PERSPECTIVES ON DEMOCRATISATION IN TURKEY

A call for democracy

TÜSİAD was founded in 1971, to play an active role in the establishment and development of a sounder economic and social infrastructure, to help Turkey take its place amongst the developed Western countries. TÜSİAD fulfilled this mission mainly in the economic area until the second half of the 1980s. As a non-governmental organisation dedicated to serving the public interest, TÜSİAD played a leading role in Turkey's adoption of the free market economy.

The second half of the 1980s showed that the establishment of a free market economy in all its dimensions was dependent on the legal and institutional structure of the country. In the same period political instability emerged as one of the main obstacles to economic and social development.

Moreover, it was widely agreed that a stable free market economy was only possible within a participatory, pluralistic democratic system. Thus, attention was focused on the factors slowing down the economic and social development of the country and those factors which were rooted in Turkish history, in its institutions and political culture.

Within this framework, TÜSİAD, while formulating necessary economic strategies for the Turkey of the next millenium, also tried strenuously to point out to the deficiencies of the existing political structure. Three studies, firstly, "Our Laws and Rights", secondly, a document about the Constitution prepared by 9 professors in 1991-92, submitted to the presidency of the Assembly and published by the latter, and thirdly, a document on the restructuring of public administration and the electoral system (1993-96) were the products of these efforts.

Is TÜSİAD alone in believing that the only possible solution for Turkey's economic and social problems and the opportunity for accelerated development lie only in an economically and socially democratic society?

No. The fact that Turkey had to sign the Customs Union Agreemen in 1995 showed that integration with Europe is, for Turkey, a state policy. During this period the support the public gave to such efforts showed that a large proportion of the society shared the same attitude. It is generally accepted now that to become fully-integrated in Europe, a broader application of democracy in economics and politics is required, and this is a pre-condition. Furthermore, whenever any problem is discussed, the two words which appear most frequently are consensus and dialogue. The fact that they do occur so often suggests that there is a real longing for a democratic society where the meaning of these words may become realised.

During such a period it was inevitable that some political and social resistance to the developments that paved the way to a more open, participatory, and more transparent system should have appeared. As a matter of fact, the economic and social conjunctures strengthened these points of resistance. Consequently, democracy could not broaden its sphere of influence; on the contrary, it started to undergo a retrogression.

What was clearly understood was that institutionalisation of economic and social democracy was not an inevitable process that the country would go through sooner or later, but could only be the outcome of the continuous efforts of the people who believed in democracy as the only solution.

In this context, TÜSİAD, while trying to find ways of strengthening and stabilizing the economy, also emphasised the need to eliminate the deficiencies of Turkish democracy so that political instability was no longer an obstacle in the path of economic development. Whereas this subject was considered to be of primary importance with regard to TÜSİAD's mission, it became in 1996 a top priority to be studied in depth. The events that coincided with the publication of this report, convinced us once again that this study was a timely response to Turkey's needs.

While the last corrections were being made, we read in the papers that the Susurluk investigation had been closed and 35 people had been convicted; that a young woman's religious convictions were exploited and she was later abused by the leader of her religious sect. It was a period in which, a year after Özdemir Sabanc›'s assasination, one of the perpetrators of this barbaric act was captured and pleaded quilty, it was the first anniversary of journalist Metin Göktepe's death in police custody, and it was the moment when the graverobbers who had stolen the corpse of Turkey's beloved and distinguished Vehbi Koç were arrested. All these events form an embarrassing picture of democracy, human rights, clean politics/clean society and humanity in Turkey. A profound lack of confidence in the system is starting to permeate all sectors of society. While internal tension increases in the country, some circles seek to consolidate national unity by playing on the theme of "external enemies".

This report "Perspectives on Democratisation in Turkey", written by Prof.Dr.Bülent Tanör, member of the Law Faculty of Istanbul University, under the auspices of TÜSİAD's Parliamentary Commission and under the coordination of Can Paker , chairperson of the commission, has been conceived in such a context.

Do we really need such a report?

Yes. Because this report takes Western democracies as a model. Since the people who have prepared this report have no desire to acquire political power and have no short-term political expectations, this study has been accomplished by maintaining an impartiality towards all the actors in the political arena. The legal system as a whole is examined, and no significant question has been excluded for conjunctural or political reasons. This report is comprehensive and consistent; it is constructive rather than destructive, and, while criticizing the system, it makes positive proposals. The report calls for very important changes to improve democracy in Turkey, but these changes should be made as a gradual transition within the system.

Is this the right timing for the publication of such a report?

TÜSİAD aims to define the democratic infrastructure necessary for Turkey both for attaining the level of developed Western countries and for achieving economic and political stability. Since it is not a political institution involved in the race for power, TÜSİAD's starting premises are not determined by political convenience. Democracy for TÜSİAD as well as for Turkey is not a matter of conjuncture, but rather one of principle. Moreover, in a period when people are regularly confronted with new examples of corruption, they lose confidence, either partially or completely, in the institutions of the system. