Constitutional acrobatics

Turkey is once again being dragged into a constitutional debate. The government is trying to take another turn with the “new constitution” process.

The "process" imposed by developments in the Middle East in line with imperialist plans and shaped by domestic political needs is showing signs of turning into a constitutional alliance.

DEM Party executives state that they are not against sitting at the constitutional table with the government in principle. According to the DEM Party, the constitutional agenda has nothing to do with strengthening the government or getting Erdoğan re-elected.

Meral Danış Beştaş, a member of parliament and one of the leading figures of the party, did not agree with CHP leader Özgür Özel's words, "I won't even make menemen with Erdoğan" and said, "Discussing the constitutional amendment through one person is an acceptance of 'I will lose the election'" and said that the constitutional amendment will be made in the Parliament , not by discussing it with Erdoğan.

However, the control of the Parliament is in the hands of the AKP, whose cadres, from tea makers to accountants, from neighborhood officials to Central Executive Committee members, are all determined by Erdoğan. Not only cannot the constitution be changed in the Parliament without the AKP, but it cannot even reach the 360 ​​yes votes required to take the amendment proposal to a referendum.

Therefore, it is impossible to see the Parliament, not only because it has already been rendered dysfunctional by the presidential system, but also because of its current arithmetical balances, as an arena of struggle independent of Erdoğan's authority and will.

This does not, of course, make any resistance in the Parliament meaningless. However, you either make the constitution the way Erdoğan wants or you cannot. There is no middle ground or in between for the subjects who will sit at the constitutional table.

So what kind of constitution does Erdoğan want? Erdoğan also uses careful rhetoric to avoid personalizing the issue. In order to disrupt the rightful belief that “this constitution will be made for Erdoğan” that has formed in large segments of the public and the political establishment, he claims that the constitution will be made according to the needs of the country.

However, this is not the truth either. The truth is that Erdoğan, who has lost the majority support and cannot even please his core base, is looking for a branch to hold on to as he is dragged down the slope. This branch is the new constitution... Erdoğan is looking to extend his political life by holding on to the new constitution and forming new alliances.

Yes, the 1982 Constitution, which is the product of the September 12 fascist coup, is in effect in Türkiye. Yes, this is far from being a liberal and democratic constitution. Yes, this is a constitution in the interests of the capitalist class. Yes, our country deserves a more advanced constitution to the fullest.

But… While a government that does not abide by the constitution, tramples on the constitutional rights of citizens, and falls behind even the September 12 mentality in terms of democracy and freedoms, sees misery for workers and silences its opponents, especially journalists and politicians, with imprisonment, is it the duty of opposition actors to sit side by side with this government and talk about the constitution?

The fundamental problem of Turkey in 2025 cannot be to make a better constitution in terms of text; because there is a problem of a government that does not comply with the constitution and grants rights to whomever it wants, rains down oppression on whomever it wants according to its political agenda, and shapes the judiciary as it wishes. The blockage on the path to democracy can be removed not by theoretical arrangements to be made in the constitution, but by changing this government.

It would be naive to think that political parties that are inclined to talk about the constitution today are not aware of this fact. The palace regime's "civil and democratic constitution" rhetoric is only legitimizing this project in the eyes of society. This constitution is neither desired for democracy nor freedom.

The relationship between Erdoğan and his future partners will not be established with positive rhetoric and good wishes. There is a project before us that can be carried out with demands, negotiations and ultimately a partnership of interests. But none of this will be able to prevent society's need to get rid of this government and the demand for change that is growing stronger every day.