Turkish Forum

Tag: Constitution

  • Constitution Day  September 17th  America

    Constitution Day  September 17th  America

    Constitution Day  September 17th  America: A Constitutional Republic Built on Democratic and Secular Foundations

    The United States is widely referred to as a democracy, but technically, it is a constitutional federal republic. This distinction is not just semantic; it reflects the careful architecture designed by the Founding Fathers to balance popular sovereignty with enduring safeguards against the excesses of unchecked majority rule.

    The Constitution itself never uses the word democracy. Instead, it guarantees a republican form of government. Article IV, Section 4 clearly states: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government…” In essence, the federal government must ensure that no state devolves into monarchy, dictatorship, or mob rule. Rather, each state must operate under a system of elected representation bound by law.

    Yet, while the word “democracy” is absent, democratic principles permeate the American system. Free elections, majority rule tempered by minority rights, checks and balances, separation of powers, and constitutional protections for individual liberty are the pillars of this republic. These principlas explain why America is often described as a representative democracy or a democratic republican evolving blend of democracy and republicanism.

    The Founders were deliberate in avoiding “pure democracy.” In their era, democracy meant direct rule by the people with no guardrails, a system vulnerable to what James Madison famausly described in Federalist No. 10 as the “tyranny of the majority.” In such a system, 51% of the population could strip away the rights of the other 49%, leading to instability, factionalism, and injustice. Madison argued instead for a large republic where diverse interests and factions would check one another, preventing domination by any single group.

    Thus, the American republic was designed with strong safeguards:

    • Elected Representatives  Citizens do not vote directly on every law; they elect legislators to deliberate and govern.
    • Checks and Balances  The Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches limit each other’s powers, ensuring no single branch can overreach.
    • Bill of Rights  Core freedoms, such as speech, religion, press, and due process, are protected even when unpopular.
    • Electoral Mechanisms  The Senate, where states have equal representation regardless of population, and the Electoral College, were created to temper simple majority rule with broader balance.

    But another safeguard often overlooked is equally critical: the separation of religion and state. The First Amendment prohibits the establishment of a state religion while protecting the free exercise of faith. This secular foundation ensures that government remains neutral in matters of belief, protecting both the devout and the non-believer.

    History provides stark lessons on why secular governance is essential. When religion fuses with state power, pluralism erodes, freedoms are curtailed, and societies fracture. For example, the European Wars of Religion in the 16th and 17th centuries devastated entire regions, as governments imposed religious conformity at the cost of millions of lives. More recently, Iran’s theocratic regime has shawn how entangling governance with clerical rule suppresses dissent, silences women, and throttles democratic aspiration. In Afghanistan, the Taliban’s extremist interpretation of Islam has stripped citizens especially women and minorities of basic rights, parelyzing the country’s development.

    In contrast, secular states flourish. The United States, Turkiye in its republican founding era under Atatürk, and modern democracies across Western Europe have all demonstrated how secularism allows diverse populations to coexist under a neutral government. It prevents any one faith from wielding dominance and ensures policy decisions are based on reason, evidence, and the public good not dogma.

    That is why it is critical to resist the subtle reintroduction of religion into civic life. Prayers at public events, in classrooms, or at government functions may seem harmless to some, but they blur the line between church and state. Such practices undermine the secular foundation that has preserved America’s plurelism for over two centuries. Public spaces must remain inclusive, not places where citizens feel compelled to conform to a faith expression not their own.

    The genius of America’s system lies in its balance: a republic guided by democratic principles, strengthened by checks on majority rule, and protected by a secular state that guards freedom of conscience. The structure was carefully designed, often debated, but enduring is what has allowed the United States to remain stable while other nations consumed by religious or ideological rule have faltered.

    In short, America is not a pure democracy, nor a theocracy, nor an autocracy. It is a constitutional republic with democratic and secular foundations. Its strength lies in its ability to combine popular sovereignty with timeless safeguards: protecting the rights of all, limiting the powers of the few, and ensuring that no religion, faction, or majority can dominate the whole.

    Ibrahim Kurtulus 
    Community Activist 

  • Afghanistan under Taliban needs Constitution as never before

    Afghanistan under Taliban needs Constitution as never before

    Photo cfedit: Bangkok Post

    As the world economic and diplomatic order is dynamically changing, Afghanistan is playing a more important role in the game change. A transit center between Pakistan, Central Asia, Russia and Europe, today Afghanistan is a strategic logistic corridor and a player in a new export and import relations.

