On Jan. 19, a Cabinet meeting was chaired by the president for the first time in 12 years of Justice and Development Party (AK Party) rule, sparking criticism that Turkey is moving away from its parliamentary system and is approaching a presidential system. Some individuals who are in favor of a presidential system, think that Turkey switched to a de facto presidential system with this practice.
But the reality is a slightly different. The system in Turkey is not a parliamentary one in the strictest sense. The government is formed from inside Parliament, needs parliamentary support and is accountable to Parliament. It also gives the presidential office extensive authorities that are not seen in any parliamentary system. Presidential authorities are regulated in a long list in Article 104 of the Constitution. Accordingly, the president is the head of state and represents the Republic and the union of the nation with this title. The president monitors the implementation of the Constitution and checks whether state bodies run in harmony. Legislative, executive and judicial authorities go against the idea of a parliamentary system. The president's authority "[t]o preside over the Council of Ministers or to call the Council of Ministers to meet under his/her chairpersonship whenever he/she deems it necessary," as stipulated by Article 104 of the Constitution, is also against the parliamentary system. Furthermore, it might obstruct the implementation of the government's overall domestic and foreign policies, and might lock the system with authorities such as appointing higher judicial figures. It might raise difficulties in the formation of government and bureaucratic appointments. All of this is within the bounds of possibility, as the country's 10th president, Ahmet Necdet Sezer, who came from a Kemalist background, did not hesitate to use these blocking powers against the AK Party, to which he ideologically objected. Let us be aware that these authorities do not pave the way for active politics, but rather restrain and block it.
As far as the idea of a parliamentary system is concerned, the problem is not confined to extensive authorities alone, but it concerns the lack of legitimacy to exercise these authorities.
Until 2007, presidents was elected by Parliament, which gave him indirect legitimacy. Kemalist political elites and institutions plotted a constitutional crisis to prevent the election of the president by Parliament in 2007, paving the way for a referendum to amend the Constitution in 2010. According to the new regulation, which was accepted by an overwhelming majority, presidents shall be elected by popular vote from among the candidates who are proposed by at least 20 parliamentarians. This was applied in the 2014 presidential election, and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan became the first president to have been elected by popular vote.
This solution removed a discrepancy in terms of democratic legitimacy, while at the same time, it resulted in a more radical deviation from the idea of a parliamentary system. The problem is not yet over; as required in a democracy, an institution with democratic legitimacy must be authorized. The responsibility of an authorized position must be accepted. This is another problem. According to the Constitution, the president is "irresponsible." He can be charged only with treason. For this, a yes-vote from three-fourths of the Parliament is needed, which corresponds to 413 deputies, and it is almost impossible to achieve such a quorum.
Now, the first popularly elected president is exercising these authorities, but this does not transform the system into a presidential one because of the double-headed executive body. The government is the sole authority that is responsible for active politics.
The Council of Ministers is an independent political body outside the presidential realm. Since a president does not have the authority to dissolve Parliament apart from very exceptional situations, the system is not a semi-presidential one either.
The system does not turn into a presidential one just because the president chaired a Cabinet meeting. There is a single definition - this is a strange system. But the reason for this oddity is not the AK Party, but Turkey's Kemalist political elites who produced it. They were also the reason why the president was elected by the public. So, they do not have the right to complain, at least in ethical terms. Eliminating this oddity is only possible with a new constitutional order.
About the author
Osman Can is a Law Professor and Reporting Judge at the Turkish Constitutional Court. He holds a PhD from the University of Cologne, Germany.
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.