Closure Case of AKP in Economist
Closure Case of AKP in Economist
The Economist analyzes the closure case against the AK Party in an editorial article titled with ‘See you in court’. The following is the excerpt from Economist regarding the case.
Article: See You in Court
Autocratic regimes in the Muslim world often ban religious parties, which then go underground and turn violent.
Turkey’s Islamists have taken a different path. Despite being repeatedly outlawed and ejected from power, pious politicians have shunned violence, embraced democracy and moved into the mainstream.
No Islamic party has been as moderate and pro-Western as the Justice and Development (AK) party, which catapulted into government in 2002 promising to lead Turkey into the European Union.
Yet the country’s secular elite is still fighting to oust the AK government, on thinly supported charges that it wants to wreck Ataturk’s secular republic. A senior prosecutor has made the charges official, by asking the constitutional court to shut AK down because it has become “a centre for anti-secular activities”. In a 162-page indictment, Abdurrahman Yalcinkaya argued that AK is using democracy as a vehicle for imposing sharia law. He asked the court to slap a five-year ban on more than 70 AK officials, including the prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and the president, Abdullah Gul.
The court, dominated by pro-secular judges, said it would decide by April whether to proceed with the case. Already jittery financial markets have taken fright. On March 17th the Istanbul Stock Exchange plunged by 7.5% and the Turkish lira fell by 3.5% against the dollar. Should the court decide to take up the case, the battle could last for a year, pushing Turkey into a prolonged period of instability, hampering reforms and jeopardising membership talks with the EU.
Mindful of all this, TUSIAD, the main business lobby, has denounced the case. “Shutting down parties is not compatible with democracy,” said its president, Arzuhan Yalcindag. America and the EU have also rushed to AK’s defence. A combative Mr Erdogan has opined that AK’s legal woes will only raise its popularity. He is probably right. The most recent challenge to AK rule came a year ago when he nominated Mr Gul for the presidency. The prospect of a president whose wife wore the Islamic headscarf and who would not veto AK-inspired laws galvanised the generals into threatening a coup. Many believe the army’s meddling helped AK to a bigger share of the vote (47%) in last July’s election. So why has the prosecutor chosen to act against AK now?
Some see it as a last-ditch attempt by Turkey’s old guard to cling to power. A new and pious class of Anatolian entrepreneurs, who have thrived under AK, is challenging the elite. One such group, Calik, which employs Mr Erdogan’s son-in-law, has acquired a media conglomerate, whose assets include a television channel, ATV, and the third-biggest daily, Sabah. “The reign of the Bosporus princes is over,” says a Western banker.
Ertugrul Gunay, the culture minister, has another explanation. He believes the case is connected to recent arrests of generals, academics and journalists linked to a string of murders, including that of an ethnic-Armenian editor, Hrant Dink (known as Ergenekon). Proponents of this theory note that Turkey’s first Islamist-led government was ejected in 1997 after it began investigating links between the army and organised crime. Another theory is that the case was prompted by AK’s efforts to ease the strict secular ban on the Islamic headscarf in universities. This move is cited in Mr Yalcinkaya’s indictment. Other “evidence” is said to range from the AK-run Istanbul council’s censoring of bikini ads to an AK official’s observation that “asking a pious girl to remove her headscarf is akin to telling an uncovered one to remove her underpants”.
It is hardly the stuff of an Islamic revolution. Yet even AK’s closest allies agree that Mr Erdogan should have done more to reach out to secular opponents. On the headscarf, he might have worked harder to protect the rights of women who choose not to cover their heads. He might also have scrapped Article 301 of the penal code, which has been used to prosecute scores of Turkish writers and academics for “insulting Turkishness”. With much of Mr Yalcinkaya’s case built on things that the prime minister and his lieutenants have said, Mr Erdogan should see the value of free speech. His secular opponents, meanwhile, would do better if they left their ivory towers and spent more time with the ordinary people of Turkey.
Note: You can read more about the case from Turkish Democracy under Test
Closure Case for AKP
Closure Case for AKP
As explained in Turkish Democracy Under Test, the closure case for the leading AKP has triggered many debates in Turkey.
There are different views circulating in Turkey about what kind of a stance the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) should adopt in the wake of the closure case recently opened against it.
According to media reports, the AKP is working on a constitutional amendment that will make party closures harder. But its plans have met with criticism from some circles who say such a step should not be taken when the judicial process is in progress.
Nevertheless, there is a general consensus that party closures should be made harder in Turkey, regardless of the AK Party case, and that the current situation is a good opportunity to take the necessary steps to this end.
Radikal daily’s Murat Belge criticizes those who say the AK Party should not take any legal steps to make party closures harder at the moment because such a move would be inappropriate at the current juncture.
“It is obvious that a process has begun, but it is not possible to call it a judicial one. This is perhaps the last name one could give to it,” he says, referring to the lack of any concrete legal ground in the AK Party closure case. He suggests that if one side does not refrain from abusing the judiciary and the law, then the AK Party, which is the victim of this attack, has the right to defend itself.
Vatan daily’s Okay Gönensin thinks the closure case may prompt the AK Party to change the Political Parties Law to harmonize Turkey’s party closure criteria with the standards in democratic countries. “If we can manage to handle the closure case as a lesson for democracy for everybody, we can take these steps,” he says, stressing that there is no point in taking this to a referendum as the AK Party currently plans to do. “This case has once again showed that the issue of freedoms should be handled collectively,” Gönensin adds, stressing the importance of regarding freedoms as a whole.
Bugün daily’s Ahmet Taşgetiren says if the closure case against the AK Party had been filed in a country where judicial decisions were free of any political motivation, then the AK Party would wait for the conclusion of the judicial process before taking action. “This is the stance that should be taken in the wake of a legal case,” he admits.
However, in the AK Party closure case, Taşgetiren points out the wide suspicion about the case’s being a part of a greater project aimed at removing the party from the political stage. He says the political leanings of the judges that will decide on the closure case also raise suspicion over whether their decision will be free of any political influence.
Referring to the allegation that the AK Party has become a “focal point of anti-secular activities,” he voices questions as to whether the prosecutor who prepared the indictment was acting neutrally or with an ideological motive. “When the scope of secularism is so controversial in Turkey, how can the judges have a neutral stance?” he asks. Given the track record of the Turkish judiciary, he thinks it is crucial for the AK Party to take measures that will marginalize the judiciary in the field of politics.
“In my opinion, the AK Party should continue to appeal to the public in the wake of the political deadlock it faces. Certainly, there should be no provocation or insult, but the AK Party should not fail in defending the rights of the 47 percent of the population that voted for it. Yes, this is a defense of democracy. It is [Prime Minister Recep Tayyip] Erdoğan’s responsibility to not let the national will be hijacked,” he declares.
Turkmenistan and Nabucco Project
Turkmenistan and Nabucco Project
Turkmen leader Kurbanguly Berdymukhamedov will discuss the project of building a natural gas pipeline bypassing Russia with the government of Turkey, a source in the Turkmen government told Reuters on Friday.
Turkmenistan, Central Asia’s largest gas producer, exports most of its gas through Russia but the European Union is lobbying for it to use an alternative route.
The West particularly wants Turkmenistan, which borders Iran, to join the U.S-backed Nabucco pipeline project, designed to help Europe diversify gas imports away from Russia.
A government official who asked not to be named said Berdymukhamedov would discuss the project during his visit to Turkey on March 24-25.
“The Transcaspian pipeline or, if you prefer, Nabucco is on the agenda,” the official said.
“But within this visit the discussion will probably be limited to an exchange of opinions.”
The official said Turkmenistan was ready to consider any viable export routes.
“We are pragmatic,” he said.
Turkmenistan sells all of its exported gas to Russian gas monopoly Gazprom , but is considering other options such as Nabucco and a pipeline to China.
Reuters