Does Erdogan’s Peace Process Conflict With Rule of Law?
Ersan Sen, a well-known criminal-law expert, argues that Turkish Prime Minister Racep Tayyep Erdogan’s Kurdish initiative may undermine the role of parliament and prospects for a lasting settlement, writes Tulin Daloglu.
Legally speaking, said Ersan Sen, a professor and well-known expert on criminal law, the government-led process aiming to end the armed Kurdish movement that since 1984 has cost heavily in blood and treasure to the nation and left at least 40,000 dead “ought to be dealt with under the Turkish parliament’s roof. Any act or perception that runs to the contrary simply suggests that ‘we are the government, therefore we hold the power, and whatever we say should be regarded as correct. That violates the checks-and-balances system in the existing parliamentary order.”
Indeed, this atmosphere that Sen describes quite accurately is ironic, as the Justice and Development Party (AKP) government puts much emphasis on honoring democratic values in state governance. The old Turkey, they claim, meaning the era between the foundation of the republic in 1923 until the AKP came to power in 2002, failed to uphold the rules of a democratic state. Moreover, the AKP takes a special interest in criticizing the single-party era represented by the Republican People’s Party (CHP) until 1946, painting the perception that “they were bad, we’re good; they lacked conscience, we hold moral upper hand.”
