Opinion: Referendum in #Turkey - dispelling myths of the end of Turkish democracy

The results of the Turkey referendum on the constitutional amendments held on 16 April brought a long hoped-for victory to Turkish President Recep Tayip Erdogan and his Justice and Development Party. The referendum that split the nation into two polar groups (51. 41% 'Yes' votes against 48.59% 'No') made international media rife with debates and concerns for the future of the country’s democratic development. But the situation is not as black as it is painted, as the country’s switch from a constitutional to a presidential Republic does not mean that the popular election system in Turkey is going to be abolished. Here’s why, writes Olga Malik. 

Why did Erdogan win? 

As ironic as it might sound, it seems that much of the Erdogan’s victory is owed to the Turkish coup d’etat in July 2016 and, to be more precise, its failure. According to Bayram Balci, the senior fellow of the Centre for International Research and Science in Paris (CERI Sciences Po): “The coup d’état was a sort of 'holy-bread'" for Erdogan as his position had been much weakened after the Parliamentary elections. But as the Turkish nation is known for being unanimous and reluctant to accept any kind of government unrest, Erdogan successfully defeated the overthrow and gained more popularity showing the world he still had a lot of supporters across the country. As soon as the coup erupted, the leaders of the three main opposition parties - the Republican People’s Party (CHP), the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and the pro-Kurdish People’s Democratic Party (HDP) - condemned the attempted coup d’état. Even in the international sphere in which Erdogan had been sharply criticized for his authoritarian policy in Turkey and for his policy towards Syria, the aborted coup d’état has improved his image. Amusingly, prior to July 2016, Erdogan was considered the enemy of democracy but as he defeated the putsch he became a sort of a savior of the Turkish democracy all of a sudden. A true irony of ironies.” 

Another reason of Erdogan’s popularity that cannot be ignored is the significant role of the Turkish media propaganda and its pro-government agenda. Love it or hate it, but the fact is there are more and more of the Turkish governmental and non-governmental funds, education organizations and the media that have started supporting (sometimes under pressure) the official political course and are standing up for Erdogan and his ruling party. Basically, many such organizations follow the pro-governmental policy just to continue their business and save jobs. But at the end of the day mass suggestion on people’s decisions and choices once again proved its efficiency and helped increase the ratings and popularity of Erdogan. 

Finally, the strong patriotic feelings of Turks and their huge pride in their country and origin are essential for understanding the causes of the Erdogan’s victory. Indeed, the so-called “national pride” factor has played a significant role and determined the choice for thousands of Turks. The perfect example that demonstrated Turkish unanimity was the incident that happened earlier in March in the Netherlands when the Dutch government denied the landing of the plane carrying Mevlut Cavusoglu, the Turkish minister of foreign affairs who planned to hold a meeting on the upcoming referendum with the Turkish community in Rotterdam.

The Turkish Twitter and social media carried posts expressing outrage and hurt national feelings while Erdogan’s eloquent response to the Dutch authorities strengthened his position among Turks residing both in Turkey and abroad.  Opposition reaction  However, despite the majority of votes being for Erdogan and constitutional changes, Turkish opposition expressed suspicions over the fairness and transparency of the campaign. The Republican Party of Turkey immediately challenged the referendum results stating they were fraudulent due to the last-minute decision of the Supreme Election Council to count non-stamped envelopes. “This decision is very unusual for the Turkish electoral system known for its accuracy and transparency,” said Bayram Balci. “But this time it seems that there were some serious irregularities in the vote count,” he added. 

Cezar Florin Preda, head of the delegation from the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe stated that “in general, the referendum did not live up to Council of Europe standards. The legal framework was inadequate for the holding of a genuinely democratic process.” He also added that provincial governors used state-of-emergency powers in order to restrict the freedom expression; the power that “should never be used to undermine the rule of law”. 

According to Aykan Erdemir, a former Turkish Parliament member and currently senior fellow of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies in Washington: “The Supreme Election Council's last-minute decision to change the rules of the vote count is an attempt to cover up the fraud. This is why both the pro-secular main opposition CHP and the pro-Kurdish HDP have challenged the referendum results. Erdogan’s campaign that has polarized the society will not only undermine Turkey’s democracy but also its social cohesion, leading to further Pakistanization of Turkey. 

“There is no doubt Erdogan will use his regained power to strengthen his Islamist rule and undermine Turkey's secular institutions. Erdogan will use his newfound powers to further strengthen his Islamist rule and undermine Turkey's secular institutions. Secularism is the glue that holds Turkey's multi-ethnic and multi-faith communities together. Erdogan is playing with fire, and the ensuing fire can consume not only Turkey but the entire Middle East," he added.

Erdogan’s campaign that has polarized the society will not only undermine Turkey’s democracy but also its social cohesion, leading to further Pakistanization of Turkey.  At the same time, Turkish main opposition parties and the media reported on blatant pressure from the Turkish government and violations of the human rights and freedom of speech across the country. Huge propaganda of the Turkish government described above was enforced with the ban to publish any anti-government comments and statements. Intimidation of the population and threats to arrest everyone who would publicly speak against the Turkish government cannot be denied.

Last year, the Turkish authorities demonstrated their seriousness about this issue by having arrested Murat Sabuncu, the editor in chief of the Turkish left-wing newspaper Cumhuriyet and his staff that included journalists, lawyers and cartoonists who were accused for possible involvement in organizing the coup d’etat in July, 2016 and co-operation with Fethullah Gulen, the Edogan’s main opponent. (However, Gulen in his interview denied any affiliation with the attempted coup).  Later that year a significant number of journalists and social activists were detained for tweets and comments in the social media in which they had allegedly offended the Turkish president.

There were even reports of the arrests of two teenagers accused of having torn down posters of the president. Finally, the long-lasting battle in the south-east of Turkey pursued by the Turkish government against the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, listed as a terrorist organization, cost more than 2,000 lives - many of which were innocent people, children and the elderly. All of this casts doubt on the referendum results as being absolutely fair and it also explains why the difference between the 'Yes' and 'No' votes was only 2.82%. 

As Balci added: “The Turkey referendum, has become the most unusual referendum in the country, especially in the country that proclaims democracy: in fact, the president has invited Turks to limit their own liberty.”  What awaits Turkish democracy?  Let’s look what the essential changes are to be made according to the new constitutional amendments and what their impact on the country’s democratic system is going to be.

The president of Turkey would be able to issue decrees on political, social, and economic issues that would carry the force of law while the duties of the prime minister would be subsumed under the office of the president, and the position of prime minister would be abolished.  However, transformation from a constitutional to a presidential system does not mean the end of democracy in the country. The role of the Turkish parliament will still remain quite significant which means that Turkish people will still play an important, if not the main part in the parliamentary and presidential elections. Moreover, the amendments are to come into force only in November 2019, after the presidential elections. By that time Turkish citizens might choose to vote for another candidate instead of Erdogan. Isn’t this a perfect illustration that incites hope for sustaining a democratic system in Turkey?  In summary, the so-called attachment to rejection, known as one of the most popular psychological syndromes that often determines our choices when we make important decisions, cannot be left behind.

As Cevdet Ugur, a well-known Turkish-American hotelier based in the USA observed: “It is always easier to say 'No' and avoid any responsibility, especially when the choice is between familiar and comfortable 'stability' and an 'unknown' future of your own country.” Perhaps the more important thing is to concentrate not on the referendum results, but on the future development of Turkey that mainly depends on its citizens.

Share this article: