Despite harsh reactions from opposition parties, Parliament has passed 16 critical articles comprising 132 items of the Domestic Security Reform Package, which has been prepared in line with Western templates to prevent violence and vandalism during protests.The government has said that the Domestic Security Reform Package, which aims to establish a balance between freedom and security of its citizens while enhancing the civilian identity of the state, has been prepared in line with EU standards of security, freedoms and security regulations.The Kobani protests, which took place in 6-7 October end led to the death of 50 civilians, during which public order was disrupted for days, provided the main impetus for the package. The government has said that the rightful demands of the masses were abused by illegal groups, accompanied by an apparent lack of authority and division within the administrative body in both cases, and the government is determined to prevent such disruptions from occurring again. Problems regarding the use of protests and the right to demonstrate have already been acknowledged by the government and it asserts that these reforms will strengthen this natural right while at the same time trying to change the course of what it calls Turkey's problematic protest culture.Meanwhile, the opposition is more united than ever in objecting to the package, a notion both praised and criticized by various circles. The bitter experiences of the Kobani protests have also provided the main motive behind opposition to the package. The opposition cites as its main points of objection the abuse of authority by the security forces and cohesion of these laws with Turkey's already troubled Constitution.There is also an ongoing debate regarding the law making process in Turkey. The ruling parties have always been criticized by the opposition for preparing reforms within "packages." The government says that all items in the package are interconnected, and the opposition says that different articles of the package should be discussed separately.One of the few regulations that has passed unopposed in the last few days is the tightened penalties for narcotics abusers and sellers together with the approval of new provisions. According to the new law, drug dealers who sell narcotics within 100 meters of schools, hospitals, houses of worship, community centers, dormitories, barracks and other places used for collective social purposes will receive twice the existing penalties. The new law has placed synthetic drugs under the scope of the Turkish Penal Code, while penalties for the possession and sale of these drugs have also been doubled. Those who possess, use or sell narcotics within 200 meters of public buildings will receive up to a seven-and-a-half year sentence. A synthetic drug known publicly as "bonsai," which has claimed dozens of lives over the past couple of years and is viewed as the biggest narcotics threat, was identified as a synthetic drug.Daily Sabah has prepared a detailed work on the hotly debated sections of the reform package, comparing previous legislation, reforms, examples from the real world and concerns and motives cited.Custody regulation:Before: Previous legislation required a custody warrant from a prosecutor, limited to 24 hours for a single person and four days for acts committed as a group.Reform: Police chiefs determined by governors and district governors are granted the right to keep individuals in custody for 24 hours for the crimes of murder, injury on purpose, sexual attack, child abuse, smuggling, prostitution, theft, pillaging and drug trafficking and production. For crimes committed as a group and for violent events that seriously threaten public order, this authorization can be increased to 48 hours. The prosecutors' authority is still in effect, increased to 48 hours for individuals.World: The police are authorized to hold suspects in custody for 72 hours in Spain and Hungary, 48 hours in Germany, Belgium, Poland, Estonia and Ireland, 36 hours in the U.K., 24 hours in France, Italy, and Denmark.Biggest concern: The police will be over-authorized and misuse this authorization. Political or ethnic discrimination may occur.Biggest motive: Suspects cannot be prevented from committing crimes fast enough even with the presence of adequate suspicion. The judiciary is currently not effective or quick enough to act, and is currently under threat by members of the Gülen Movement.Governor authority regulation:Before: Governors are the highest administrative executive in a province representing the state and the government, but a specific regulation was not present.Reform: Governors may order security forces to find perpetrators of a crime if necessary. Governors may order the use of all public vehicles, including ambulances, fire engines, tow trucks and heavy construction equipment, in case public order is threatened, including those belonging to local authorities, with the military being the exception. Local authorities are obliged to follow these orders, and if not, security forces will enforce the orders of the governor. Public and private damage for not obeying such orders will be compensated from the responsible public officials by the related public institution. District governors are authorized to use this authority in their districts.Those who act against the decisions and measures taken by the governors to provide public order can be punished with imprisonment from three months to one year.World: The issue is strictly related to the administrative structure of each country.Biggest concern: Governors will be over-authorized and misuse their authority on behalf of the ruling government. Local authorities are bound to their respective local voters and should not be pressured to intervene against the will of their local population. There should be at least one neutral force that can act separately and reach all sides of clashes.Biggest motive: Public order should be maintained or re-established as fast as possible and all authorities should support it. Local authorities did not aid in such efforts in the Gezi and Kobani protests, during which public order was interrupted for days. Search regulation:Before: Previous legislation required a search warrant from the prosecutor.Reform: Authorization of a chief security officer in charge to conduct a body search of a possible suspect and/or his or her belongings in case of an emergency. However, the officer will be expected to provide official documentation to the suspect regarding the case at the time of the search within 24 hours.World: Austria, Italy, Germany and the U.K. are among EU countries in which security forces can conduct a search without authorization from their superiors.Biggest concern: The police will be over-authorized and misuse their power. Political or ethnic discrimination may occur.Biggest motive: Suspects cannot be apprehended quickly, even with the presence of adequate suspicion. For instance, the Bingöl incident, which took place on Oct. 9, 2014. The judiciary is not effective and cannot act quickly enough, and is currently under threat by members of the Gülen Movement.Molotov cocktail regulation:Before: According to legal precedents of Turkey's Supreme Court of Appeals, a Molotov cocktail is considered a weapon when used as a weapon to cause damage. It was not named as a weapon within the law, preventing security forces from taking preemptive action.Reform: Usage of a neutralizing force against individuals who attack or who are preparing to attack the police by using Molotov cocktails, explosives, flammables or any other weapon.World: Germany, the U.S., U.K. and Ireland are among countries that define usage, production and trade of Molotov cocktails as a crime in their respective laws.Biggest concern: Using Molotov cocktails is already a crime, reform should be made separately. Extrajudicial executions will occur.Biggest motive: Molotov cocktails are a deadly weapon. Some 5,458 Molotov cocktail attacks have taken place in the last six years, three police officers and four civilians have been killed and 406 police officers, one soldier and 127 were injured.Carrying weapons during protests regulation:Before: Slingshots were not listed as a weapon in legislation. Previous legislation foresees imprisonment no less than one year for wielding weapons other than firearms.Reform: Imprisonment from two years six months up to four years for carrying fireworks, Molotov cocktails, slingshots, iron shot, sticks and stones during protests.World: There are additional laws in some countries that specify certain objects. For example, daggers are specified as a weapon by a separate law in Belgium. French legislation describes every cutting, bruising or injuring object as a weapon. But in almost all legislation, the method of use is more important than the object itself.Biggest concern: Protests may occur instantly, everyone with a slingshot in their pocket will be persecuted. A clear distinction should be made between firearms and slingshots as they receive almost the same punishment. Usage is more important.Biggest motive: Peaceful protesters should be separated and protected from violent groups. Protests should be made free of weapons. Slingshots can seriously injure people when used with iron shot and they are used in particular by illegal groups in almost all protests. This regulation is only confined to protests.Carrying illegal organization material regulation:Before: Carrying illegal materials in protests complying with protest regulations was not regulated.Reform: Imprisonment from six months to three years for participating in protests with emblems, banners or uniform-like clothing of illegal organizations.World: Almost all countries have regulations on the issue in cohesion with their own illegal organization legislation.Biggest concern: If used excessively, this regulation may end up with many people facing jail time.Biggest motive: Propaganda of illegal organizations and the provocation of people should be prevented. The right to protest should be protected from illegal propaganda.Covering face regulation:Before: Covering the face was not considered a crime. It was only depicted as preparation for a crime if a crime is committed, possibly increasing punishment.Reform: Imprisonment from three to five years for wholly or partially covering the face to hide one's identity. If protesters carry weapons or apply violence, the minimum term applied would be four years.World: There are no specific examples that this act alone is considered as a crime.Biggest concern: People can cover their faces because the weather is cold, or they want to keep their identity secret from their employer, family, etc. This should be considered a crime only when people actually commit a crime.Biggest motive: Identities of suspects cannot be determined. Illegal organizations and provocateurs mingle with the crowd using the freedom of hiding their identities.Public damage regulation:Before: The crime was not specified and regulated for protests, damages could be collected from the perpetrator, if apprehended. Usually damages were collected from insurance companies.Reform: Material damage to public property will be collected from the perpetrators.World: The cost of repairing public damage was collected from the perpetrators of the 2010-2011 England student riots. In Germany, even the clean-up fee paid to sanitation services following a legal protest is paid by protesters.Biggest concern: The regulation is usually regarded as positive.Biggest motive: People harm public property without being responsible for its damage.This article is contributed by criminal lawyers Didem Nur Taylan and Cavit Tatlı.