We can perhaps make the most accurate assessment of the state of Turkish politics by looking at the final decision of the Supreme Election Board (YSK), just a short while before the general elections. With this decision, the YSK has rejected the objections made to President Tayyip Erdoğan's candidacy for the presidency for the third time. However, Article 101 of the Constitution is clear that, as a rule, a person can be elected president "at most twice". The only exception to this is the provision in Article 116 of the Constitution, which allows the incumbent president to be a candidate for the third time in case the parliament decides to renew the elections. However, the decision that led Turkey to the early elections was taken by President Erdogan, not the Grand National Assembly of Turkey.This is the last in a series of decisions that the YSK has made in recent years, unlawfully favoring the AKP and its leader. As will be remembered, the YSK accepted "unsealed votes" as valid in the 2017 Constitutional referendum, contrary to its established jurisprudence; In 2019, YSK canceled the election of the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality, which was won by CHP candidate Ekrem İmamoğlu. It seems that this time the YSK did not hesitate to decide in favor of the ruling party, even at the expense of violating the Constitution.Recently, there has been another important development not only in terms of damaging the freedom and fairness of the election campaign but also in terms of revealing the pathetic situation in which the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary have fallen in Turkey: Upon the Constitutional Court’s unblocking of HDP's bank accounts, the news that some members of the high court were called by the President by phone and almost questioned, fell on the media. If true, this news, unfortunately, confirms widespread public concerns that the President, when appointing members to the Constitutional Court, prefers people whom he is sure will act in line with his policy, thus aiming to "encircle" the high court.Meanwhile, HDP's request to postpone its oral defense, which was decided by the Constitutional Court to be held at a date during the campaign period, after the election was rejected by the court. This led to the HDP's decision to enter the elections under the umbrella of another party, which was concerned about the possibility of being shut down before the parliamentary elections to be held on May 14. It is clear that this decision of the Constitutional Court, which creates uncertainty for the HDP, is a development that will adversely affect the health of the election campaign.The oppressive practices of the AKP-MHP administration are of course not limited to the right to fair and democratic elections and the independence of the judiciary. Intense pressure and restrictions on freedom of media and communication indeed continue at an unprecedented level. As a matter of fact, the findings in ‘Turkey in the Media and Press Freedom Report for 2022,’ recently announced by the European Center for Press and Media Freedom, are quite disappointing.&nbsp;The report records many cases of systematic crackdowns on independent media, most of which we already know. According to the report, Turkey is unfortunately one of the countries that imprison journalists the most, as there were 41 journalists in prison at the time the report was published. Many journalists in Turkey face arrest and prosecution, especially those who report critically about the AKP-MHP government and its supporters. The Kurdish media takes the biggest share from the state and government pressure on the media.These developments, which created doubts about the fairness of the election campaign, were accompanied by another development that undermined the security of the campaign: There were reports of an armed attack on the Iyi Party Istanbul Provincial Presidency building. The police made a statement that this was not an attack on the party building, but an unlikely event that the guard of the construction opposite the building had to open fire in that direction to scare the thieves. However, the persuasiveness of the police statement weakens when it is remembered that the decision of the İYİ Party to return to the opposition bloc after a short crisis in early March has greatly disturbed the ruling parties.While all this is going on, there is no sign of a positive change in the economic policy that creates the livelihood problems that the people are exposed to in their daily lives. In the meantime, it is unclear to what extent the recent decision to remove the upper limit on interest rates on “FX-Protected Deposits” will stop the rise of the dollar and return to the Turkish lira. In addition, the artificial relief created by the populist "election economy", which the government has been implementing for a while, does not mean that the economic crisis of society, in general, has disappeared. Nor does it mean that the economic crisis has come to an end. The cost of this policy in the medium and long term will fall on the political team (most likely, the "Table for Six") that will control the executive after the elections.In the past, it was as if election campaigns had a sweet excitement and joy for everyone. Probably since the campaign coincided with the month of Ramadan, unfortunately this time it is not so.I hope we will prepare the next Bulletin in a more pleasant environment. Stay tuned. * Prof. Dr. Mustafa Erdoğan

The Freedom Observer

In the application, it was stated that "the risk and threat of closure after the submission and finalization of the lists will create irreparable or impossible consequences for the Party" and that after a possible closure decision, the Party will lose its right to participate in the elections and the right of deputies to be elected will be taken away. While awaiting the decision of the Constitutional Court, HDP made attempts to enter the elections from the lists of the Greens and Left Future Party in order not to be out of the vote due to a possible closure case before the May 14 elections and was waiting for the final decision of the Constitutional Court.Last week, the Constitutional Court gave its decision on the HDP's application. In the statement made by the Constitutional Court, it was stated that "the request for the postponement to a date after the general election of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey and the Presidential elections announced by the Supreme Election Council was rejected unanimously on 22/3/2023". Although the Constitutional Court was expected to decide in this direction, this decision proved that the Constitutional Court damaged the fair and competitive nature of democratic elections. In other words, regardless of the content of the closure case, the AYM's refusal of HDP's request to leave the oral defense until after the election is contrary to the requirements of the democratic political order. It is unacceptable in a democratic country that parties are worried about being shut down shortly before the elections and their politicians are threatened with a political ban. One of the primary conditions for the elections to be held in a fair process and for legal security is the elimination of "judicial" concerns about arbitrarily removing political parties from the competition. *&nbsp;Ömer Faruk Şen – Ph.D. – Missouri University

The party's oral defense, which was decided to be held on March 14, was postponed to April 11 due to the earthquake. Thereupon, HDP applied to postpone the oral defense to a date after the election, that is, after 14 May. 

HDP's Request for Postponement of Oral Defense to be Rejected

In the application, it was stated that "the risk and threat of closure after the submission and finalization of the lists will create irreparable or impossible consequences for the Party" and that after a possible closure decision, the Party will lose its right to participate in the elections and the right of deputies to be elected will be taken away. While awaiting the decision of the Constitutional Court, HDP made attempts to enter the elections from the lists of the Greens and Left Future Party in order not to be out of the vote due to a possible closure case before the May 14 elections and was waiting for the final decision of the Constitutional Court.Last week, the Constitutional Court gave its decision on the HDP's application. In the statement made by the Constitutional Court, it was stated that "the request for the postponement to a date after the general election of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey and the Presidential elections announced by the Supreme Election Council was rejected unanimously on 22/3/2023". Although the Constitutional Court was expected to decide in this direction, this decision proved that the Constitutional Court damaged the fair and competitive nature of democratic elections. In other words, regardless of the content of the closure case, the AYM's refusal of HDP's request to leave the oral defense until after the election is contrary to the requirements of the democratic political order. It is unacceptable in a democratic country that parties are worried about being shut down shortly before the elections and their politicians are threatened with a political ban. One of the primary conditions for the elections to be held in a fair process and for legal security is the elimination of "judicial" concerns about arbitrarily removing political parties from the competition.

The party's oral defense, which was decided to be held on March 14, was postponed to April 11 due to the earthquake. Thereupon, HDP applied to postpone the oral defense to a date after the election, that is, after 14 May.

<h2 fr-original-style="" style="margin: 0px; color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.85); font-weight: 500; padding: 0px; box-sizing: border-box;">Regulation for the victims of delayed pension age</h2><ul fr-original-style="padding-inline-start: 20px;" style="padding-inline-start: 20px; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; list-style-position: inside; box-sizing: border-box;"><li fr-original-style="" style="box-sizing: border-box;">AK Party Group Deputy Chairperson Muhammet Emin Akbaşoğlu said that the regulation on those victims of delayed pension age has been submitted to the Turkish Grand National Assembly and is expected to be enacted on Tuesday or Wednesday next week.</li><li fr-original-style="" style="box-sizing: border-box;">Details: According to the proposal, those who were insured before September 9, 1999, can retire if they have completed their premium days and working hours. In addition, a 5-point premium support corresponding to 500 liras will be provided for those who retire and want to continue working in the same workplace.</li></ul><h2 fr-original-style="" style="margin: 0px; color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.85); font-weight: 500; padding: 0px; box-sizing: border-box;">Criticism of the Opposition</h2><ul fr-original-style="padding-inline-start: 20px;" style="padding-inline-start: 20px; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; list-style-position: inside; box-sizing: border-box;"><li dir="ltr" fr-original-style="" style="box-sizing: border-box;">‘Eeny, meeny, miny, moe’: MHP leader Devlet Bahçeli, in his speech at the group meeting, described the Joint Memorandum of Understanding announced by the Millet Alliance as ‘a political hollow, a declaration of destruction, a guarantee given to separatism and a freak imposition’. Bahçeli said of the alliance, ‘They will determine the presidential candidate on February 13. If they cannot decide, they should go before a notary public and choose their candidates by lot. If they disagree, they can draw short and long straws to nominate a candidate. They can find their candidates with the nursery rhyme ‘Eeny, meeny, miny, moe, catch a tiger by the toe.’’<img src="https://images.aposto.com/2023/1/6/1675532663075.jpeg" style="display: block; vertical-align: top; margin: 5px auto; text-align: center; width: 100%; max-width: 550px; border-style: none; position: relative; cursor: pointer; padding: 0px 1px; box-sizing: border-box;" width="550" ratio="1.78" fr-original-style="display: block; vertical-align: top; margin: 5px auto; text-align: center; width: 100%; max-width: 550px;" fr-original-class="fr-draggable">Gazete Duvar<ul fr-original-style="padding-inline-start: 20px;" style="padding-inline-start: 20px; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; list-style-position: inside; box-sizing: border-box;"><li dir="ltr" fr-original-style="text-align: left;" style="text-align: left; box-sizing: border-box;">In his speech at the AK Party's group meeting, President Erdoğan&nbsp;addressed the AK Party deputies who did not attend the meetings in the General Assembly of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey: ‘If you do not fulfil your duty properly, this nation will not do you justice, the salaries you receive are haram, know this!’</li><li dir="ltr" fr-original-style="text-align: left;" style="text-align: left; box-sizing: border-box;">‘Bye, Mr Kemal’: Erdoğan also addressed CHP leader Kılıçdaroğlu and said, ‘If Mr Kemal likes this expression so much. I will also give you the new slogan he will use from now on: Bye, Mr Kemal. We do not ask for royalties, we give our blessings.’</li></ul><img src="https://images.aposto.com/2023/1/6/1675533755508.jpeg" style="display: block; vertical-align: top; margin: 5px auto; text-align: center; width: 100%; max-width: 550px; border-style: none; position: relative; cursor: pointer; padding: 0px 1px; box-sizing: border-box;" width="550" ratio="1.78" fr-original-style="display: block; vertical-align: top; margin: 5px auto; text-align: center; width: 100%; max-width: 550px;" fr-original-class="fr-draggable">AA<ul fr-original-style="padding-inline-start: 20px;" style="padding-inline-start: 20px; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; list-style-position: inside; box-sizing: border-box;"><li dir="ltr" fr-original-style="text-align: left;" style="text-align: left; box-sizing: border-box;">‘Bye-bye love’: CHP leader Kılıçdaroğlu responded to Erdoğan's outburst with a scene from the movie ‘Organize İşler’, which he shared on social media. The Everly Brothers' song Bye Bye Love was featured on the stage. </li></ul></li></ul>

Spektrum

Justice Minister Bekir Bozdağ announced last week that ‘We will probably submit the constitutional amendment proposal to the Presidency of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey next week’ and stated that the proposal will be submitted to parliament this week. Another title of the constitutional amendment, which also includes the ‘legalisation of the headscarf’, is ‘protection of the family'.At the beginning of this month, President Erdoğan said, ‘Strong families give birth to strong nations. Let us create strong families so that we can be a strong nation. A weak family weakens a strong nation. We do not want to give this opportunity.’&nbsp;One step behind: President Erdoğan responded to CHP leader Kılıçdaroğlu's call for ‘legalising the headscarf’ with a call for a ‘constitutional amendment’. Erdoğan said, ‘Let's not stop there, let's make additional amendments that will strengthen our family institution, which consists of the union of men and women, and enable us to look to our future with confidence.’Why? There have been anti-LGBTQIA+ discourses in Turkey for a long time. In recent months, a rally called ‘Big Family Meeting’ was organised, banners with anti-LGBTQIA+ statements were carried and slogans were chanted. Minister of Interior Süleyman Soylu has made opposing discourses many times, and in a statement he made in August, he said, ‘This is why they want to unleash LGBTI or what is it, sexlessness on this country. First they will acclimatise, and then they will take our children away from us. We see all of these.’ In October, Minister of Industry and Technology Mustafa Varank said, ‘You can do whatever you want, but if you impose sexlessness, if you continue to undermine the concept of family, we will not say goodbye to anyone.’What will happen?&nbsp;Minister of Justice Bozdağ stated that paragraphs will be added to Article 24 of the Constitution, and the first paragraph of Article 41 will be amended. While Article 24 is expected to be amended regarding the headscarf, Article 41 is expected to be amended to read ‘The family is the foundation of Turkish society and is based on equality between spouses.’ It is believed that the word ‘spouses’ will be replaced with ‘men and women.’&nbsp;It is stated that with this word change, it is planned to constitutionally prevent marriage equality. Currently, no same-sex unions are recognised in Turkey, nor are marriages or similar unions outside the country. Marriage is restricted between a man and a woman by the article in the Civil Code which reads: ‘The man and woman who are to marry each other apply together to the marriage registrar's office in the place where one of them resides…’.&nbsp;How is it in other countries?&nbsp;In the image below, you can see the latest status of legal regulations on marriage equality and homosexuality.Today, marriage equality is recognised in the USA and most European countries. Although there are discourses against LGBTQIA+s in almost every country, countries acknowledge their existence in legal status and approve of their marriage rights. Of course, this process has not been going on for a long time but has been developing rapidly, especially in the last 10 years. If we look at a few countries:&nbsp;Netherlands:&nbsp;The Netherlands was the first country to legalise marriage equality. With the decision taken on 1 April 2001, homosexual couples were granted the same rights as heterosexual couples, including adoption.&nbsp;Belgium:&nbsp;In Belgium, where marriage equality was legalised in 2003, same-sex couples were granted the right to adopt children in 2006.&nbsp;Spain: In Spain, where marriage equality was legalised in 2005, couples can adopt whether they are married or not.&nbsp;Canada: Marriage equality in the country entered national law in July 2005 and was legalised nationwide. Before this period, it was legal in some provinces.South Africa:&nbsp;The first African country to allow marriage equality, South Africa legalised adoption in November 2006.Norway: the country's 2009 law paved the way for same-sex couples to marry and adopt, but for the past 20 years same-sex couples have enjoyed many of the same legal rights as unmarried heterosexual couples, under the term 'civil partnership'.Sweden: Since 1995, civil partnerships have been recognised, and in 2003 couples were granted the right to adopt a child. In May 2009, it was legalised for couples to marry in a civil or religious ceremony.&nbsp;France:&nbsp;In April 2013, a bill allowing marriage equality and adoption was approved by the parliamentary plenary and signed into law by the president.Argentina:&nbsp;On 14 July 2010, Argentina became the first South American country to have marriage equality and adoption rights after the law was passed by parliament.USA:&nbsp;In 1996, a federal law called the Defence of Marriage Act (DOMA) defined marriage as ‘the union of one man and one woman’. The law was canceled by the Constitutional Court in 2013. However, marriage equality had previously been legalised in several states, including Massachusetts, California, Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, and New York. In 2015, the Supreme Court ruled that marriage equality is a legal right and legalised it across the country. Justice Anthony Kennedy, who wrote the judgment, said, ‘No union is deeper than marriage.’United Kingdom:&nbsp;Marriage equality is now legal in all parts of the United Kingdom, although it was recognized at different times in different regions.&nbsp;Switzerland:&nbsp;Same-sex marriage became legal as of 1 July 2022 after it was approved in a referendum held in September 2021.Taiwan:&nbsp;Taiwan's Parliament passed the legalisation of marriage equality in 2019. Taiwan became the first Asian country to take this decision, and approved the right to adoption, albeit in a limited way, with the same law.Mexico: In Mexico, same-sex marriages became legal throughout the country, with the northeastern border state of Tamaulipas also approving marriage equality.&nbsp;On the other hand, especially in Middle Eastern countries, it is seen that LGBTQIA+ persons are not recognised for their fundamental human rights and are subjected to criminal sanctions due to their sexual orientation.&nbsp;Is family unity achieved by men and women?&nbsp;Stating that a strong family constitutes a strong society, President Erdoğan had stated that with the regulation to be made, ‘They will set a barrier against threats to the family institution and human nature.’&nbsp;Just the other day, AKP Deputy Chairman Hayati Yazıcı said about the regulation on the institution of the family, ‘Family unity consists of the marriage of a man and a woman, it is as clear as that. Can there be a citizen against this?’However, when compared to the rest of the world, it is possible to see that marriage is guaranteed as a constitutional right in many countries, and that the union between two people and sexual orientation is also recognised as a fundamental right and freedom. It would not be wrong to say that all countries attach importance to family and family unity and regard it as the basic building block of society. In this context, when we evaluate the changes and decisions taken by countries over the years, we can say that family unity and strength can be achieved through free and equal rights rather than marriage between men and women. &nbsp;<blockquote fr-original-style="color: rgb(9, 9, 9); border-color: rgb(37, 44, 60); border-width: 4px; font-style: italic; padding-left: 10px;" style="color: rgb(9, 9, 9); border-color: rgb(37, 44, 60); border-width: 4px; font-style: italic; padding-left: 10px; margin: 0px 0px 1em; border-left-style: solid; box-sizing: border-box;">‘Homosexuals must also be legally secured within the framework of their rights and freedoms. We do not find the treatment they are subjected to from time to time on some television screens humane.’ -Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, 2002</blockquote>

We can say that family unity and strength can be achieved through free and equal rights rather than marriage between men and women.  

