmsin Oiin n h Cntttoa ad ea Poiin Rlvn t te rhbto of Prohibition the to Relevant Provisions Legal and Constitutional The on Opinion Comission, Venice e armn Mhe ad aikn Zkry, Turkiye Zekeriya, Caliskan, and Mehmet Kahraman, lims held by the Ottoman sultans from 1517 to 1924 when it was abolished ) (Art. 86), (Art. ) abolished was it when 1924 to 1517 from sultans Ottoman the by held lims 1982 219

ril 9() tts ht []ltcl ate sal o b fre wt te name the with formed be not shall parties “[p]olitical that states 96(3) Article of 89 and 88, 87, 86, 85, 84, Articles in found be can principle thisof reflections The legalpolitical, andorder onreligiousthetenets.state of or personal of purpose influenc the political for whatsoever, manner any in religion, by sacred things or held feelings, religious or religion abuse or exploit to allowed be shall one No the of 147 and 24(4) 14, 4, Article by protected is secularism of principle The hs ril as big nw rhbtos ht r nt ttd n h Constitution. the in stated not are that prohibitions new brings also article This apatilmasi Rejimi, Dogu Anadolu Bolgesi Calismalari,(2007): 127 Calismalari,(2007): Bolgesi DoguAnadolu Rejimi, apatilmasi

Constitution ntherefore and isunconstitutional.it clearly Ergun. Ergun.

et r ein o a ae nldn ay f h aoe od o similar or words above the of any including name a or region, or sect

at Poiiin ae: ifrn Apoce b te uks Cntttoa Cut and Court Constitutional Turkish the by Approaches Different Cases: Prohibition Party and Court Constitutional Turkish the by Approaches Different Cases: Prohibition Party , art. 24, sec. 1 sec. 24, art. , , art. 96 art. ,

, r o ee prily aig h fnaetl sca, economic, social, fundamental, the basing partially even for or e,

ine rlgos eif n conviction. and belief religious cience,

provisions include the protectionAtaturktheof includeprovisions 218 7,

53 no.1 ( no.1 ( no.1

‟ e iaa Priei Hkka Sauu e Siyasal ve Statusu Hukuksal Partilerin Siyasal de 2010 2010 ): 131 ): 128 ): 215

217

216 codn t this to According e tts f the of status he ’ s principless CEU eTD Collection 300 (Ashgate:2009), 221 Accession 220 ( Party Labour People‟s was party first The nation. and territory its with state the of integrity indivisible the of principle the infringed they that 4.2. Case OZDEP the of evaluation detailed of theCourtdecisions.decisions a on based study empirical an make to essential is it So laws. theCou andregulations the ofstrictness the differentiate to important is Turkeyit in closures partyfrequent the reasonof the explain tobe able To interpretation. of are an terms vague they that argue to fair is it “the nation” as the of such “sovereignty Constitution, and state” the the of of independence 68(4) Article in protected be to trying are that values directly than option other no has analyz will Court I as law this implement the name like the seems it with name, formed their be in to „communist‟ parties political prohibits strictly which Parties Political For parties. political of closure frequent the of reasons the of one be might This parties. political on prohibitions permissible of range Amendments.2001 constitution from law this exempted had Constitution 1982 the of 15(3) Provisional Article because articles these cancel to Court Constitutional the for possible not was auth more even is Parties Political on Law the that argue scholars regulations these of Because Oder, Bertil Emrah Bertil Oder,

uoen omsin o Dmcay hog LwVnc Cmiso) Cntttoa Ipiaos of Implicatons Constitutional Commission), Law(Venice through Democracy for Commission European oritarian towards fundamental rights and freedoms than 1982 Constitution. 1982 than freedoms and rights fundamental towards oritarian

The Constitutional Court closed a series of Kurdish nationalist parties for the reason the for parties nationalist Kurdish of series a closed Court Constitutional The wide a provide Parties Political on Law the and Constitution the seen be can it As to European Union, (Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg, 1999), 103 1999), Strasbourg, Publishing, ofEurope (Council Union, toEuropean d in case of the Court bases its decision to this article only, it has a large powerlargea has itonly,this article todecision its Courtbases the of dcasein

. Turkey in The Militant Democracy Principle in Modern Democracies, ed. Democracies, Modern in Principle Democracy Militant The in Turkey . 221

e under third chapter. At the same time if we consider the consider we if time same the At chapter. third under e xml, f e osdr ril 9() f a on Law of 96(3) Article consider we if example, 54

Halkın Emek Partisi Emek Halkın rts rigid interpretation ofrigidinterpretation rts

), formed on 7 June 7 on formed ), 220 al review until review al

However, itHowever, Markus Thiel Markus

CEU eTD Collection 223 2008): 3 no. ( 13, &Politics Society European South 222 evidenceasthe forindictment: nationterritoryand and wit state the of integrity indivisible the both undermine to apt were programme party initi who Prosecutor 4.2.1. oftheprinciple violation secularismunder thecase. of RP int state the of principle the regarding 1993. November secularism. of principle the principleintegrityindivisiblethe the of of undermine to sought also programme its that grounds the on OZDEPdissolve to Court Constitutional the to applied Prosecutor Chief the However, 1992. October 19 on party successor a as OZDEP procedure closure When 1990. EHCR Judgment, Case of Freedom and Democracy Party (OZDEP) v.4 Turkey, (OZDEP) Party ofDemocracy Freedom and Case EHCRJudgment, Güney

Claims of the ChiefProsecutorthe Claimsof inIndictment the , Aylin, and and Aylin, , ZE pooe t cet a ytm ue b pae n faent i wih our which in fraternity and peace by ruled bewillentitledpeoplesself to system a create to proposes OZDEP ones mo Turkish even minorities but oppress minorities, to Kurdish designed system capitalist a on based policy, State destruction. and exile of policy a day, and propaganda chauvinistic present and militaristic the to an rights up natural maintained most the been overriding has philosophy „Turkish‟ dominant The Kurdishofignotothe andexistence people preserve to monopol order Inthat bureaucrats. military and civil of collaboration the with along daysofthe earliestFrom Republic, certain thehavehadpartiesmonopoly a power on followingthe uses Prosecutor Chief The Chief the of indictment the with started closure OZDEP‟s of procedure The dernization and westernization.dernization and

In OZDEP case OZDEP In Başkan td h poeue f islig at camn ta sm prs f the of parts some that claiming party dissolving of procedure the ated , h plc o toe n oe hs en o eue o eonz the recognize to refuse to been has power in those of policy the y, theofprinciplesecularism. , Filiz. ,

222

Party Dissolutions an Dissolutions Party

ZE ws isle b te osiuinl or o 11 on Court Constitutional the by dissolved was OZDEP f epes aor Party Labour People‟s of ,

I will focus on the arguments of the Constitutional Court Constitutional the of arguments the on focus will I - determination. giy a I il ics te or‟ dcso about decision Court‟s the discuss will I as egrity,

273 55 cam o te uds pol, y en of means by people, Kurdish the of claims d

d Democratic Consolidation Case: The Turkish Case, Turkish The Case: Consolidation Democratic d passages in the party programme of OZDEPofprogramme party the in passages

re itsrelegitimate mostrights.

the state with its territory and nationandterritoryitswith the stateand 223 –

a be prud n h nm of name the in pursued been has

a started, was

t mmes founded members its

–

particularly its h CEU eTD Collection 224 the of rest Accordingh tonation. the with Kurds of religion and history common the stressing by minorities onthed based recognizedlegally be can minorities no unity, nationalsuch within that concludes He only. citizenship of bond the on based civic, exclusively is nation Turkish him, For Turk.” a “[e]veryone that states which references.legalgivingFirsthistorical andof all, states that: he language. ornationalreligiousrace,oforTurkey, basedondifferences culture, are in minorities there thePartiespoliticalPoliticalpartiesthat81Law(a)directlyof on toargue prohibits Article La the of (a) 81 Article in also and Constitution the of 3 and 2 Articles and Preamble the in stated as state the of integrity indivisible of principle rightthe Turkeyandin mentioning minorities The Turkish Constitutional Court‟s rul Court‟s Constitutional TheTurkish belonging to a single nation and founded the Republic of Turkey, no matter what matter no Turkey, of Republic the founded and nation single other a of to belonging will in the by judgment, nation” “Turkish value the formed culture, and common identical religion an words, history, past, common a having People as Kurds recognize to need no is there that argues also Prosecutor Chief The Constitution the of 66(1) Article to reference gives also Prosecutor Chief The bythesethanother thoseacceptedtwo treaties. present is minority no system, legal Turkish the In wi religion. of discriminationlaws any the before equal was everyone that out point to regulation made such was and too, Muslim, not were who those to given was Muslims for dated provided rights political Treaty and civil the from Lausanne benefit to means the the And, minorities. Musli by not were firstly who those regulated only and was 24.7.1923 minorities of issue The Prosec Chief The Kurdi are there that claiming Prosecutor Chief the to According their ethnic ori ethnic their

istinctionofreligiousnationalor or orsectracelanguage. culture, im: gin is. This unity of the nation is so powerful that Kurds took part took Kurds that powerful so is nation the of unity This is. gin

utor also tries to prove that there are no minorities in Turkey by Turkey in minorities no are there that prove to tries also utor

bound to the Turkish state through the bond of citizenship is citizenship of bond the through state Turkish the to bound ing on OZDEP case on November 11, 1993; no. 1993/2: 31 1993/2: 1993; no. 11, on November case onOZDEP ing

56 to

self - determination equals undermining the equalsundermining determination 224 w on Political Parties. Especially Parties. Political on w wr icue i te cp of scope the in included were m

h epe and people sh thout making thout

CEU eTD Collection 226 225 territor the in minorities creating of way by unity national harm to parties “political 81(b) Article to According freely. cultures particular their enjoying and developing minorities at aims it as Parties Politi on Law the of 81(b) Article also but above, stated reasons the for Constitution prog Constitution.the why isThat Turkish. in made official The Turkish. is state the of language the Constitution, the of 3 Article processes. of provision official the to are According processes judicial that all at doubt no is there Therefore, state. state Prosecutor Chief The indictment. the in problematic legally as considered is proceedings.” court in precedence given be t intongue mother as Turkish than other languages of teaching the prohibiting Constitution the of tongue mother in education Ibid, 39Ibid, 32Ibid, ramme requiringrighttodevelopmentofthe freeramme culture:

o hm ti pr o te rgam nt ny otait Atce 2 f the of 42 Article contradicts only not programme the of part this him, For development the for of and anation. people a mot its in education to entitled be will people Each freely. cultures particular their enjoy and develop to minorities the and peoples Kurdish and Turkish the permitting established be will order An programme party the of statement another cites Prosecutor Chief the Lastly, shalltongue mother person‟s “A that stating programme party the in sentence The P Chief The peoples various of not and people, Turkish the people, unique a of the consists nation Turkish respect, this In citizens. other the with together Independence of War the in heeducationalinstitutions Turkish to citizens. .