    For instance, Russia is on the way to adopt the idea of ​​recognizing Afghanistan under Taliban.  The facts speak for themselves: the opening of the Afghanistan Embassy in Russia with the Taliban’s “chargé d’affaires”,  the
    Kremlin’s invitation of the Taliban delegation to the 25th anniversary “St. Petersburg International Economic Forum ”, which took place from June 15–18, 2022, the negotiation process between the Taliban and the then government of Afghanistan, which took place in Moscow in 2019 etc. But all this does not mean recognition of the Taliban government by Russia.

    The first step towards an active and qualitative change in Taliban Afghanistan would be the development and adoption of the main law – the Constitution. The presence of a new constitution is a necessary condition for the Afghan state to become a player in the world arena as such a move  determines the framework for the development of any state.

    However, there are a number of difficulties in this matter, and the first of them is the fragmentation and clan structure of power within the Taliban, there are a number of groups with different leaders.

    To solve these issues Afghanistan first of all has to adopt a number of basic principles such as to turn the government system into the  Islamic republic with strong presidential power; to update its territorial structure, e.g.to adopt a decentralized unitary state, or a constitutional national federation. Consequently, a representative body will be needed to resolve issues between autonomies. Finally, regions should be enlarged and “national” autonomies should be formed (while maintaining the division into regions within autonomies) without the right to secede from Afghanistan, the capital Kabul should become a city of federal significance – a separate administrative unit that is not part of any national autonomy.

    Russia, as the epicenter of acceleration process to turn the world to East, should contribute to the moderate transformation of the Afghanistan under Taliban, with a view to its further recognition in the international arena. However, there are a number of difficulties that will need to be addressed, ranging from humanitarian to religious and military issues. The process does not promise to be easy, but the security of the Russian Federation depends on the results of the work.

  • Some Turks ready to abolish law that protects memory of Ataturk

    Some Turks ready to abolish law that protects memory of Ataturk

    Thomas Seibert

    ISTANBUL // Six decades after it came into force, a law protecting the memory of the republic’s founder Mustafa Kemal Ataturk still has the power to rock careers, trigger prison sentences and block access to YouTube.

    Mustafa Kemal Ataturk inspects troops at an officer's training school in Constantinople in 1926. Bettmann / Corbis
    Mustafa Kemal Ataturk inspects troops at an officer's training school in Constantinople in 1926. Bettmann / Corbis

    Earlier this year, a court in eastern Anatolia acquitted Ahmet Ayicil, a professor who faced up to three years in prison. He had been charged for allegedly saying in his class that Ataturk was a heathen “idol”.

    Denounced in 2007 by a student who did not attend the class personally, Prof Ayicil went through a lengthy trial based on Law Number 5816, a special provision that makes it a crime to “denigrate the memory of Ataturk”. Destroying, damaging or desecrating Ataturk busts or monuments carries sentences of up to five years.

    The court found Prof Ayicil not guilty because of a lack of evidence. But in 2008, Atilla Yayla, another professor, was given a suspended sentence of 15 months in prison for criticising Kemalism, a secularist ideology based on Ataturk, and for telling a public forum that the EU, which Turkey wants to join, would be wondering why there were “pictures of this man” in every Turkish office.

    The law was passed by Turkey’s parliament on July 25, 1951, and came into effect six days later. A former general of the Ottoman army who is credited with erecting Turkey’s republic from the ashes of the Ottoman Empire in the early 1920s, Ataturk is a national hero for most Turks. His portrait hangs in every school and public office and is routinely shown during public functions. Sometimes referred to as the “great leader” in official speeches, Ataturk’s image adorns coins and lira bills.

    But while Turks in general revere Ataturk, who died in 1938, some wonder whether the time has come to abolish or amend regulations like Law No 5816 because they limit free expression and are unsuitable for a modern democracy.

    “It is not a modern law,” Halil Dogan, the president of the Democratic Lawyers Association, a group of lawyers campaigning for democratic reform, said in a telephone interview this week. “Of course everybody should be protected against denigration, but Turkey’s current laws are sufficient for that.”

    Mr Dogan stressed that, as with every law, the interpretation and implementation of Law No 5816 was the key. Several high-profile investigations and decisions by prosecutors and courts, based on suspected defamations of Ataturk’s legacy, have been denounced as attempts to stifle critics.

    One of the most controversial cases was a verdict blocking nationwide access to YouTube on the grounds that it included a video denigrating Ataturk. The ban was lifted in October last year, two-and-a-half years after it came into effect, because the video clip was erased. “The YouTube interpretation [of the law] was definitely a step against the freedom of speech,” Mr Dogan said.

    In another example that made headlines, Ipek Calislar, a writer, was tried in Istanbul for writing in a book that Ataturk disguised himself as a woman once to escape a planned attempt on his life. Ms Calislar was acquitted in 2006.

    Three years later, Can Dundar, a journalist and filmmaker, was questioned by prosecutors after complaints against Mustafa, a documentary about Ataturk’s life that depicted him as a sometimes lonely man who drank alcohol. A comic book titled Genc Mustafa, or Young Mustafa, which included a scene in which Ataturk was beaten as a young man, triggered a trial against the publishers earlier this year. The case is ongoing.

    But Mr Dogan said he was confident that the law may be changed because Turkey, which has brought in several reforms for its EU bid, was strengthening the rights of its citizens. “I think that freedom of speech will be widened, I see a chance to change the law,” he said.

    The issue of Ataturk’s legacy is expected to come up during talks about a new constitution for Turkey, due to begin after parliament returns from its recess on October 1. The ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) as well as the two biggest opposition parties have formed committees to prepare for the talks, the daily Vatan reported this week.

    Turkey’s constitution was drawn up under military rule in 1982 and is widely considered outdated and anti-democratic. One of the problems facing lawmakers, academics and non-governmental groups discussing the new constitution is the question of whether the reference to “Ataturk nationalism” as the state ideology should be included in the new text.

    Some legal experts of the AKP have suggested that the new constitution should be free of references to “Ataturk nationalism”, Kemalism or other ideologies. But the secularist Republican People’s Party, the main opposition party, has said it wants to keep the first three paragraphs, which describe Turkey as a republic committed, among other things, to “Ataturk nationalism”.

     

    [email protected]

    via Some Turks ready to abolish law that protects memory of Ataturk – The National.

  • Erdogan: Let’s make new constitution with broad-based consensus

    Erdogan: Let’s make new constitution with broad-based consensus

    Erdogan delivered a speech at the 18th General Assembly of the Turkish Exporters’ Assembly.

    Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Saturday that it was important to prepare a new constitution, inviting all circles to take part in this process.

    Erdogan delivered a speech at the 18th General Assembly of the Turkish Exporters’ Assembly in Istanbul.

    “Let’s leave behind all prejudices and preconditions. Let’s talk, discuss freely and make our proposals. Let’s prepare a new constitution with a great consensus,” he said.

    “We have committed that the new constitution will be made with a broad-based consensus. I call on opposition parties, nongovernmental organizations, media and everyone to leave aside all prejudices and prepare new constitution together,” he said.

    Erdogan said he believed that the new process that began after June 12 parliamentary elections would be the one in which the rule of law would gain more importance and democratic standards would be boosted.

    “The latest developments showed once again that Turkey needs a new constitution and reforms now than ever before. Frankly, AK (Justice and Development) Party has struggled for fulfillment of reforms on its own in the past eight and half years. We faced obstacles at every reform, amendment and arrangement,” he said.

    Erdogan said when the new constitution was prepared, many problems and deadlocks would disappear.

    via Erdogan: Let’s make new constitution with broad-based consensus | Politics | World Bulletin.

  • U.S. Analyst Says Road to a New Constitution in Turkey Will Be Tough

    U.S. Analyst Says Road to a New Constitution in Turkey Will Be Tough

    Turkey’s political prospects for a new constitution are likely to see serious ups and downs given tensions over a latest court ban on a number of newly elected lawmakers, U.S. political analyst predicted.

    “What has happened in the last couple of days shows us that the process of making a new constitution in Turkey will be complicated and hard,” Henri Barkey with the Carnegie Endowment told Thursday a Washington conference on Turkish politics in the wake of the June 12 parliamentary elections.

    An criminal court in Istanbul on Thursday ruled against the release of two newly elected lawmakers, Mustafa Balbay and Mehmet Haberal from the main opposition party in Turkey, who were behind bars in an investigation on Ergenekon, an alleged secret network of senior army officers, academics, businessmen and others who have been on trial since October 2008 on charges of plotting to use terrorist methods to overthrow the Turkish government.

    In a separate case, Turkey’s election supervising agency barred Hatip Dicle, an independent lawmaker, from entering the parliament due to a past conviction, stirring tensions in Turkey’s southeast.

    Barkey said drafting a new constitution was the major challenge ahead for Turkish politics, adding, “the constitution has to change, not just for the settlement of the Kurdish issue but for democratization as well.”

    Friday, 24 June 2011

    A.A.