Marriage equality: Does the family unit consist of a man and a woman?

MHP leader Devlet Bahçeli, in perhaps the most awaited group meeting speech in a long time, described the visit of the AKP delegation to HDP on the constitutional amendment as ‘a natural and right step.’ In the relevant part of his speech,what Bahçeli said is as follows:&nbsp;<blockquote fr-original-style="color: rgb(9, 9, 9); border-color: rgb(37, 44, 60); border-width: 4px; font-style: italic; padding-left: 10px;" style="color: rgb(9, 9, 9); border-color: rgb(37, 44, 60); border-width: 4px; font-style: italic; padding-left: 10px; margin: 0px 0px 1em; border-left-style: solid; box-sizing: border-box;">‘Why did they meet with the HDP? What will we say, and how will we react to this? These are the hypothetical questions whose answers have been sought for days. I don't even need to repeat how we look at the HDP. It is a devastating and mischievous attitude for those who don't make a sound about the AKP delegation's contact with the CHP to talk about the HDP on our backs. In our eyes, the CHP is the same as the HDP. We do not look at what was discussed, we look at how a reasonable and democratic solution will be found.’</blockquote>The controversial visitThe AKP, which needs 360 votes to take the constitutional amendment to the referendum and 400 votes to adopt it without a referendum, has visited all parties with a group in the Turkish Grand National Assembly. On 2 November, Minister of Justice Bekir Bozdağ, AKP Deputy Chairman Ali İhsan Yavuz, and AKP Group Deputy Chairman Mustafa Elitaş visited the HDP delegation for the constitutional amendment proposal prepared by the AKP on domestic relations and religious freedom.After the visit, AKP Şanlıurfa MP Mehmet Ali Cevheri said, ‘It is absurd not to go. It is a legal party, established according to the law. It operates under the roof of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey and has a group. We also need their support.’Former AKP MP Mehmet Metiner said, ‘If entering into dialogue-cooperation with the HDP is a requirement of the vision of the Turkish Century, then would it be right to criticise the HDP by equating it with the PKK, and would it be right to blame others who are in dialogue-cooperation with the HDP? Is it only right when we do something?’. Metiner argued that ‘every word that will be said about the HDP from now on will run on empty.’AKP executive Şamil Tayyar said, ‘The AK Party should conduct its relations with the HDP on the same level as it sees it. If it is a political extension of the PKK and a party that needs to be shut down, why are we discussing the Constitution with them? If the PKK is separate from the HDP, why did we need to use such a language and tone that put them in the same equation?’İYİP Spokesperson Kürşad Zorlu said, ‘Indeed, parties should not use their standards of judgment to win elections. An understanding that anything is legitimate to win elections will lead to a problem of legitimacy in which the society and politics are at the center. It is an unacceptable approach.’CHP Spokesperson Faik Öztrak said, ‘If you are doing politics of values and principles, you will bear the consequences. What you said before this, what you are doing now, I leave this to the consideration of our nation.’&nbsp;Former HDP Co-Chair Selahattin Demirtaş said, ‘Instead of taking a share from this meeting and starting a fast meeting traffic with the HDP, the representative of legitimate politics, the opposition preferred to turn it into a storm to wear down the AKP and implicitly criminalise the HDP. It is inconceivable.’ He reacted to the opposition with these sentences. Demirtaş said that ‘no one can ignore the HDP’ and called on the opposition to ‘come together to form a realistic program to end poverty, hunger, war, and despair.’Why was there an expected reaction from the MHP?AKP Group Deputy Chairman Mahir Ünal, who had harshly criticised the language revolution in recent weeks, resigned from his post after Bahçeli's heavy criticism. It was interpreted that this development could be an indicator of a disagreement within the People's Alliance (Millet İttifakı).The People's Alliance had long accused the HDP of being the political representative of the terrorist organisation PKK. The opposition parties' contact with the HDP was condemned. The CHP was associated with the PKK due to the meetings between the CHP and the HDP, and the thesis that the HDP was the ‘sleeping partner’ of the six-party alliances despite forming a separate alliance with the socialist parties was being processed. Even the CHP's alliance partner İYİP, which had no contact with the HDP, was labeled a ‘PKK supporter.’ Efforts were being made to create a crack in the six-party table through the nationalist sensitivities of the İYİP.This understanding, which excluded the HDP from legitimate political grounds, was narrowing the opposition's room for maneuver. Although it was obvious that HDP voters would be one of the decisive electoral groups in the second round of the two-round election system, no policy was (could) formulated to address this reality.Journalist İsmail Saymaz wrote on Monday that an MHP official told him that they had learned about the AKP’'s visit to the HDP from the press. As the visit brought with it allegations that a new opening process was on the way, there were expectations that Bahçeli might demand early elections or show a harsh reaction to the AKP as a ‘balancing act.’Expanding the political spaceAccording to journalist Hande Fırat's reports from the MHP lobbies, the party, which ‘has not changed its view on the HDP,’ thinks that the AKP’'s view on the HDP cannot change and that ‘it cannot make a new initiative anyway.’ Thinking that the CHP and the HDP are the same, the MHP does not find it strange that the AKP, which goes to the CHP, goes to the HDP.’ In other words, we may be waiting for a period in which it becomes clear that the AKP and the MHP, which have recently become identical, are two political parties in the alliance.The AKP’'s proposal for a constitutional amendment to the CHP's proposal for a legal guarantee for headscarves is likely to further complicate politics. The AKP's proposal to change the definition of family to block same-sex marriages in the constitution, in addition to legalising the headscarf, puts the CHP in an unwanted dilemma. The use of closed ballots in constitutional amendments also paves the way for parties to ‘set traps’ for one another, for unexpected parties to vote in the same direction, or for MPs to violate party discipline.For the time being, it can be interpreted that the opposition parties have strengthened their hand against the accusation of ‘anyone in contact with HDP is a terrorist sympathiser’ and the government's national security and survival discourse has weakened. In the article published in Spektrum titled ‘The thorn-filled road of opposition: Opposition in the State of Emergency,’ the promise of the opposition parties to build a new Turkey depends on ‘refusing to do opposition to the extent permitted by the government.’