225

oeuo as pit t te at porme sig o rgt to right for asking programme party the to points also rosecutor rcse icuig uidcin rcse ad ciiis must activities and processes jurisdiction including processes

For the Chief Prosecutor, it is in contradiction with article 42 article with contradiction in is it Prosecutor, Chief the For

the statement in the party programme contradicts Article 3Articleof programmecontradicts party the instatement the s that judiciary is one of the basic functions of the of functions basic the of one is judiciary that s her tongue, that being an essential prerequisite essential an being that tongue, her cannot pursue the aim or engage in activities in engage or aim the pursue cannot 57

o te eulc of Republic the of y cal 226 be

CEU eTD Collection 230 229 228 227 e an rather is it whole, a as Constitution the of context the in considered is it when contradiction a not is 15 Article provisional the of existence the However Constitution. the contradict to has during toignore lawable a decisio beto that states ItParties. Political on Law of provisions the applyingnot OZDEPabout of 4.2.3. on Law the of whichPartiesPolitical contradictsthe Constitution. provisions the of instead Turkey, by the signed and Constitution agreements the international of provisions the apply to Court Constitutional the requests Poli on Law the of cancellation makes Constitution 13, theconstitutionalasdo. authorities democracy interpret not do they because simply Turkey in banned be can parties political interpretation. and definition own its on based solution proposed sec and 4.2.2. languageorTurkishculture.” the than other cultures and languages spreading or developing protecting, through Turkey 1993/2 1993; no. 11, on November case onOZDEP ruling Court‟s Constitutional TheTurkish Parties onLawPolitical Ibid,43 Ibid,46 14,

The Defenseof OZDEPThe The Decisionofthe The Constitutional Court ularism In the different parts of its decision, the Constitutional Court discusses the requestthe discusses Court Constitutional the decision, its of parts different the In A contradicts Parties Political on Law the that indicates OZDEP of theprinciple interprets it that OZDEPdefense,argues its In the of 15 Article provisional the However, Constitution. the of 69 68, 66, xception. And the Court stresses that it is impossible to ignore the existence of existence the ignore to impossible is it that stresses Court the And xception.

ifrn fo te oiia pwrs nesadn, n i dvlp its develops it and understanding, power‟s political the from different , art.81 ,

227

ns, either two laws havens,eithertwolaws contradicttoeachlaw or othera 229

230

ia Pris mosbe OZDEP impossible. Parties tical 228

indivisible integrityindivisible t tess ht the that stresses It rticles : 10, 11, 10,

12,

CEU eTD Collection 235 234 233 63 2009), 232 231 integrity. the from separate are minorities these that means automatically Turkey indivisibleintegrityofprinciple the state. of t minorities other and nation Treaty. Lausanne the by accepted Lau the by regulated abolished2001 isit after constitutionalamendments. (1980 rule passed Council Security National during laws review to Court Constitutional the prohibiting was 15 Article provisional 15. Article provisional the of because Political Parties on Law the of constitutionality review unauthorized is it thus and article this 75 1993/2: 1993; no. 11, on November case onOZDEP ruling Court‟s Constitutional TheTurkish Ibid,72 Ibid,76 De Ergun. Ozbudun, Ibid,77

StateSINGLE;isThetheterritoryis WHOLE; nationONE. ais the unity theplacedin all areNation, they Turkish the in origins withheld, present different of individuals are there though Even nations. one right than more not nation, one no is There limitless. pri as freedoms and rights individual made being unlimited same is the from benefiting are discrimination they as citizens other No and Kurds the between laws. uniform to subject a are carry they citizens, not other do origin Kurdish wit Together citizens.other from themdifferentiate that ruleslegal of any there are Citizens nor state. minority; a of definitions legal the and sociological the to conforming of characteristic integrity the in the that placed and nation, Turkish the outside conceived be cannot different they a that or nation, minority a not are they that however, stipulated, been has it identity; their expressing from prohibited not are origin Kurdish is of citizens the language origins, citizens other as and Just integrity. race national and of territorial of differences notion the on with incompatible based status minority of recognition The in minorities are there that claiming Court the to according that infer can We t with agrees Court The

Thefollowingreasoningshedoflight the partsissue: onthis vated, restricted... In the State of the Republic of Turkey, there is one state and state one is there Turkey, of Republic the of State the In restricted... vated, mocratization and the Politics of Constitution Making in Turkey, in Making Constitution of Politics the and mocratization san n

Tet ad hr ae o ioiis rsn, te ta those than other present, minorities no are there and Treaty e hat

are not accepted in the Lau the in accepted not are e nitets li ta te su o min of issue the that claim indictment‟s he 233

hs vr rfrne o h eitne f Kurdish of existence the to reference very Thus, 234 - 1983) including Law on Political Parties until Parties Political on Law including 1983) 59

231

t s motn t mnin ht the that mention to important is It 232

san n e Treaty e

of the Turkish Nation… Turkishthe of

uks national Turkish ( undermines the undermines Budapest: CEU Press, CEU Budapest: 235

rte is orities

y are y h theh

CEU eTD Collection 241 240 London, of University 239 49 Press:2007), Pennsylvania (Pennsylvania, Arat F. Zehra Kabasakal ed. Turkey, in Rights Human 238 237 London, of University 236 theitsCourtseesresult, preventingthese aim assortsof thinks and Parties Political mi on Law the of legislators the of mindset the shares it proceedingsthatdecision,thisByunconstitutional. judicialthe shows Court education and are ideologyof of fear by explained disintegration simply be cannot concept minority the about limited Court Constitutional a within and Treaty. legislation Lausanne national the of of understanding subject a as but rights human universal as not rights minority considers Court the state, the of disintegration the to lead will identities the violates programme its in constitution. people Kurdish for rights minority for asking OZDEP‟s nation. Turkish the from excluded are status minority granted already are tr differentiated foraskresult, those who As a Turkishnation. the to belonging of aspects important most the are freedoms and rights individual unlimited from benefiting mutually view, Court‟s the in words, other In nation.

ai, Derya. Bayir, Oran, Baskin. Baskin. Oran, Ibid, Ibid,249 Ibid,262 Derya. Bayir, oiy s n atfca formation” “artificial an is nority 233 h Court The fear its of because Oran, Baskin to According Turkish the outside being means minority a being Court the for that seen be can It

exclusive concepts. exclusive

Turkishnationalism.

239 Negating Diversity: Minorities and Nationalism in in Nationalism and Minorities Diversity: Negating eaig iest: Minoriti Diversity: Negating “ Minority Concept And Rights In Turkey: In Rights And Concept Minority rte i ses rm h fc ta the that fact the from stems it rather , 2010 2010 lo ue ta dmns f ZE aot h ue f ohr oge in tongue mother of use the about OZDEP of demands that rules also ) , 242 , ) : 229 )

236

According to the Court, being subject to the uniform laws andlaws uniform the to subject being Court, the toAccording 240

n smtig ht ih b fre b pltc. s a As politics. by formed be might that something and es and Nationalism in in Nationalism and es 238 being part of the nation and being a minority a being and nation the of part being

are wi agree I 60

The Lausanne Peace Treaty and Current Issues, Current and Treaty Peace Lausanne The artificial formation endeavours h ai ta ti apoc o the of approach this that Bayir th or i a stron a is Court uks Law Turkish uks Law Turkish ht h r the that , , (h diss., (PhD , (h diss., (PhD , cgiin f diverse of ecognition spotr f the of supporter g eatment or whoor eatment 237 ht s why is That ue Mary Queen ue Mary Queen

. 241 ht a that

are ” in CEU eTD Collection 244 14 2011), University, CentralEuropean 243 242 the by foreseen are that aims secret than rather programme party by violations its and laws and Constitution the in regulations legal on based be to supposed is which document legal ofpartThisdeci theprogramme. toreference anygiving withoutparty the ofobjectives secret about speculateto rightthe finds Court the why is That programme. party the in found be cannot decision the in mentioned according Moreover, objectives. its about conclude can it which using by party the of activities the about evidence no has Court the that argue anorwithassociationintegrate independent state wit self External concerned.” people the for arrangements constitutional special other any or arrangements self “Internal self reads simply it determination, self external meaning the questioning theselfrightto of self of demands the equates Court The state. the of integrity indivisible the of principle the against is it that decides Court http://www.anayasa.gov.tr/files/pdf/anayasa_yargisi/anyarg20/b_oran.pdf The Turkish Constitutional Court‟s ruling on OZDEP case on November 11, 1993; no. 1993/2 1993; no. 11, on November case onOZDEP ruling Court‟s Constitutional TheTurkish Vezbergaite Oran, Baskin. Ulusal Egemenlik Kavraminin Donusumu, Azinliklar ve26 Turkiye, Azinliklar Donusumu, Kavraminin Egemenlik Ulusal Baskin. Oran, h Trih ains nt bsd n aim I i ovos ht uh program such that obvious is It racism. on based targetbreakingprovisionsth down unity nation‟s Turkish divide tothe aims party the The of programme objective. The citizens. real the among its feelings separation hide to the this doing of is it program that understood be can and “brotherhood” it words “unity”, the program its in using frequently is OZDEP Although CourtgoesThestates evenfurtherand that: and internal between differentiate cannot Court the as that argues Oran Baskin self to right the about programme OZDEP‟s in part the Regarding f e osdr ht ZE ws en jde bcue f t porme w can we programme, its of because judged being was OZDEP that consider we If , Ieva - - determination is people‟s decision to establish an independent state, create a freecreatea state, independent an establishto people‟sdecision is determination determination may take various forms such as autonomy within a within autonomy as such forms various take may determination . Remedial Secessi Remedial .

eedn pry s raig elns f eeg, otlt and hostility revenge, of feelings creating is party defendant - determination with the demand of secession of the state without state the of secession of demand the with determination

on as an Exercise of Right to Self Determination of Peoples, (MA diss., (MA Peoples, of Determination Self to Right of Exercise an as on sion seemspartsionifthatquiteweitof a consider is problematic

- e countrynationale andintegrity. determina 61

eemnto a dmn fr secession. for demand as determination h an existingindependenth an state.

tion. o h Cut te betvs ht are that objectives the Court, the to

- 244 determina

: 80 state, federal state,

243 tion, the tion,

242

CEU eTD Collection 248 247 246 245 selfto rightthe to referring while OZDEP of intention the about Court Constitutional Turkish the from differently ruled democracy. of rules the break or violence use to people incite would that it in thedeclaration asstruggle.” of support.this freedom and independence for peoplesthe of strugglelegitimate and The programme. its s in programme the in struggle sentences the armed showed government the supported openly had OZDEP that argued self to right the to referring By Turkey.divide to attempt an in and “minority” people”, “Kurdish “Kurd”, theinprogrammeparty‟s“peoples”wastodissolution of enough theparty. justify words the of use the Court Constitutional v and equality of basis the on country the form would together who peoples, Kurdish and Turkish the of unity the for work to wished party the that statedis it as programme the in stressed is unifiedremain to countrythe needfor the contrary, Tur of partition the seeking party the as interpreted be can that programme the in nothing is There problem. Kurdish the to solution peaceful and democratic a favored it that 4.2.4. thegaveECHRConvention and 8.12.1999. itsdecision final on the of 14 and 11 10, 9, Articles of violation a alleging ECHR the to applied OZDEP closure, As Court.

Ibid,18 Ibid,15 Ibid, Part ofDemocracy Freedom and Case EHCRJudgment,

11 The Judgmentthe ECThe of The OZDEP thatitself defendedarguing government The that argued OZDEP ECHR, the Before

rsl, h Cntttoa Cut ae n re dsovn OZDEP. dissolving order an made Court Constitutional the result, a

ECHR stated that when it considers the above quoted sentence, it finds no finds it sentence, quoted above the considers it when that stated ECHR

- determination. According to the ECHR t ECHRthe to Accordingdetermination.

y (OZDEP) v.y6 Turkey, (OZDEP) it had been clearly stated in its programme its in stated clearly been had it oluntary association. However, for the for However, association. oluntary tating that “OZDEP supports the just the supports “OZDEP that tating - democraticfreedomsusing was determination, the governmentthe determination, 246

he intention of OZDEPis of intentionhe .

