University of California, Los Angeles

A Single Referendum in Turkey by Julia Robinson @ University of California, Los Angeles

The recent referendum passed by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey will lead to long term democratic backsliding. The redistribution of power to the executive office, the dissolution of checks and balances of higher power, and the change of procedure for dissolution of the legislative branch will all contribute to inevitable democratic backsliding. However, within these new amendments are small loopholes that give the Republic of Turkey a chance to overcome their transition to a regime with very limited democratic institutions.

Before I begin my argument, I would like to give a brief summary of Turkey’s political history. In 1950, Turkey became a democratic state, shortly after joining the UN and NATO. However, many events led to an decrease in stability, and multiple military coups occurred to attempt to give political power back to civilians from multiple anti-democratic groups. In 2016, after an attempted military coup and the firing of over 100,000 employees in all sectors of the political fields, Turkey declared a state of emergency which extended to 2017. As a resolution to this state of emergency, recently elected President Erdogan proposed a referendum that would revise or repeal 76 of the 177 Turkish amendments, the main point of this referendum transitioning Turkey from a Parliamentary system to a purely Presidential system.

Now, when we consider democratic backsliding, we have to remember that it means it will make democracy harder to happen in the next period. The proposed referendum, which was passed in 2017, will use political leaders and their personal agendas, the alteration in horizontal accountability, and a skewed form of electoral process to make democracy harder to achieve in the upcoming years Turkey has to face.

First, the referendum changes the parliamentary state to a presidential one, abolishing the Prime minister and delegating the power of head of state and government to the president himself. This change in government is what I would say falls under the political leader hypothesis of democratic backsliding. The effects of this change of power will be short term, meaning they will happen almost instantaneously, the change will affect the supply side of politics, involving the political leaders and their power to reform, and change politics on an institutional level. In addition to the condensation of power to one individual, the referendum now allows for the President to hold partisanship, meaning that the power the executive office holds can now lean towards a certain party or group of individuals. This will now lead to a disruption of civil and political liberties, where one group of citizens is highly represented whereas the other gets almost no representation at all.

Second, we can analyze the change of horizontal accountability, meaning the checks and balances of the branches of government. The referendum takes legislation’s power to hold the executive office accountable away in three specific ways. The first, is that parliament no longer oversees the council of ministers, the only power they have to make a change is that they can offer written submissions to only the Vice President, a newly added position, and to the Ministers. While this seems reasonable. Both these groups are accountable to only the President, not to the people or legislation. Second, in order to re-pass a bill the President vetoes, the Parliament now needs an absolute Majority to get the Bill passed, this makes it almost impossible for Parliament to pass any Bill that is not allowed by the President. Finally, the process of impeachment has changed drastically, involving a vote higher than the absolute majority, an additional review by a separate committee, and another ⅔ majority in order to get the case sent for a final review. In other words, the Parliament has now a very limited process in how they can hold the President accountable. On the side of the judicial branch, the President goes from appointing four out of twenty-two judges, to four out of thirteen, with an additional two being appointed from his council of Ministers. This is a clear decline of democratic qualities in a government. Losing the ability to hold your executive office accountable allows for free reign of any legislation, and an ultimate power to a single individual. Officials will no longer have to provide facts to justify their actions, and the capacity to impose negative sanctions on questionable actions has been almost wiped away with the newly passed referendum.

Finally, a manipulation of elections strategically in the newly passed referendum will lead to a compromised electoral system, removing government’s limited duration and constitutional limits. The referendum, in its final dramatic change, alters the process of the dissolution of Parliament. Essentially, the President can dissolve Parliament at anytime, without dissolving his own office, but if parliament wants to dissolve themselves it must include the office of the President. However, if the President is in his second term, which is the technical legal limit, but was re elected with the popular vote, he is allowed to surpass the restriction of his term limit and hold a third term. While this may be a rare occurrence depending on the President’s popularity with the people, it is possible for a President to old office for decades at a time, superseding electoral procedures and disregarding that government should have limited duration.

These changes, due to the referendum passed, will slowly destroy democratic institutions, but there is a possible way to stop the changes from leading to more democratic backsliding. The referendum creates a convenient loophole for Parliament, that if used correctly could stop an autocratic leader from rising, and soon abolish the referendum. The loophole states that is any Presidential decree contradicts fundamental civil rights and responsibilities in the constitution, it is not allowed to pass, regardless of the majority. It also states that if the decree contradicts a law, the law takes precedence, and that the President cannot overturn existing laws where Parliament was once involved. While this seems like a very small loophole, it is enough to catch the dissolution of these democratic institutions and potentially save Turkey from an incremental democratic backslide.

The Turkish constitutional referendum, explained

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/tu.html

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/16/erdogan-claims-victory-in-turkish-constitutional-referendum

3 Comments

  1. JASON GUSTAVO BALLEJO

    March 13, 2018 at 2:42 am

    I completely agree with you Julia in that this will definitely lead to democratic backsliding. In fact, with the information you have provided about this referendum passed by by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, it appears that he is on the path to becoming Turkey’s autocrat. It seems to me that President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is driven by self interest and although lots of people are against this referendum, sadly maybe nothing will be able to reverse it. We can see examples in other countries where politicians are elected into office or simply people with authority change laws to their favor and their people cannot do anything about it. A good one is Mexico with the PRI party president Enrique Pena who was simply an office-seeking candidate and now has the authority of a dictator and is leading Mexico away from a democracy and hurting the progression of its economy due to self interest.

  2. JOSEPH O NEUHEISEL

    March 15, 2018 at 1:06 am

    I also chose Turkey as an example of democratic erosion and I think you hit the nail on the head, this new refernedum that gives Erdogan much more power is a problem for democracy and will cause turkey to fall into an authroitarian government if it hasnt already. One thing in the referendum that I thought you also could have mentioned was the fact that since the judiciary branch in turkey is not independent of the president, Erdogan wont have proper checks and balances to monitor his decisions and actions. That said, I really like your points you made and the examples you brought in. I also really liked how you stated a way for Turkey to help itself from falling into an authritarian society in the last paragraph and gave examples of how it could be done.

  3. JONATHAN PAUL KIDD

    March 15, 2018 at 2:18 pm

    I enjoyed your post Julia! The way you presented your argument was extremely concise and clearly laid out the elements within the Turkish Government that could lead to to an autocracy. I really liked how you focused on the referendum, specifically the loophole it has. I think it is important for us to remember that often times a policy can have multiple (and often opposite) effects depending on how they are used. I am very interested to see wether the loophole is used to prevent or encourage democratic backsliding, thanks for sharing!

Leave a Reply