MHP leader Bahçeli commented on the AKP’'s HDP visit with these words.

‘A natural and right step’

Turkey is one of the countries where terrorism hurts the most. It is quite normal that society's large part does not sympathize with a party, some of whose representatives declare that they do not see the PKK as a terrorist organization, and from time to time slogans in favor of the terrorist organization are chanted at its congresses. Therefore, I do not think it is a correct approach to explain the inability of the HDP and the opposition alliance to come together on an electoral alliance only with the "divide and rule the opposition" strategy of the People's Alliance.Moreover, the economic program of the HDP, which seems likely to form another alliance with left/socialist parties, is "too far left" for the opposition alliance.On the other hand, HDP received exactly 5 million 866 thousand 309 votes in the 2018 general elections. This number is likely to increase in this election. In other words, HDP has popular support that even the most nationalist government cannot overcome by labeling it as "terrorist". In a country where so many citizens are terrorists or terror sympathizers, it would probably not be possible for anyone to survive. HDP members associating with terrorism or associating the party with terrorism "from the outside" is a grave injustice to the millions of peaceful people who voted for the party by embracing their Kurdish identity.&nbsp;Therefore, it is very significant that Demirtaş underlines the distance between the HDP and the PKK and criticizes his party after criticizing the government and the opposition.Through the rhetoric of its leaders and Demirtaş, the HDP aims for the opposition alliance to recognize its legitimacy. For example, it did not attend the emergency extraordinary meeting of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM) to discuss the issue of violence in health care because the CHP did not contact the HDP in its legislative proposal.The six parties adopt a democratic stance on issues such as the legitimacy of the HDP before the law, the constitutional rights of HDP politicians, freedom of expression, and security of life of HDP voters. They promise that governments will create a democratic environment in which the HDP will utilize its constitutional right to dissent.In return, the HDP should not expect that the common pain and anxiety of division caused by a separatist terrorist organization to large segments of the population with different views will suddenly disappear. The HDP should also understand that the parties representing these population segments are not willing to form an open alliance with it, and should not withhold its support at least in the second round.After all, if democracy is to be rebuilt with the "Reinforced Parliamentary System" model, it will open a space for the HDP to take part in democratic politics and voice its opposition. If Turkey is to rebuild democracy, an HDP that has no ties with terrorism and HDP voters who freely express their democratic demands will take their place there. Only in this way will social peace be achieved.

Grand National Assembly of Turkey ile ilgili hikayeler