It stands by them in this in them bystands It 248 247 key. On the On key.

The ECHR The 245

fe its After thing CEU eTD Collection 255 254 South 253 1 252 2008): 3 no. ( 13, &Politics Society European South 251 TurkishExample 250 249 importantisRP yearof dissolved. the wasbeenrulingthe closure itwhen Therefore, a for had grounds. same the on party the dissolved Court Constitutional the 1998 January 16 secularismbyreferringactsof an to principle the to contrary activities the of center the been has it that grounds the on dissolved itgovernmentwi formeda1996, coalition Parliament. in seats the of third one or MPs 157 into translated which vote, the coup. 1980 the of aftermath pa other all with together which, Party, Salvation National the of banning the after voters” religious for voice “political as 1983 in founded was RP) secularism. of principles the violatingfor parties 4.3. theKurds.ofconsent expressed,democratically given, freely the by underpinned be must project political proposed the that emphasize to instead but Turkey, from separation seek to people encourage to not no. Ibid, 7 Ibid, Rights Human Essex Case, Party Refah The Democracy: and Religion Rights, Human Kevin, Boyle, Güney, Aylin, and Başkan, Filiz. Party Dissolutions and Democratic Consolidation Case: The Turkish Case, Turkish The Case: Consolidation Democratic and Dissolutions Party Filiz. Başkan, and Aylin, Güney, Case, Turkish The Case: Consolidation Democratic and Dissolutions Party Filiz. Başkan, and Aylin, Güney, EHCR Judgment, Case ofPartisi Refah Case EHCRJudgment, Ibid,19 ig Are Kteie ad ao, zn I Sclrs Psil i a Majority a in Possible Secularism Is Ozan. Varol, and Katherine, Adrien Wing, harmnotdemocracyitself. do currently is state a way the question into call that those even political diverse allow to democracy of essence the of is It rules. democratic infringes it that mean not does State Turkish the of structures and T

he fact that such a political project is considered incompatible with the current principles current the with incompatible considered is project political a such that fact he 1 (2004): 4 1 (2004): European Society & Politics 13, no. 3 ( 2008): 2008): 3 no. ( 13, &Politics Society European The Refah Party Case

The Chief Prosecutor applied to the Turkish Constitutional Court to have the party the have to Court Constitutional Turkish the to applied Prosecutor Chief The four closed Court Constitutional Turkish the history, legal Turkey‟s In

Texas International Law Journal 42, no. 1, (2007 1, no. 42, LawJournal International Texas

MoreECH importantly,the

251

In the1995 national elections the RP had gained 22 per cent of cent per 22 gained had RP the elections national the1995 In

249

(The Welfare Party) and Othe Party) Welfare (The bydleadersofremarksmembers andthe certain RP. th the centreth 267 267 63

250 R statedthat: R The Islamist Welfare Party (Party Welfare Islamist The - right True PathPartyrightTrue .

):8 projects to be proposed and debated, and proposed be to projects

rs v. Turkey, 4 v. Turkey, rs te, a be dsovd n the in dissolved been had rties,

organized

- Muslim , provided that they that provided , 253

Refah PartisiRefah

onr? The Country?: 255 252 political The RP The n June In Review 254 On , CEU eTD Collection 38, Review Law & Society in , Turkey Parties 259 267 2008): 3 no. ( 13, &Politics Society European South 258 2 11 no. (2004): 257 :61 (2002) no.2, 7, Politics Mediterranean Rights, Human of Court European ofthe Jurisdiction 256 found be can principle this of reflections The 68(4). Article with together Constitution the of each forArticles case,rather theythat argue violates eachthe caseprinciple secularism. of violated the specify not do Court the time the of most and Prosecutor Chief The secularism. accused Prosecutor Chief 4.3.1. nationalism.Kurdish Turk the defend to necessity the expressed he which in Democracy” “Militant called book even a wrote He debate. public of issues became RP, the about speeches public his with together of lines Islamist to contrary views his for known is indictment, the prepared and RP the against case the initiated 1997. February 28 on meeting Council religiousl party‟s the about uneasiness extreme their expressed military Turkish of representatives the after 1997 May 21 on started democraticininterventionpoliticallife. radica a is Court the of decision the by office from government a of dislodging the standard, parties. parliamentary ruling the also but government, that shows it as Güney, Aylin, and Başkan, Filiz. Party Dissolutions and Democratic Consolidation Case: The Turkish Case, Turkish The Case: Consolidation Democratic and Dissolutions Party Filiz. Başkan, and Aylin, Güney, Boyle, Kevin, Human Rights, Religion a Religion Rights, Human Boyle,Kevin, oaigu Dce Pors Uiy n Dmcay Pors, nt, n Dmcay Dissolving Democracy: and Unity, Progress, Democracy, and Unity Progress Dicle. Kocacioglu, aymz Svi n Agn Brl Lmttos n h Fedm f oiia Pris n uky and Turkey in Parties Political of Freedom the on Limitations Birol. Akgun, and Sevki Hakyemez, ish democracy through the adoption of harsh measures against Islamist revivalism and revivalism Islamist against measures harsh of adoption the through democracy ish

Claims of the ChiefProsecutorthe Claimsof inIndictment the T the programme, party of because judged was which case OZDEP from Different The he principleof protectedsecularismisbyhe the Preamble, 147 and Article4,14,24(4)

P ae an ee mr sgiiac a te rcdr o dsovn party dissolving of procedure the as significance more even gains case RP

the Court has not banned only small parties that have no chance to form a form to chance no have that parties small only banned not has Court the politics. The shortness of the time he devoted to prepare the indictment the prepare to devoted he time the of shortness The politics. 259

h R fr en cne o atvte cnrr t te rnil of principle the to contrary activities of center being for RP the

nd Democracy: The Refah Party Case, Essex Human Rights Review Review Rights Human Case,Essex RefahParty The ndDemocracy: no. 258 257 oine plce a te eua Ntoa Security National regular the at policies oriented y

Moreover, the Chief Prosecutor, Vural Savas, who Savas, Vural Prosecutor, Chief the Moreover, 3 (2004): 441 3(2004): 64

256

t s ar o ru that, argue to fair is It

y any by P olitical

l CEU eTD Collection 2008): 3 no. ( 13, &Politics Society European South 262 261 17, Democratization Rights, of Court Human European 260 Provisional the add to 3511 no. Law passed Parliament 1988, In Education. the Higher of Council by enacted Code Discipline of Student 7 Article of because headscarf the with university attend to able not were students he religious with school attending students female the prohibit that Education Higher on Law the in regulations no are There Law. this regarding Court Constitutional the of decision particular a to refers only prosecutor the that see can Education Higher on Law to refers Prosecutor indictment:the from quote To secularism. of principle the contradicts headscarf, the wearing servants civil preservationthe and 88), (Art. demonstrations religious of prohibition 87), (Art. religion by sacred held things and religion of exploitation the of prohibition the 86), (Art. ) abolished was it when 1924 all of head spiritual (temporaland khilafat of return the of advocacy the of prohibition the and secularism of principles the of protection 85), (Art. Ataturk for respect 84), (Art. reforms and principles Ataturk‟s of protection the Th Parties.Political on Law the of 89 and 88, 87,86, 85,84, Articles in Güney TheTurk Ozbudun, , Aylin, and and Aylin, , lhuh n ieaue t s rud ht n hs at f h idcmn, h Chief the indictment, the of part this in that argued is it literature in Although retreatgoingbeforeheadscarf.are to the that speech election an in stated has they Erbakan Chairman right, fact in and constitutional public, the a incited opposition, organized is of headscarf a with offices principle government in working the and other contradicts and Erbakan Necmettin students attire claim members Chairman party the votes, headscarf reaps that it that religious confirming believing secularism, Court with Constitutional school the attending of decision the Despite and students female for support RP‟s the that argued Prosecutor Chief the Firstly, ish Constitutional Court‟s ruling on The Welfare Party case on January 16, 1997; no. 1998/1: no.1997; 16, on January Party case Welfare Theon ruling Court‟s Constitutional ish

Ergun.

of thePresidencystatusofofthe (Art.89). of Affairs Religious

at Poiiin ae: ifrn Apoce b te uks Cntttoa Cut and Court Constitutional Turkish the by Approaches Different Cases: Prohibition Party Başkan , Filiz. ,

ed persistently nearly in every speech that receiving education receiving that speech every in nearly persistently ed Party Dissolutions an Dissolutions Party “when they form the government, the university chancellors university the government, the form they “when Article 16 to the Law on Higher Education which states which Education Higher on Law the to 16 Article

Muslims held by the Ottoman sultans from 1517 to 1517 from Ottomansultans the by held Muslims 269 65 no.1 ( no.1

262

d Democratic Consolidation Case: The Turkish Case, Turkish The Case: Consolidation Democratic d 261 , when we consider the consider we when , 2010

adscarf. However, in 1980s the female the 1980s in However, adscarf. ): 131 ):

ese provisions includeprovisions ese primary source we source primary 260

CEU eTD Collection 267 266 265 2006) ofPress, Utah Parti AK the and Democracy Turkey: New ofa Emergence The 264 263 bythepartyalso executives. embraced are speeches these that evidence clear is speeches these made who those against the that fact the publicized, were speeches hearts.” their in feel they hatred and rancour resentment, the alive keep Muslims let And us. for store in has future the what see us Let longer. little a wait will we waited; have We change. must system “This 1996: November Ş Mr Kayseri, of mayor The Kayseri. of mayor and party the of in 1993 March 23 whichParliament,suppo is on Erbakan Necmettin leader party by made speech a is them of One theactivitiesalso ofthisinfringes thepartyprinciple. secularism of principle the to contrary is headscarf the wearing that prove only not Court secularism. of principle the down struck belief religious for türban or headscarf a with hair and neck the covering allowed are students “female that The Turkish Constitutional Court‟s ruling on The Welfare Party case on January 16, 1997; no. 1998/1: 6 1998/1: no.1997; 16, on January Party case Welfare Theon ruling Court‟s Constitutional TheTurkish v.Turkey and Others Party) Welfare ofRefahPartisi(The Case EHCRJudgment,

EHCR Judgment, Case ofPar Refah Case EHCRJudgment, 2547. no. law the added16to 1988; annex10, on December Parliament in the passed Thelaw Kuru, Ahmet. Re Ahmet. Kuru, In addition, the Chief Prosecutor points to various speeches of MPs, vice MPs, of speeches various to points Prosecutor Chief the addition, In lived Everyone one‟ssystemisown legal integralchoose an of partthe freedomreligion. of an movements. to according live to obliged religious be I should then, various Why, been peace. in lived everyone so and haveorganisation, own his of rules legal the to there according history of our framework In a within for him, choose alwa for has to that appropriate Moreover, able principles. general most be is must system citizen legal The which systems. himself legal several be must There ... members. and leader party the of speeches some to points also Prosecutor Chief The ” . 263 , 16 , interpretation of Secularism in Turkey: The Case of the Justice and Development Party,” Development and Justice the of Case The Turkey: in Secularism of interpretation a a ucntttoa o 0.318 rln ta i i cnrr t the to contrary is it that ruling 07.03.1989 on unconstitutional as law

However, that article went before the Constitutional Court and the Court the and Court Constitutional the before went article that However,

264

rting plurality oflegalrtingplurality To quotethe speech: systems.

And the Chief Prosecutor uses this decision of the Constitutional the of decision this uses Prosecutor Chief the And 267

tisi(The Welfare Party) and Others v. Turkey, 9 v. Turkey, and Others Party) tisi(TheWelfare 266 h Ch The RP 66

did not start any process of disciplinary action disciplinary of process any start not did

e Poeuo age that argues Prosecutor ief ys been the case throughout our history. our throughout case the been ys

ed.

M. Hakan Yavuz (Salt Lake City: University University City:Lake (Salt Yavuz Hakan M. other‟s rules? ... The right to right The ... rules? other‟s kü aaee as n 10 on says Karatepe ükrü , 12 ,

lhuh these although

- 265 chairman

but

in CEU eTD Collection 34(2003) Relations ofInternational TurkishYearbook 270 269 268 ad ofan statement regime the of guardian and system political the that account into p givenshould which of views the officers, secularism.ofprinciple ” RP Imam the down close to government Council. Security National of advices vast has ofinterpre power Prosecutor Chief the that argue to fair is It Constitution. the in principle general the to referring by secularism of principle the infringed RP the that argues he and education worththismentioning:reaching conclusion is while prosecutor the of arguments The secularism. of principle the and Constitution the to open is education religious to students of millions subjecting and Schools), Hatip (Imam personnel clerical for divinity of schools primary more and necessary, than Divinity Uzgel, Jenkins, Ibid,10 ‟s claiming that it is necessary to open new such schools in public speeches is against the against is speeches public in schools such new open to necessary is it that claiming ‟s İlhan. ainl euiy oni i a avsr bd cnitn o hg lvl military level high of consisting body advisory an is Council Security National the with line in not is RP the of policy the that claims also Prosecutor Chief The lim the defines Prosecutor Chief The secular a as qualified be state. cannot instruction religious through children of millions sc the re and changingthe to acquiesceswhich state any “clerics”, beyond court Because, supreme by only sometimes judgments. and laws, and constitutions their in sometimes included provisions by control under education” “religious kept has state democratic t to impediment importantan deemed is education religious the countries democratic developed most in Even of Faculties more open to RP the of policy the Prosecutor Chief the to According

Gareth, Between Praetorianism and Democracy: The Role of the Military in Turkish Foreign Policy Policy Foreign Turkish in Military the of Role The Democracy: and Praetorianism Between 268

International Affairs 83,no. Affairs International tation. NSC legitimized the military's active involvement in politics as an actor of actor an as politics in involvement active military's the legitimized NSC visory body in a legal document which consists the basis of the claim of the of claim the of basis the consists whichdocument legal a in visorybody

e asn o sclr n fe tikn ctzn ad each and citizen, thinking free and secular of raising he - Hatip schools and henceforth not to open new open to not henceforth and schools Hatip

2(2007)

“ lhuh ainl euiy oni avsd our advised Council Security National Although riority by Council of Ministers. of Council byriority : 67 181

its of secular state himself in terms of religious of terms in himself state secular of its

: 344

ol ncsay o meig h ne for need the meeting for necessary hools

270

i i nt sa t se rfrne o the to reference a see to usual not is it , - forming of the minds of minds the of forming 269

Even if we takewe if Even ly contrary ly

ones, the ones, The

CEU eTD Collection 276 275 38, Review Law & Society in , Turkey Parties 274 273 272 271 and Party the represent not did speeches their and people these that argued RP the members, law. private the in contracts enter to freedom to demand criticizing t to contrary not are headscarf the about opinions its that thattakespeechescited part in the and policies its that Court the convince to tries it way, this In order. public the destroy not do that ways in it practice and religion any to adhere to capacity the viol as secularism describes of sorts all from conscience of freedom and religion of freedom protect to implemented and developed principle a is it contrary the On religion. theto guaranteed constitutionally f worship of freedom and religion of freedom enjoy to everybody “ that stating Cons the of 2 Article of justification the stresses RP The secularismbecauselineinnotwith aboutisspiritProsecutor the it1982 Constitution. theof 4.3.2. ProsecutortheChief result,requested party.the Courtto the close a As secularism. of principle the infringe party political a of actions that Prosecutor Chief ruli Court‟s Constitutional TheTurkish oaigu Dce Pors Uiy n Dmcay Pors, nt, n Dmcay Dissolving Democracy: and Unity, Progress, Democracy, and Unity Progress Dicle. Kocacioglu, Ibid,98 Ibid,82 Ibid,50 Ibid,

65 The Defenseof The for the plurality of legal systems, the party argues that its MP Erbakan was referring was Erbakan MP its that argues party the systems, legal of plurality the for Regarding against enmity not is „„Secularism secularism: of definition own its offers party The Chief the of understanding the accept not does it that states RP the defense, its In

h plce rgrig h hasaf os o voae hs principle. this violate not does headscarf the regarding policies the euaim s o a tit rnil ad t os o ma ahim I enables It atheism. mean not does it and principle strict a not is secularism the claims in the indictment on the issue of the headscarf, the RP argued RP the headscarf, the of issue the on indictment the in claims the the Refahthe Party

thenotindictmentisthetoprinciplesecularism. contrary of ng on The Welfare Party case on January 16, 1997; no. 1998/1: 1998/1: no.1997; 16, on January Party case Welfare Theon ng reedomofreligion. no.

3 (2004): 450 3(2004): 68 276

In relation to speeches made by ot by made speeches to relation In 272

titution given by co by given titution he principle of secularism and secularism of principle he ation.” ”

. Moreover the party points party the Moreover . 273

oevr te party the Moreover, nstitution 275 her partyher -

n the On makers Political 73

that 274 271

CEU eTD Collection 2 2006), Press, ofUtah University : 282 281 280 279 278 277 sphere.private the toreligion confineto aims and sphere public their allows and religions visibility toward neutral stays state the that implies secularism passive while Kuru, to According secularism. assertive calls Kuru Ahmet what embraces passages the 4.3.3. law a constitute not infringement. do decisions such of opposing Hence, command. of force the carry Government. that stated rightly advice conscious. and religion of freedom enjoy to necessary is education religious that arguing education religious theactivitiestosecularism. contrary of principle illegal of centre a becoming avoid to membership from expelled were concerned people the h Eegne f Nw uky Dmcay n te K Parti AK the and Democracy Turkey: New a of Emergence The Kuru, Ibid, Ibid, Ibid,92 Ibid,87 6 v. Turkey, and Others Party) Welfare ofPartisi(The Refah Case EHCRJudgment,

s of National Security Council and violation of the principle of secularism, the party the secularism, of principle the of violation and Council Security National of s 84 196 The Decisionofthe The Constitutional Court Ahmet. Ahmet. , assertive secularism means that the state favors a secular worldview in the public the in worldview secular a favors state the that means secularism assertive , locatin By the with develops ofthepeople.conscience saved that politicization, from saved democracy the is which place respectable real „„isits in kept and administration of tool a being religion from of order, secular vision the In humanity… the of of i nation, basis science, of enlightenment the become has anddogmatism scholastic medieval the destroyed has that life of way a is Secularism with started Court the indictment, the in stated claims the evaluate to passing Before stat RP The

about its understanding ofunderstandingitssecularism.According toabout Court: the 279 280 Reinterpretation of Secularism in Turkey: The Case of the Justice and Development Party, Development and Justice the of Case The Turkey: in Secularism of Reinterpretation

278 It is an advisory organ that has no executive powers and its de its and powers executive no has that organ advisory an is It bu te at n h idcmn cnetn te at‟ nt following not party‟s the connecting indictment the in part the About ainl euiy oni i nt n ra spro t Primn o the or Parliament to superior organ an not is Council Security National te eiin n h cncec o te epe h Cut hw ta it that shows Court the people the of conscience the in religion the g d ht t os o acp te lis n h idcmn rltd with related indictment the in claims the accept not does it that ed

281

ndependence, national sovereignty, and the ideal the and sovereignty, national ndependence, 69

277

282

ed. By using this definition, the Courtthe definition, this using By M. Hakan Yavuz (Salt Lake City: City: Lake (Salt Yavuz Hakan M.

cisions do not do cisions ”

CEU eTD Collection 285 284 3,(2008 283 limitedtonot contracts enter Tothequoteinlaw.ofprivatethe decisionthe Court: whichindicatesConstitution 42 Article stresses and Constitution the of 2 Article and Preamble the in reflection headscarf,thethe Courtstates that: rituals.and s of definition its to loyal stays Court the decisions, its giving while below, mention will I As parties. Political on Law and Constitution the in stated secularism of principle general the than other sphere of place the defining regulations legal specific noare there as parties politicalIslamist of decisions closure the in importance gains definition non neutral, a create to politics, soc including of types other from out separated be can Islam that notion the promotes The on ruling Court‟s Constitutional TheTurkish hvl,i. aig sa: tdig eiin n eua Turkey Secular in Religion Studying Islam: Taming Shively,Kim. 1

982 ): 685 ): Reg shallprovisionsnotthesecontravening be established. education and training of Institutions state. the of control and supervision the under methods, educational and science contemporary of basis the on Atatürk, of reforms T de its base To of tool a thetosecularism.principlecontrary of also but privilege of toolis situation this Undoubtedly a universities. and organizations only public in discrimination not used be can attire of forms related religi same the of people among even conflicts create h even can heads of coveringand and attires various practiceto people Forcing it. this by follow to them forcesfollow not do hair who ones the and on pressure creates neck universities the covering Permitting a decision,its In

ann ad dcto sal e odce aog h li the along conducted be shall education and raining Constitution

arding the speech supporting plurality of legal systems, the Court ruled that it is it that ruled Court the systems, legal of plurality supporting speech the arding clrs adjaosy eed te ulc peefo rlgos symbols religious from sphere public the defends jealously and ecularism , art. 42, sec. 2 sec. 42, art. , iin te or rfr t te rnil o sclrs ta fns its finds that secularism of principle the to refers Court the cision, bout the claims in the indictment regarding the speeches related withrelated speeches the regardingindictment the in claims the bout

that:

The Welfare Party Welfare The - eiiu pbi sae n institutions. and space public religious 70 284 the religious symbols and rituals in the public the in rituals and symbols religious the

case on January 16, 1997; no. 1998/1 no.1997; 16, on January case asavs t ulc fie and offices public at eadscarves 285 nhoooia Quarterly Anthropological on. Headscarves and certain and Headscarves on.

e o te rnils and principles the of nes a activities, ial

(3) of the of (3) : 199 283

1 no. 81, This

CEU eTD Collection 287 286 givingtobeforeTodecisionthequo its closeRP. theoflackevidence.of because Schools, Hatip Imam and Divinity of Faculties about RP the of policy the about that cl the about rule not did Court The secularism. of principle the violate they that decided Court the mentioned, speeches all the for general, In closure. the avoid to only Party the from al party the that sign a as of principle positions effective in people these put the to behavior RP‟s the interpreted Court to The secularism. contrary activities illegal of centre a becoming avoid to membership Party therepresent to authoritythe have not did vice MPs, including members Ibid, : 202 1998/1 no.1997; 16, on January Party case Welfare Theon ruling Court‟s Constitutional TheTurkish

214 Convention. theof 17 Article and Constitution,the of 68 Article of protection receivethe not may activit and speeches members‟ parliamentaryParty and Deputies elimi to tools as used been have freedoms and rights democratic that understood been has It democracy militant of concept the to refers Court the that stress to important is It the accept not did Court The Party the and of ErbakanNecmettinChairmanis contrary be speech Constitution Hence, the values. universal by the reflecting protected can Treaties be Rights Human cannot view peace a Such science. contemporary public of plurality that shake evident is will It which systems legal unity. national of precondition through a is system legal the system in Unity integrity. national the damage also and legalcitizens among bonds legal establish own to le of freedom established…Plurality the their have should communities religious choose that propose contract this by Medina. of Constitution the as known also Act Medina the of idea Islamic the from stems systems legalof plurality of idea The

ae eorc i fvu o “sha of favour in democracy nate 287

so embraces their views. For the Court, these officials were expelled were officials these Court, the For views. their embraces so

- chairman of the party and mayor of Kayseri stating that they that stating Kayseri of mayor and party the of chairman

h fudtos f eua sse bsd n nelc and intellect on based system secular of foundations the gal systems according to beliefs will make it difficult to difficult it make will beliefs to according systems gal defense 71

of the RP about the speeches of several party several of speeches the about RP the of

and the people concerned were expelled from expelled were concernedpeople the and teofthatpartthedecision:

to the principlethe oftosecularism. i odr b te ea Pry Chairman, Party Refah the by order” ria

Some Islamist political thinkers inspired thinkers political Islamist Some ies. These ies.

