Foreign observers following Turkish politics naturally may have an image of Turkey as a country where political parties face constant threats of closure by the Constitutional Court. They are, in fact, not mistaken. The ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) has just escaped being closed down by the court.
Now it is the pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party (DTP) that the Constitutional Court is about to issue its judgment on, in a case for closure brought by the chief public prosecutor. So far 24 political parties have been closed down by the court. As for the parties of the DTP line, the number is already four. It will, therefore, be no surprise if the same thing happens to the DTP.
We know for certain that the decisions of the Constitutional Court on party closure cases are not strictly legal but also political. The judges sitting on the court use political reasoning. It is time for them to give serious thought to the function of a political party such as the DTP, and more importantly on how to resolve the Kurdish issue without political actors. Turkey needs political parties like the DTP and the AK Party that represent the Kurdish constituency to first integrate the Kurds into central politics and to address their demands and grievances.
The DTP should therefore not be closed down. Though it is not the sole representative of the Kurdish constituency as it used to be, it nevertheless reflects the views and positions of a significant segment of the Kurdish population. The DTP's presence in Parliament is valuable in itself, as is the representation of the DTP grassroots in central political institutions of Turkey. It is the DTP again where radical Kurdish politics engages in an internal debate on the ways to put their demands forward. The ability of radical Kurdish politics to transform into a legitimate political agent will, therefore, be seen in the internal debate of the DTP. And all of these processes require non-closure of the party. Only if the party is kept open will the DTP evolve over time into a genuine political party, distancing itself from the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) and having a life, program, and constituency of its own.
Closure, on the other hand, would only serve to avoid questioning the party's conventional line. The radicals in the party will think that they are vindicated as they continue to argue that political struggle has its limits, and thus they should keep the violence option open.
It is clear that the DTP has not yet completely distanced itself from violence. It could have established its own political entity but instead, its leaders have chosen or were obliged to choose, to remain under the shadow of the PKK. As such they have not only disappointed many in Turkey but also foreign observers in the West. The legitimacy of a political party that does not denounce violence would be questioned in any liberal democracy.
Moreover, as Kurdish people have increasingly been questioning the wisdom of using violence as a method of political struggle, it should have been time for the DTP to emerge as solely a political agent. But it has hesitated in sending messages to the PKK and its extensions in the region. But this seems suicidal for the DTP. They should keep in mind that the DTP now has a rival in representing Kurdish politics, the AK Party. It is a challenge for the DTP to reconsider their conventional approach to politics and the Kurdish issue. I would remind them that the AK Party has succeeded in eliminating the conventional center-right political parties in Turkish politics - such as the Motherland Party (ANAVATAN) and the True Path Party (DYP) -- and replaced them, as such parties failed to renew themselves and change political, social and economic circumstances. The same might happen to the DTP in the region if it does not respond to challenges brought by the AK Party. The July 22 elections presented a clear warning to the DTP that the provision of services to the people in the region matters as much as identity politics. Given the poor performance of the DTP in local administrations and the growing weariness of people with violence, the DTP might face a serious blow in the upcoming local elections of 2009.
To conclude, first, the Constitutional Court should let the DTP evolve. Closing the party would mean siding with the radicals within the party. Second, closing the party would be another embarrassment for democracy in this country. The court should save us from such an embarrassment.
22.09.2008
Now it is the pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party (DTP) that the Constitutional Court is about to issue its judgment on, in a case for closure brought by the chief public prosecutor. So far 24 political parties have been closed down by the court. As for the parties of the DTP line, the number is already four. It will, therefore, be no surprise if the same thing happens to the DTP.
We know for certain that the decisions of the Constitutional Court on party closure cases are not strictly legal but also political. The judges sitting on the court use political reasoning. It is time for them to give serious thought to the function of a political party such as the DTP, and more importantly on how to resolve the Kurdish issue without political actors. Turkey needs political parties like the DTP and the AK Party that represent the Kurdish constituency to first integrate the Kurds into central politics and to address their demands and grievances.
The DTP should therefore not be closed down. Though it is not the sole representative of the Kurdish constituency as it used to be, it nevertheless reflects the views and positions of a significant segment of the Kurdish population. The DTP's presence in Parliament is valuable in itself, as is the representation of the DTP grassroots in central political institutions of Turkey. It is the DTP again where radical Kurdish politics engages in an internal debate on the ways to put their demands forward. The ability of radical Kurdish politics to transform into a legitimate political agent will, therefore, be seen in the internal debate of the DTP. And all of these processes require non-closure of the party. Only if the party is kept open will the DTP evolve over time into a genuine political party, distancing itself from the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) and having a life, program, and constituency of its own.
Closure, on the other hand, would only serve to avoid questioning the party's conventional line. The radicals in the party will think that they are vindicated as they continue to argue that political struggle has its limits, and thus they should keep the violence option open.
It is clear that the DTP has not yet completely distanced itself from violence. It could have established its own political entity but instead, its leaders have chosen or were obliged to choose, to remain under the shadow of the PKK. As such they have not only disappointed many in Turkey but also foreign observers in the West. The legitimacy of a political party that does not denounce violence would be questioned in any liberal democracy.
Moreover, as Kurdish people have increasingly been questioning the wisdom of using violence as a method of political struggle, it should have been time for the DTP to emerge as solely a political agent. But it has hesitated in sending messages to the PKK and its extensions in the region. But this seems suicidal for the DTP. They should keep in mind that the DTP now has a rival in representing Kurdish politics, the AK Party. It is a challenge for the DTP to reconsider their conventional approach to politics and the Kurdish issue. I would remind them that the AK Party has succeeded in eliminating the conventional center-right political parties in Turkish politics - such as the Motherland Party (ANAVATAN) and the True Path Party (DYP) -- and replaced them, as such parties failed to renew themselves and change political, social and economic circumstances. The same might happen to the DTP in the region if it does not respond to challenges brought by the AK Party. The July 22 elections presented a clear warning to the DTP that the provision of services to the people in the region matters as much as identity politics. Given the poor performance of the DTP in local administrations and the growing weariness of people with violence, the DTP might face a serious blow in the upcoming local elections of 2009.
To conclude, first, the Constitutional Court should let the DTP evolve. Closing the party would mean siding with the radicals within the party. Second, closing the party would be another embarrassment for democracy in this country. The court should save us from such an embarrassment.
22.09.2008
No comments:
Post a Comment