Think-tank report points to change in governmental system as inevitable
by Fatih Şemsettin Işık
ANKARAMay 01, 2015 - 12:00 am GMT+3
by Fatih Şemsettin Işık
May 01, 2015 12:00 am
In a report published on April 30 by the Ankara Center for Political and Economic Research (ASEM), the necessity of a presidential system in Turkey, following the country's 92 years with a parliamentary system, was discussed with some recommendations for a change in the governmental system.
Titled "Governmental Systems in Turkey and the model of a Presidency," by co-editors Haluk Alkan, Yusuf Tekin and Şevki Hakyemez, the report tackles debates on a presidential system by comparing it with the current problems in the parliamentary system in Turkey.
The report was also introduced at a symposium held at Bilkent University in Ankara on Thursday, where President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan gave a speech concerning the issues surrounding a presidential system.
Claiming that the tutelary system has been able to protect its influence through the parliamentary system, the report says: "It is an indispensable exigency for Turkey to urgently implement a change in the governmental system that will dispose of threats against national will, carve political stability in stone, consolidate democracy and uphold universal values, particularly human rights and the state of law regarding the natural consequences of both Turkey's position in the international arena and gained experiences."
The study says that a presidential system does not necessarily generate federalism in governance and also that one should not err by considering a presidential system as a practice that brings dictatorship and anti-democracy. It says: "Constantly it is emphasized that a presidential system will engender anti-democratic results and one-man rule. However, it is a known reality in world statistics that a parliamentary system is more convenient for one-man, anti-democratic or dictatorial rule."
Alongside this, the report highlights the necessity for some mechanisms to provide reconciliation between legislative and executive branches in a presidential system, and points out that a change in the electoral system might be appropriate: "It is important for legislative elections to render the relationship between voter and representative as genuine and to keep representatives accountable to voters. At this point, moving into the single-member district plurality system might be taken into account. In presidential elections, time and term limits and the way of nomination must be accentuated carefully."