286

behaviors aim

CEU eTD Collection 293 no.2(2002) 7, Politics Mediterranean Rights, ofHuman Court ofEuropean the Jurisdiction 292 291 290 289 288 shar either to programme its or constitution its in reference no was there that place first the in argued RP are speeches and acts their party, thetowholeimputableparty. the in members accused the of positions significant the account into taking that added and defense Party‟s the for ground sufficient a not was on focushowwill the Courts‟ofunderstanding threatreconcile withother. each I part, this In democracy. to threat a present RP the of activities the that agrees ECHR The Co Constitutional Turkish of reasoning the approved history 13.02.3003. on decision Convention the of 18 17, 14, 11, 10, 9, Articles violates 4.3.4. that rules.protectionrights humansupranational and Constitutionthe ofprotection the receive cannotparty the of actions orde democratic the replace to view a with freedoms of members and leaders that concluded Court order. sharia of antithesis as democracy defined Court The

Ibid,36 Ibid,1 ofPartisi Refah Case EHCRJudgment, Ibid, 214 Ibid,215 aymz Svi n Agn Brl Lmttos n h Fedm f oiia Pris n uky and Turkey in Parties Political of Freedom the on Limitations Birol. Akgun, and Sevki Hakyemez, it hasitbeen of thecenterthetheactivitiesto principle secularism contrary of

The Judgmentthe ECHRThe of

Regarding the Regarding ConstitutionalC of the judgment approvedECHR The Cons the of decision the that claimingECHR the to appliedRP The a As

a r sa. eody i claim it Secondly, Islam. or ia

result, the Constitutional Court made an order dissolving the the dissolving order an made Court Constitutional the result, 289

question whether it sought to introduce a regime based on sharia, the sharia, on based regime a introduce to sought it whether question 291

The The 293

P ae s itnt n sne ht o te is tm i its in time first the for that sense a in distinct is case RP

(The Welfare Party) and Others v.Tur and Others Party) Welfare (The

d ht n nlss f h sece md b it by made speeches the of analysis an that ed 72

the the r with a system based on sharia on based system a with r RP

ee sn dmcai rgt and rights democratic using were 290 288 r bu lsr decision. closure a about urt ourt that expelling the officialsthethatexpellingourt

n te CR ae t final its gave ECHR the and Based on this definition, The definition, this on Based key,44

RP 74 titutional Court isCourttitutional

. on the ground the on

. These . 292 s

CEU eTD Collection 298 297 296 295 294 that argued RP The threat. a such is there when dissolution for time appropriate the discusses E the of decision the quote To democracy. with incompatible is sharia that stated ECHR the Court, bring.wishtospeakers a rules divine and religious to refer both they that concluded and RP, the of members certain by made speeches the evaluated ECHR The positions. the and leaders party‟s the of actions the with compared be must programme the not have a until programme democracy their in aims of such revealed principles the to contrary aims with parties political that shown “t ECHR whil the criterion to sole According intentions. the as account into taken be cannot party political ofthe RP members thatprovedthe party sharia aimsintroduceit topower held ifalone. speech and activities the of aspects certain that fact which the but programme problem party‟s a caused the not was it that stating by responded Government Turkish Turkey. in sharia introduce to policy party‟s the was it that demonstrate not did members

Ibid,39 Ibid,36 Ibid,32 Ibid,26 Ibid,24 CHR: oehr ih h itnin f h pry o nrdc sai odr te CR also ECHR the order, sharia introduce to party the of intention the with Together are sharia, of Conventiontakenthe whole. as a introduction the i conceived as democracy, of to principles fundamental the with reconcile references to difficult explicit contain which statements, offendingthe together,read when that, notes Court The it. inplace nohave freedoms faithfully which p of evolution constant the or spherepolitical the in pluralism sharia, as such Principles invariable. and thatstable is religion, by considers down laid rules divine Court and dogmas the the reflects Court, Constitutional the Like Constitutional with similar decision, its giving before that mention to important is It GovernmentprogrammeofTurkishthat ECHR statingthe a defense approved The

297

e oiia eprec o cnrcig onre has countries contracting of experience political he 298

73 fter taking powe taking fter te ai o te oiia rgm wih the which regime political the of basis the s

r.” That is why is That r.” dtriig its determining e

the content of content the s f certain of es 295 ublic

296 294 n

CEU eTD Collection 304 303 302 301 300 299 thatprotectnorms closure and sharia on based system a establish to freedoms and rights democratic using was RP the that argue they and concept democracy militant from stemming argumentsuse Courts both that see can we case, RP the inwhy, is That democracy. inc is order sharia that accepted they Secondly, order. sharia establish to is RP the of intention real the that decided Courts both Firstly, Court. Constitutional Turkish of RP the of dissolution justifying reasons compelling and convincing were there that ruled ECHR real. become and shape taken had concerned danger the before acting for imminent. and established sufficiently is democracy for policy that of danger the though even democracy, to came has powe party political a until intervening, before wait, to required be cannot State a that statedECHR The coalition. a of compromises the by beingrestricted without power seize have would votes the RP of 38% received the time, that at held been had election general a if that estimates which sort. hadput toopportunitynever an this of nothing it Therefore coalition. done of part as country the had governed had party the it that stated Government but sharia on based regime a introduce whi during year, a for power in been had it

Ibid,43 Ibid,42 Ibid,34 Ibid,32 Ibid,25 Ibid,24 303 ad eu t tk cnrt ses o mlmn a oiy noptbe ih the with incompatible policy a implement to steps concrete take to begun and r

and therehasandbeennoviolationof 11Articleof the Convention. As

neetnl, h EH rfre t a oiin ol are ot n aur 1997, January in out carried poll opinion an to referred ECHR the Interestingly, it can be seen, there are two reasons that the ECHR approved the closure decisionclosure the approved ECHR the that reasons two are there seen,be can it 301

The ECHR concluded that it cannot criticize Turkish Constitutional Cour Constitutional Turkish criticize cannot it that concluded ECHR The the rightto the

. According to the ECHR, this shows that the RP has a potential to potential a has RP the that shows this ECHR, the to According .

freedom offreedom assembly

its planitsof settingregime theocratic practice. up a into ch time it could have tabled draft legislation to legislation draft tabled have could it time ch 74

and association.and of this party is not violation of violation not is party this of

304

302

As a result, the result, a As mail with ompatible 299 300

Turkish

t CEU eTD Collection 61 1991/1: 307 306 34,Law Journal International Fordham Parties, 305 thewellofnameprogrammeasthe asHe party. used thefollowing passagesas evidence: bethepreviouslysuccessor toato politicalparty, thedissolved TurkishParty.Workers‟ itself declared having of and nation and territory its with state the of integrity indivisible the on having carried ofname, its into “communist” word the incorporated having of others, the over class social one of domination the establish TBKP. the dissolve to Court Constitutional the Chi the elections, general in participate to preparing was TBKP the 4.4.1. programparty their in articles had they as nation and territory its with state the of integrity indivisible the undermine that programmes their on based closed were parties Other party. the of ideology Co United the of decision closure the Turkey of Party Party of violation a alleging ECHR the to applied parties these 4.4. The Turkish Constitutional Court‟s ruling on United Communist Party of Turkey case on July 16, 1991; no. no. 1991; 16, July on case Turkey of Party Communist United on ruling Court‟s Constitutional Turkish The v.4 Turkey, Others Partyand ofCommunist United Case EHCRJudgment, Akbulut, Olgun .Criteria Developed by the European Court of Human Rights on the Dissolution of Political Political of Dissolution the on Rights Human of Court European the by Developed .Criteria Olgun Akbulut,

The TBKP Case ( Emek Partisi Emek Claims of the ChiefProsecutorthe Claimsof inIndictment the h ojcie f h Uie Cmuit at o Tre i t ed prsin and oppression end to is inequali Turkey of Party Communist United the of objective The the with together Turkey in humanitariandemocratic values… thoughts contemporary with enriches it which theory Party Communist United The politicalofnamethe Theparty theisUnited Turkey. CommunistParty of Prosecu Chief The when later, days ten Just 1990. 4, June on party political a as formed was TBKP The of three and parties communist/socialist closed Court Constitutional Turkish The

me related with grantingKurdishtorightsrelatedminorities. with me

(Turkiye Birlesik Komunist Partisi, Komunist Birlesik (Turkiye y n g byn cptls b srnteig eorc, o nbe social enable to democracy, strengthening by capitalism beyond go and ty ), Socialist Party of Turkey of Party Socialist ),

o bsd h cam i te nitet n h prs f h party the of parts the on indictment the in claims the based tor

mmunist Party of Turkey is related with the communist the with related is Turkey of Party mmunist

of Turkey determines its policies based on the Marxist the on based policies its determines Turkey of no. 1( 2010) :48 1( 2010)

(

Sosyalist Turkiye Partisi Turkiye Sosyalist activities likely to undermine the principle of principle theundermine to likely activities 305 He accused the party of having sought to sought having of party the accused He

TBKP

). It is interesting to note that only that note to interesting is It ). h Cneto, aey Labour namely: Convention, the

ef Prosecutor applied to applied Prosecutor ef )

United Communist United 307

306

CEU eTD Collection 314 13 1991/1: 313 312 311 310 309 308 Parties Political on Law the of 93(3) Article contradicts name its into “communist” ofonethe socialoverdomination others. class regulations, these exercis dictatorship”. group or class establish or protect “to others…” the over class social establis of aim the with exercised states Constitution the of 14 Article Amendments. 2001 in changed were Constitution the of 68 and 14 Articles Articles the on claims his based Prosecutor Chief The abolish to aim order. communist they the establish to ideology, own their violates that it deem they that democracy doubt no is there revolution, socialist the reaching for manner todominationaims establish of one socialothers. over class party the that means automatically theory Marxist embracing Prosecutor Chief the for words, workers theofrule the no. 1991; 16, July on case Turkey of Party Communist United on ruling Court‟s Constitutional Turkish The 1 6, sec. Ibid, art. The Ibid,a Ibid,11 Ibid,8 Ibid,5 1982 svriny hl nt e eeae t ay niiul gop r class.” or group individual, any to delegated be not shall sovereignty e rt. 68, sec. 4 sec. 68, rt.

