Turkey is a country that crosses the border between West Asia and South East Europe. The majority of the people living there are Turkish speaking Muslims, but there is a substantial population (around 18%) of Kurds and Zazas. The country is a parliamentary representative democracy, but many people take issue with its being called a full democracy. What follows is a look at why you might think Turkey is not fully democratic.
The doubts arise, no doubt, because of the fact that in Turkey's history there have been many occasions on which the military has interrupted democracy. The first of these was in 1960, when General Cemal Grsel led a coup d'tat, removing President Celal Bayar, prime minister Adnan Menderes from power, and his cabinet with him. The military ruled Turkey after this until 1965.
In 1971 the military once again intervened, but did not take full power; they offered the then president an ultimate which demanded a transition to a new government. This has been referred to as 'guided democracy'. A more serious case of military intervention came in 1980, when the army took complete control again in response to what they called 'domestic political anarchy'.
These were dark times, as extremists from either end of the political spectrum resorted to violence, and even murder, to get their voices heard. However, in 1982, a new constitution was secured via a public vote, and so the road to democracy had begun once again. The 6th of November 1983 saw the Motherland party win a victory in a democratic election, and so Turgot zal became prime minister.
The government voted in on that day has remained stable ever since, but Turkey is still just shy of enjoying full democracy. The respect in which it fails is the inclusion of article 301 in the constitution, which forbids anyone from insulting Turkey. The article has been put to use in some extremely controversial ways, most of all so when used to charge writers and other artists for mentioning things like the Armenian genocide in ways in which the government does not approve of.
The doubts arise, no doubt, because of the fact that in Turkey's history there have been many occasions on which the military has interrupted democracy. The first of these was in 1960, when General Cemal Grsel led a coup d'tat, removing President Celal Bayar, prime minister Adnan Menderes from power, and his cabinet with him. The military ruled Turkey after this until 1965.
In 1971 the military once again intervened, but did not take full power; they offered the then president an ultimate which demanded a transition to a new government. This has been referred to as 'guided democracy'. A more serious case of military intervention came in 1980, when the army took complete control again in response to what they called 'domestic political anarchy'.
These were dark times, as extremists from either end of the political spectrum resorted to violence, and even murder, to get their voices heard. However, in 1982, a new constitution was secured via a public vote, and so the road to democracy had begun once again. The 6th of November 1983 saw the Motherland party win a victory in a democratic election, and so Turgot zal became prime minister.
The government voted in on that day has remained stable ever since, but Turkey is still just shy of enjoying full democracy. The respect in which it fails is the inclusion of article 301 in the constitution, which forbids anyone from insulting Turkey. The article has been put to use in some extremely controversial ways, most of all so when used to charge writers and other artists for mentioning things like the Armenian genocide in ways in which the government does not approve of.
About the Author:
There's plenty to see on cheap holidays Turkey, such as the Chora Church in Istanbul.
No comments:
Post a Comment