The political process in Turkey will inevitably have to become more inclusive of the grassroots movements and grant greater power to local governments
On April 18, 2014, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan announced that the ruling AK Party had initiated preliminary work to introduce a series of electoral reform bills on the Parliament floor before the legislative assembly's summer recess which traditionally begins early July and continues until October. According to the initial statements by government officials, electoral reform would have introduced single-seat constituencies across the nation and eliminated the 10 percent national threshold which critics have long opposed as an impediment upon adequate representation of popular sentiments. Despite the obvious benefits of the proposal, various members of the opposition have argued that the AK Party's reform efforts are merely aimed at controlling a greater share of the seats in the Parliament instead of bolstering the country's democracy.
While maintaining term limits ahead of next year's parliamentary elections demonstrates that the party leadership feels confident despite the reasonable threat of certain members of parliament joining opposition ranks to continue their careers in Ankara, the executive committee's decision to postpone debate on much-needed legislative steps regarding electoral reform represents a setback for the broader agenda of bringing the gap between national politics and local movements.
Even though many opponents accused the government of seeking the electoral system for its own benefit, the country's overall direction indicates that such steps will have to be taken by future governments irrespective of their composition since current rules have effectively led to an over-centralization of political power in the hands of a handful of political party executives, who traditionally used their mandate against grassroots movements. In national and local elections, the center has had the final say in a variety of issues including campaign funds and nominations. Combined with the 10 percent threshold, this organizational model led to a "table d'hote" democracy that required disgruntled voters to support their second or third choice since their first pick could not garner enough support to secure representation in the Parliament. In most cases, voters tend to agree with their second choice on some issues but find themselves supporting the party across the board by virtue of casting their vote.
The hazards of such a model became clear when a group of disgruntled citizens took to the streets last summer over an urban development project in downtown Istanbul.
During a series of interviews with activists on the ground, a research team including myself discovered that the participants felt severely underrepresented by existing political parties. The same sentiments gave rise to #occupyCHP, a grassroots campaign that mobilized the same social groups against the main opposition leadership which, they argued, had failed to represent their demands adequately as part of the main opposition party's local election campaign.
With Turkey heading down the road of a de facto semi-presidential regime, the political process will inevitably have to become more inclusive of grassroots movements and grant greater power to local governments in order for all pieces to move smoothly. Considering that the AK Party is likely to dominate national politics for the foreseeable future, the interests of both the nation and various opposition groups would be better served under new electoral rules.
Keep up to date with what’s happening in Turkey,
it’s region and the world.
You can unsubscribe at any time. By signing up you are agreeing to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.