h Cif rsctr lie that claimed Prosecutor Chief The w it stated party the though even that claiming continued He theatideologyTPKP that aimsProsecutorclaimedMarxist of Chief The willdependsocialismon democracy...strengthof the majo mass on based transformations rooted realizing by manner peaceful a in socialism to transition the proposes Turkey of Party Communist United The socialism. establish to and peace

Constitution

the Chief Prosecutor accused the TBKP of having sought to establish the establish to sought having of TBKP the accused Prosecutor Chief the “[n]one of the rights and freedoms embodied in the Constitution shall be shall Constitution the in embodied freedoms and rights the of “[n]one , art. 14, sec. 1 sec. 14, art. ,

over others, final goalbeing finalothers,over

rity via strengthening the peace and democracy. The success of success The democracy. and peace the strengthening via rity

310

Article 68 prohibits “Article 68(4) prohibits political parties political prohibits 68(4) “Article prohibits 68 Article hing rule of a person or a group or the domination of one of domination the or group a or person a of rule hing 76 313

h prys aig noprtd h word the incorporated having party‟s the

the establishment the 311 According to Article 6(3) the right to right the 6(3) Article to According

() 1 n 6 o te Constitution. the of 68 and 14 6(3),

308

of communism.of ould adopt a peaceful a adopt ould 312 establishing ae on Based 314 In otherIn which 309

CEU eTD Collection 319 318 317 13 1991/1: 316 315 fundamental the with line in not is it as 15 Article provisional cancel to Court the from demands TBKP the Parties Political on Law the of provisions unconstitutional the to Pointing Convention. TBKP the of favor in decide will Turkish the with comply ECHR the that not obvious is it that does stresses TBKP The Convention. PartiesEuropean and Constitution Political on Law the of 96(3) Article from th incorporated having party political articlesitsinthe programme that stressesattaching its importancedemocracy. to party the that others over class social one of domination the ignored. be cannot classes different of existence various or some the of interests the represent parties political the Sinceclass. a on based and name class a with partypolitical a establish to free is it that means althoug 4.4.2. includingthenamewordsorof region, aor any abovesimilarones.” „nat or „theocratic‟ „anarchist‟, „fascist‟, „communist‟, name the with formed be not shall parties “political that: states Ibid, Ibid, 41Ibid, Co United on ruling Court‟s Constitutional Turkish The Ibid,16 Law on Political Parties, art. 93 art. Parties, Law onPolitical

ti ril bn te ue f pro o a ru, t os o bn h cas ue It rule. class the ban not does it group, a or person a of rule the bans article this h Defenseof theThe TBKP 21

h TK rgty rus ht hr i nt rvso i te osiuin ann a banning Constitution the in provision not is there that argues rightly TBKP The itsIn

aus f h Constitution. the of values aims to abolish democracy fo democracy abolish to aims defense , byreferringthe14Articleofthe, to TBKP Constitution,theargues that

oa scait, h nm o a eiin lnug, ae sc or sect race, language, religion, a of name the socialist‟, ional

if it applies to the Court by alleging the violation of the of violation the alleging by Court the to applies it if e word “communist” into its name. The ban stemming ban The name. its into “communist” word e 319 r reaching to socialist revolution, by referring to referring by revolution, socialist to reaching r 7 BP ute cam ta te or hs the has Court the that claims further TBKP . 317 7

316

mmunist Party of Turkey case on July 16, 1991; no. 1991; 16, July on case Turkey of Party mmunist Moreover

The Constitution only forbids establishing forbids only Constitution The t he TBKP tries to refute the claimthe refute to tries TBKPhe 315 at o te oit, the society, the of parts

318

CEU eTD Collection Thiel(Ashgate:2009) 323 322 321 320 by prohibited word a name its in included party political the that fact the that ruled Court class to amounts it since exclud dictatorship, unconstitutional as considered was former the only that rules and government‟ „class and sovereignty‟ „class between differentiates Court Constitutional socia one of domination the exist. may reasons judicial justified if even Constitution the by regulated clearlyis which regulation s It Parties. Political on Law the review to authorized not Toquotearticles. the decision from : 4.4.3. theofachievementafterthe transitionsthey losetheirvalidity. legal and order new a to transition for are articles provisional because law the cancel to authority Ibid ,46 Ibid Ibid, 45 Ibid, 60Ibid, dr Bri Erh Tre i Te iiat eoay rnil i Mdr Dmcais e. Markus ed. Democracies, Modern in Principle Demoracy Militant The in Turkey Emrah. Bertil Oder,

321 The Decisionof The

The Court firstly rejects the claim in the indictment that the party sought to establish to sought party the that indictment the in claim the rejects firstly Court The isit that argues Court Constitutional the decision, OZDEP the instance its to Similar theyprovisions,distinct priority. haveapplication not pr are other articles of provisional that the from by different carried value the judicial and The provisions basic articles. the provisional between exist may variations certain that natural is it en and regulations legal different between connections establish articles Temporary attach. they which meanings premises and their basic relevant of of content the and periodsregulate, they which institutions to the and according assessed not on rather but is applicability provisions temporary of Validity provisional the of validity the discusses Court the decision its of beginning the At , 298 ,

ing a change of government through free and competitive elections competitive and free throughgovernment of change a ing

theConstitutionalCourt

cas vr others. over class l the basis of temporary legal relationships between them between relationships legal temporary of basis the

vsos I fc, f t s osdrd ht hy bring they that considered is it if fact, In ovisions. sure preservation of the rights. Also in this respect, this in Also rights. the of preservation sure 78

322 n hs eouinr dcso, the decision, revolutionary this In

rse ta i cno inr any ignore cannot it that tresses 320

. 323 The CEU eTD Collection 328 (Ashgate:2009) 327 I Turkey, 326 1991/1: 325 324 an such has party the whether decide and class” the of “domination define to option an had TBKP the that claim the regarding However, indictment. the in claims two to approaches different two embraced Court the that reason the be might This approach. liberal a adopt to chance the article, this on based deciding while that argue to fair is it So, name. their in 96 Article Ar cancelling 15 Article Provisional of protection under is Parties. w the included had TBKP liberal. Parties. its into “communist” word the incorporated decision:the party. the close to sufficed Parties, Political on Law of 96(3) Article Demo Militant The in Turkey Emrah. Bertil Oder, no. 1991; 16, July on case Turkey of Party Communist United on ruling Court‟s Constitutional Turkish The v.6 Turkey, Others Partyand ofCommunist United Case EHCRJudgment, aymz Ysf ek. otiig h Pltcl pc, at Closur Party Space, Political the Containing Sevki. Yusuf Hakyemez, Ibid,300 62 326 having sought to establish the domination of one social one of domination the establish to sought having 327 nsight Turkey10, no.2(2008): 141 no.2(2008): Turkey10, nsight h raoig f h Cut n hs ae s osdrd n ieaue s relatively as literature in considered is case this in Court the of reasoning The name its as party the dissolve to order an made Court the result, a As

Still, the Court decides to dissolve the Party the dissolve to decides Court the Still, (3), we can see that it strictly prohibits parties from having the word “communist” word the having from parties prohibits strictly it that see can we (3), If we consider that consider we If ,298 n sca cas vr h ohr o amn etbihet f n type any of establishment aiming name or of others use the the over regulated dictatorship… class has its social Parties name, one clearly Political its is Parties on in independently Political “communist” Law „Communist‟ on Law word The the of the evident. 96(3) Article has with Party contradiction defendant the Since

il 9() f h sm lw Mroe, f e ae loo a take we if Moreover, law. same the of 96(3) ticle

325 r „omns‟ n t nm, otay o h Lw n Political on Law the to contrary name, its in „communist‟ ord

when this decision was being made, the Law on Political PartiesPolitical on Law themade, being wasdecision this when

from the subject of establishing the domination of domination the establishing of subject the from c name violates Article 96(3) of Law on Political on Law of 96(3) Article violates name racy Principle in Modern Democracies, ed. Markus Thiel Markus ed. Democracies, Modern in Principle racy 79

328 te or cno b ciiie fr not for criticized be cannot Court the , on the purely formal ground that the that ground formal purely the on class over the others, the Courtthe others, the over class s n te osiuinl or in Court Constitutional the and es

324 To quote that part o part that quote To a te artv of narrative the at k

Court has no has Court having f

CEU eTD Collection 331 330 329 the attaches it that stressed it Moreover, circumstances. sufficient and relevant other of absence the in dissolution, its justify cannot other member byTurkeybut alsothe onlynot accepted be cannotthat orderpolitical a establishto aimed invariably “Communism” law. public its of principles fundamental the jeopardized and unity territorial and political politi totalitarian a and doctrine subversive a to referred the “communist”, itself call to choosing by Government Turkish the to According the of principles.democratic with accordance in were programme and constitution its that and others the over class social Co Constitutional in ill were it dissolving for Court Constitutional 30.01.1998. on decision final its gave Court the and Convention the of 11 and 10 9, 2, § 6 Articles (a) infringed had Court 4.4.4. this see, will we As whole. a as willbasisprovidecontradictionof thethe judg party the of programme the account into taking aim EHCR Judgment, Case of United Communist Par ofCommunist United Case EHCRJudgment,

Ibid,12 Ibid,21 penalizing TBKP

TBKP The Judgmentthe ECHRThe of In its judgment, the ECHR stated that in principle, a political party‟s choice of name of choice party‟s political a principle, in that stated ECHR the judgment, its In that stating itself defended Government Turkish The Constitutional the that claiming 1992 January 7 on ECHR the to applied TBKP The

was not seeking, in spite of its name, to establish the domination of one social classsocial one dominationof the establishto name,its spite of inseeking, not was

were clearly incompatible with Turkey‟s fundamental constitutional principles. constitutional fundamental Turkey‟s with incompatible clearly were pltcl at fr aln isl “com itself calling for party political a urt had itself accepted that the that accepted itself had urt 330

329

Befor

States of the CouncilofStatesofEurope. the much weight to the Constitutional Court‟s finding that finding Court‟s Constitutional the to weight much te or, t rud that argued it Court, the e ty and Others v. Turkey tyOthers and - 80 founded. For the TBKP, there is a contradiction a is there TBKP, the For founded. ment oftheECHR.ment

TBKP

was not seeking the domination of one of domination the seekingnot was uit we, n h oe hand, one the on when, munist” a ga ta udrie Turkey‟s undermined that goal cal the constit the ,10

h raos ie b the by given reasons the 331

ution and programme and ution TBKP the

CEU eTD Collection 335 2010 University, 334 333 332 Court‟s the general, very is secularism of principle with related Constitution the and Parties unity”. “national of defender the as itself defines and politics by formed be may which formation artificial an is “minority” that thinks and Parties Political on Law the of legislators the of mindset the the creating for OZDEP accuses thi that argue to fair is It exist. and not does that minorities minorities Kurdish the of existence the ignores selective ideology. tostate official the from stemmingrealities‟ political references giving by “minority” and “citizenship”, nation”, the case, OZDEP In Parties. Political on Law pr definitions constructing 4.5. Article 11ofinfringed theConvention. dissolution State, Turkish the itself or society call to choosing in that shows the which “communist”, evidence concrete any of absence the in resu a As dissolution. its justify may that circumstances sufficient and relevantotherpossibilityof the the Constitutional itselfCourt nullifiedimpliedthat the ECHR politic satisfiedrequirementsittheofthe contrary, democracy,includingothers, that, on and the over ogramme or activities of the party with the regulations stated in the Constitution and the and Constitution the in stated regulations the with party the of activities or ogramme

Ibid,249 Ibid,26 Ibid,24 ai, ey. eaig iest: ioiis n Ntoaim n uks Law, Turkish in Nationalism and Minorities Diversity: Negating Derya. Bayir,

Conclusion l lrls, nvra sfrg ad reo t tk pr i pltc. culy the Actually, politics. in part take to freedom and suffrage universal pluralism, al n ea Pa Refah In is Court the reasoning its in that reveals decisions Court the of analysis The

) : 235 : 335

TBKP t (P cs, f e osdr ht euain i te a o Political on Law the in regulations that consider we if case, (RP) rty

aall ih h sae ideology state the with parallel

a otd o a oiy ht ersne a el het o Turkish to threat real a represented that policy a for opted had

333 332

s datc measu drastic a is 81

Court uses the definition of “nation”, “Turkish “nation”, of definition the uses Court

s decision shows that the Court shares Court the that shows decision s

o e be o onc te accused the connect to able be to 334 e n rld ht hs measure this that ruled and re

By this way, the Court simplyCourt the way, this By lt, the ECHR ruled that ruled ECHR the lt, ( Ph ds. Qen Mary Queen diss., D

hsoia and „historical CEU eTD Collection no 13, &Politics Society European South 338 I Turkey, 337 336 nationalismhaveKurdish perceivedimportantthreatsthe most the as for state ideology. and Islam political OZDEP, and RP the to Court the of approach the from observe can we As communist of collapse the communist and socialist regimes, and War Cold the of end the since that fact the by explained be can TBKP towards attitude liberal more a for definitions use to Court the of intention The oth option haveany not Courtdoes the name, their in 96 Article that fact the to due Parties. Political on Law the of 96(3) Article to contrary name, Party the dissolve to decided parties. political of freedom the of expansion the toward attitude liberal the establish to sought party dominati the that indictment the in claim the reject to government” ideologydecisions.this closure byits off the from drawn definitions these using by that reveals case OZDEP and RP the Both ideology. state the of character secular the defend to interpretation of powers vast its uses Court the that shows also case This headscarf. the wear prohibi documents legal the in articles no were there although secularism of principle the to contrary is headscarf wearing that rules Court The rituals. and symbols Court e the ideology Kemalist the with Parallel importance. gains secularism of definition mbraces the assertive version of secularism which defends the public sphere from religious from sphere public the defends which secularism of version assertive the mbraces

aymz Ysf ek. Containing Sevki. Yusuf Hakyemez, Güney Ibid,235 nsight Turkey10, no.2(2008): 141 no.2(2008): Turkey10, nsight , Aylin, and and Aylin, , n BP c TBKP In on of one social class over the others. This approach of the Court interpreted as interpreted Court the of approach This others. the over class social one of on

Başkan s, h Cut ss eiiin o “ls svriny ad “class and sovereignty” “class of definitions uses Court the ase, , Filiz. ,

n h gon ta i hd nldd h wr „co word the included had it that ground the on (3) strictly prohibits parties from having the word “communist” word the having from parties prohibits strictly (3)

Party Dissolutions an Dissolutions Party

parties are not perceived as a threat to the established order. established the to threat a as perceived not are parties . 3 ( 2008): 264 2008): 3 . ( h Pltcl pc, at Coue ad h Cntttoa Cut in Court Constitutional the and Closures Party Space, Political the

336

d Democratic Consolidation Case: The Turkish Case, Turkish The Case: Consolidation Democratic d icial state ideology, the Court reproduces Court the ideology, state icial er than simply apply the law to this case.this to law applythe simply than er

As I have mentioned above, mentioned have I As 337 However . ting female students female ting mns‟ n its in mmunist‟ h Court the 338

a CEU eTD Collection no.2 52, (2012):244 Law ofInternational Journal Aslı. Bali, Stud Eastern 339 islikelyprotectto more ideology.Court thestate the provides and context historical a in question research my non of threat the against interests own their and values democratic basic the of interpretation own their defend and strengthen to elites state that shows structure parties. political by represented gu high to judges, bureaucrats officers, military of consisting elites state by developed is democracy the on based Turkey modern ideologyIslamismKemalist and sees that 1923 since is It nationalism. Turkish and secularism on based restructuring political and social heavy a witnessed which Ataturk, Kemal Mustafa further the for that argue I me research. motivated association and assembly of freedom to compared as ideology of state the prioritizing by criticisminterpretation of power its using is thatit that stating Court Constitutional the countries Moreover, European other democracy. than militant parties institutionalized political of number higher much banned parties. political the of closure especiall and Turkey in democracy militant of practice the out in interpretation find to was goal my particular, In Turkey. Shambayati, I also argue that after the introduction of political pluralism the concept of militant of concept the pluralism political of introduction the after that argue also I in democracy militant of practice and concept the was study this of subject The h P The ies 48, no.48, ies

Hootan. erils of Judicial Independence: Constitutional Transition Transition Constitutional Independence: Judicial of erils r Kmls lgc fo Krih ainls ad sai revivalism Islamic and nationalism Kurdish from legacy Kemalist ard 1(2012):109

the establishment of the Constitutional Court is the part of the strategy o strategythe of part the is Court Constitutional the of establishment the h T The

roots of this militant at militant this of roots rih osiuinl or and Court Constitutional urkish CHAPTER5

339 My starting point was the fact that the Constitutional Court Constitutional the that fact the was point starting My

plig Hir Applying

Kurdishnationalismthemajoras threats its to existence.

: CONCLUSION: 83 -

state political elites. This explanation locates explanation This elites. political state s

titude lie the early Republican period under period Republican early the lie titude chl‟s

h rl o te osiuinl Court‟s Constitutional the of role the

h Jsie n Dvlpet Party Development and Justice the eeoi peevto thesis preservation hegemonic

reason why the Constitutional the why reason n te uks Example Turkish the and

h shlr about scholars the i frequent in y , Virgina Virgina , Middle , o this to - level f

CEU eTD Collection reasoning.ideologyitsbyusing th sign clear a is This minority. Kurdish the of recognition legal history, to references with Constitution the reading combines ca definitions constructtointerpretation meaningtheir throughinterpretation. leav democracy, the Turkish the as of values “secularism” foundational and nation” the of “sovereignty and state” the of independence “the lists Constitution implement the of 68(4) Article instance, directly For terms. general in than shaped are prohibitions option other no with Court name, the their leaves in „communist‟ name the with formed be to parties political prohibits which Parties Political on Law of 96(3) Article instance, For interpretation. for room no providing ve are provisions these of Some Constitutions. 1982 and 1961 the by provided the againstorder class appli its of ground major third the is this and addition, In secularism. of principle the and state the of integrity the indivisible of principle principles: constitutional basic two protecting on focuses largely democracy militant latter. the in developed institutionally and broader much is it democracy, militant of concept the embraced freedoms. political and civil restricting o means by opponents internal its from regime democratic the of protection the from starting se the Court‟s definition of ethnic minority is minority ethnic of definition Court‟s the se y nlzn te or dcsos so ta te or ue is at oe of power vast its uses Court the that show I decisions Court the analyzing By of account detailed provide to tried I the in institutionalized democracy militant found I f e osdr h rgltos eae wt pry clos party with related regulations the consider we If - based rule.based

parallel

Although both the 1961 and the 1982 Constitutions 1982 the and 1961 the both Although cation, militant democracy defends the constitutional the defends democracy militant cation,

84 with the state ideology.withstate the long list of prohibitions about political parties political about prohibitions of list long

based on a unique a on based ing it for Constitutional Court to define to Court Constitutional for it ing

enabling the Court to refuse the refuse to Court the enabling 91 n 18 constitutions, 1982 and 1961 t h Cut rtcs state protects Court the at interpretative

Forexample, rs t a b si that said be can it ures hs a. oe other Some law. this

strategy that strategy y detailed, ry

in OZDEPin f CEU eTD Collection have I Court the of decisions three all account into taking By War. Cold the of end the sincemarginalizedbecome have parties thatthese thefact orderconsidering established the to i as Court the of behavior this interpreted have I the in claim the rejected thatthethesocialdominationofpartyindictmentoneothers. toestablishclass sought theover and government” “class and sovereignty” “class the defining this reproduces Court ideologyclosuredecisions.byits the ideology, state official the from drawn definitions these using of definition own Court‟s the to contrary RP views the defended it that because secularism decide of principle to the violated sufficient it finds Court the words, other In actions. these defend contrary actions the between differentiate not does Court the that striking is it However rituals. and symbols religious from sphere public the defends which secularism of version assertive the embraced secularism, h wearing that ruling by Court, the that shown have withwhencollaborateother threat eachthere isserious Kemalist to a ideology. b can This regulations. legal on based be to supposed is which indictment the in NSC of advices the to reference a see to usual not is It secularism. of N decisions advisory the to refers Savas Vural Prosecutor Chief the of indictment the in that stressed havealso I RP. the of policiesIslamist the worriesabout its expressed Council th of procedure the that indicated have I elites. state of agents different between relationship the concerns ational Security Council (NSC) Council Security ational n BP c TBKP In theinindictmentheadscarfRegardingthe claimregardingpublicinsphere, wearing I (RP) Party Refah of closure the of analysis the of finding important most the of One secularism. I have concluded that both the RP and OZDEP cases reveal that by that reveal cases OZDEP and RP the both that concluded have I secularism. coue f h R satd ut he mnh atr h Ntoa Security National the after months three just started RP the of closure e s, hv son ht h Cut mrcd l a embraced Court the that shown have I ase, o h picpe f euaim n te reo o pris to parties of freedom the and secularism of principle the to

to prove that the activities of the party infringe the principle the infringe party the of activities the that prove to 85 t does not perceive socialist parties as a threat a asparties socialist perceive not does t

asaf s otay o h picpe of principle the to contrary is eadscarf e seen as evidence that state elites state that evidence as seen e brl prah while approach iberal

f the of CEU eTD Collection the forstatethreats ideologytheCourtusedpowerof and itsinterpretation protect it. to politic that concluded al Islam and Kurdish nationalism have perceived as the most important most the as perceived have nationalism Kurdish and Islam al

CEU eTD Collection Dissolution the on Rights Human of Court European the by Developed Criteria Olgun. Akbulut, a Rights Human of Court European The Fahil. Abulkareem, uoen omsin o Dmcay hog Lw Vnc Commission (Venice Law through Democracy for Commission European (Ven Law through Democracy for Commission European Cliteu The Odul, Celep, http://www.ptesc.ssc.upenn.edu/Paper_pdf/Capoccia%20part%201.html?action=show&person=125 Democratic 2007, Giovanni, Capadocia, Ri Human Kevin, Boyle, the of Activism Selective and Alliance Republican The Court: the of Friends Ceren. Belge, Nati and Minorities Diversity:Negating Derya. Bayir, International Case, Turkish the from Lessons Transition: Constitutional and Courts Asli. Bali, Turkish the and Transition Constitutional Independence: Judicial of Perils The Asli, Bali, Court, Constitutional Turkish the in Rights Political Paradigms: Conflicting Zuhtu. Arslan, USA: Change, and Continuity of Challenges Turkey Özlem, Tür, and Benli Meliha Altunısık, o “Dissolution Bulent. Algan, 17 2009: to Relevant Provisions Legal and Constitutional 1999) of Implications 2012) Publishing: Terror of Time the in Democracy Militant and Exception 20 workprogressin Europe, 1no.Review1(2004): Rights1 ofTurkey,LawConstitutional Court 2010 University,Mary of ConstitutionalJournalno.3(2013): 666 11, Law Jo VirginiaExample, EasternStudies11, Middle no.1 CurzonRoutledge ConflictEverlastingbetweenCourt theParliament”, andAUHFD 60,no.4 (2011): 809 Parties,PoliticalFordhamofInternational no.1( JournalLaw 2010):46 34, diss. MA

r, Paul. And Rijpkema, Bastiaan, The Foundations of Militant Democracy in Democracy Militant of Foundations The Bastiaan, Rijpkema, And Paul. r,

UkraineKharkov

Political Accession : , 2005 , 227 urnalofInternationalno.2Law52,(2012): 235

- ghts, Religion and Democracy: The Refah Party Case, Essex Human Essex Case, Party Refah The Democracy: and Religion ghts, 272

Causes of Party of Causes

o uoen no, Cucl f uoe ulsig Strasbourg, Publishing, Europe of (Council Union, European to University, 2010 University, Pltcl ate b Te osiuinl or i Tre: An Turkey: in Court Constitutional The by Parties Political f

(2002) - 16

Bibliography : Militancy

Society 9

- Closures in Turkey, Parliamentary Affairs (2012):1 Affairs Parliamentary Turkey, in Closures 25

Review65340,no.3(2006):

the Prohibition of Political Parties in Turkey, in Parties Political of Prohibition the and - onalism in Turkish Law, PhD diss., Queen diss., PhD Law, Turkish in onalism 701

Democratic

, ed. A. Ellian (Rebublic of Letters of (Rebublic Ellian A. ed. , nd the Judgments again Judgments the nd c Commission ice

Rule: Party Ban in Western in Ban Party Rule: - 320

- 76 Opinion ) ), - 688

Constitutional

T he State of State he st Turkey st - n the on 834

- , CEU eTD Collection üe, yi,ad akn Flz Pry isltos n Dmcai Cnoiain ae The Case: Consolidation Democratic and Dissolutions Party Filiz. Başkan, and Aylin, Güney, 1982 the to Amendments 2001 The Levent. Gonenc, Single in Regime Tutelary of Roots Sociological and Political Legal, The Hatem, Ete, uu Ahmet Kuru, Pro Dicle. Kocacioglu, ve Statusu Hukuksal Partilerin Siyasi Turkiyede Zekeriya, Caliskan, and Mehmet Kahraman, Poli Turkish to Key A “Secularism”: Dietrich. Jung, Gareth,InternationalJenkins,Affairs 83, Civil for Prospects Change: and Continuity Gareth. Jenkins, Authoritarian Tim.Social Jacoby, Powerthe andTurkish State, of Tradition Turkey‟s Context: Samuel.FragileIssacharof, Democracies, Harvard Law(2007)no:6Review120, and Text Between Turkuler. Isiksel, Resmi Devletin Kararlarinda Mahkemesi Anaya Murat. Huseyin Isik, Constitutionalization: through Empowerment Judicial of Origins Political The Ran. Hirschl, YusufSevki.Militan Hakyemez, Demokra Constitutional the and Closures Party Space, Political the Containing Sevki. Yusuf Hakyemez, B Akgun, and Sevki Hakyemez, HakanYavuzM. , : in Party,” Development Societyno.3(2004):Review38,and433 PartilerinKapatilmasiSiyasal Rejimi, DoguAnadolu Calismalari Bolgesi 129 AffInternational Con 2012 AdaletYayinevi, Fourfrom C Lessons Turkey,in no.2(2008)InsightCourt Turkey10, 54 Human ofCourt European the of Jurisdiction and SouthCase,Eur Turkish no:1(2004)89 1, Review Period - 78 - stitutionalism,InternationalofJournalConstitutionalLaw 11,no.3(2013)

154

, PhD diss., Middlediss.,PhD

enepeain f euaim n uky Te ae f h Justice the of Case The Turkey: in Secularism of Reinterpretation airs 83,2(2007)airs no. Salt LakeSalt City:UtahUniversityofPress, gress Unity and Democracy: Dissolving Political Parties in Turkey, Law Turkey, in Parties Political Dissolving Democracy: and Unity gress onstitutionalLawRevolutions,Social&Inquiry 25, no.1(2000)

opeanSociety&Politics 13,no.3 opeanSociety&Politics - The Emergence of a New Turkey: Dem Turkey: New a of Emergence The 109 East TechnicalEastUniversity, 2012

irol. Limitations on the Freedom of Political Parties in Turkey in Parties Political of Freedom the on Limitations irol. :

339 no. - si Anlayisi ve 1982Anayasasi,AnlayisivesiSeckin, 2009 Ankara:

462

- 2(2007) 335

: London: Frank CassPublishers,London:Frank 135

Rights, Mediterranean PoliticsMediterraneanRights, tics, Intellectual Discourse 14, no.2 14, Discourse Intellectual tics, :

- 339 144

osiuin f uky Akr Law Ankara Turkey, of Constitution -

335 (2008)

(

2006):1 – iiay eain i Turkey in Relations Military : 263 ocracy and the AK Parti AK the and ocracy - - 23 281

dooii Ankara: Ideolojisi, (2007): 122 (2007): : 1405 : 702 2004 7,no.2(2002) - - 726 1467

- (2006):

131 - Party

and

ed.

CEU eTD Collection Muller, Mersel, State, Nation and Religion Kemalism Turkey: in Secularism and Islam of Review Ahmet. Kuru, Pursuit In Esen, Kirdis, and Hootan Shambayati, Turkish of Politics “The of Review Sabri. Sayarı, no:5 Review27, Law Cardozo State Preventive the to Democracy Militant From Andras. Sajo, The Esra, Ozyurek, Projec A , Turkey and Balances and Checks Constitutional Comparative Ahmet. Ozcan, T of System Constitutional The Ergun. Ozbudun, Constitutional Turkish the by Approaches Different Cases: Prohibition Party Ergun. Ozbudun, Constitution of Politics the and Democratization Faruk, Omer Genckaya, and Ergun Ozbudun, Baskin.UlusalEgemenlikOran, KavramininAzinliklar Turkiye veDonusumu, Baskin. Oran, in Principle Democracy Militant The in Turkey Emrah. Bertil Oder, Muller, http://www.anayasa.gov.tr/files/pdf/anayasa_yargisi/anyarg20/b_oran.pdf Turkeyin Empowerment York(2005) Pres, New Multi the 2255 (2006): 2007 Fund,MarshallGerman 2011 Mcmillan, European andCourtofRights,Court DemocratizationHuman 17, no.1 Tu inMaking (2007) Press, Issues, Thiel,Ashgate, ( Markus no:4 Constellations19, Which LawConstitutional JournalLaw4,Internationalof Constitutional no.1(2006): 84 Middl ia. h D The Yigal.

Jan e EastJournale 65,1(2010) no. in J Philosophy Alone Cannot Resolve Cannot Alone Philosophy an - Human Rights in Turkey in Rights Human - enr Rtikn Militant Rethinking Werner. - Party enr Mltn Dmcay in Democracy Militant Werner. Minority Concep Minority : 35 : - rkey,CEUPress,2009 Budapest: 2295

Syste - 56 oiis f eoy n Turkey, in Memory of Politics , ed.Rosenfeld Michel and

souin f oiia Parties: Political of issolution

, 1938 m,

(2012):536 : 1 Ari HareketiYayinlariAri 2009): 263 2009): , PoliticalQuarterlyResearch, 62,no.4 - 3

t And Rights In Turkey: The Lausanne Peace Treaty and Current and Treaty Peace Lausanne The Turkey: In Rights And t - 90 b Jh M, John by 1950” , ed. Zehra F. Kabasakal Arat , Arat Kabasakal F. Zehra ed. , - 539 - :161 356

eorc: n nrdcin A Introduction: An Democracy: - 162 ?

Rethinking Militant Democracy: a Democracy: Militant Rethinking 89

, 2012, AndrasSajo(Oxford 2010): :1253

Democracy: İsmet İnönü and İnönü İsmet Democracy:

h Ofr Hnbo o Comparative of Handbook Oxford The

re 18 urkey

Syracuse, f 'otmoay Civilization'': ''Contemporary of Vanderl

h polm f nenl Democracy, Internal of problem The ippe 76 to the Present, Present, the to 76

- NY: 113

(2009): Albany: .

Pennsy yaue nvriy Press, University Syracuse Modern Democracies Modern

767 (2010):125 lvania: Pennsylvania lvania: State rcia Dilemma Practical - 779

the n Introduction n

S Palgrave US:

Uni Formation of Formation - 1269 - est of versity 132

Judicial t of the of t

, ed. ed. , ,

CEU eTD Collection The 1924 Constitution The 1998/1 TurkishThe ConstitutionalCourt‟srulingon no.1991;1991/1 16, TurkishThe The ConventiononHumanEuropean Judgment, EHCR Judgment,of CaseRefah EHCR Judgment,of CaseFreedom EHCR Uzgel Ilhan, Between Praetorianism and Democracy: The Role of Military in Turkish Foreign Turkish in Military of Role The Democracy: and Praetorianism Between Ilhan, Uzgel Tyulkina, Kim. Shively, Party, Development and Justice the and Court Constitutional Turkish The Hootan. Shambayati, Erich Zürher, in Participation Political Ensure to Legislation Turkish Amend to Need The Sinem. Yargic, Adrien. Wing, Pro Enemies: and Allies Nicole. Watts, Vez Civil of Model Turkish The Ozan. Varol, (2012): 2 no. 53, Journal Law International Harvard d‟Etat, Coup Democratic The Ozan. Varol, Yönetim11,no:DergisiTurkey, Bilimleri 21(2013) ExampleTheTurkishCountry?: E JournalInternationalof Middle diss., Ce MA LawConstitutional 11,no.3(2013):292 292 TheTurkishYearbook Policy, of InternationalRelations 3 Quarterly Eastern Middle

bergaite, Ieva. Remedial Secession as an Exercise of Right to Right ofExercise an asSecession Remedial Ieva. bergaite, Turkish -

356 Svetlana.MilitantDemocracy,

Constitutional Constitutional 81,n

Jan.TurkeyHistory,Modern a

ntralUniversity,2011 European ahrn, n Vrl Oa. s euaim osbe n Majority a in Possible Secularism Is Ozan. Varol, and Katherine, aig sa: tdig eiin n eua Turkey Secular in Religion Studying Islam: Taming o: 3(2008o: Case ofCaseUnitedCommunist Party

Studies48,no.1(2012):107

Court‟s Court‟s

): 683 ):

Partisi(TheWelfareParty)v.Others and Turkey Rights - 711

rulingonUnitedCommunist onNovemberrulingonOZDEP11,no.1993;1993/2 case and TexasInternationalLaw ast Studies 31,Studiesast no. Legal

Democracy PhD diss., Cen diss.,PhD - 356

- The Welfare PartyThe WelfareonJanuary no.1997; case 16, Documents London uds Pris n uks Pltc, 1990 Politics, Turkish in Parties Kurdish - 123

- 90 iiay eain, nentoa Junl of Journal International Relations, Military

and Others v.Turkey Othersand Party (OZDEP) v. TurkeyParty(OZDEP)v. : Tauris,2004 :

: 4(1999) 205 tral European University,tral2011 European

224 Journal 4 , : (2003):177 631

Party of TurkeyPartyof Self Determination of Peoples, of DeterminationSelf

42,no.1 656

- 210 (2007

Anthropological

case onJulycase

) : 1

- 53 - Muslim Muslim

94,

CEU eTD Collection 1982 Constitution The 1961 Constitution The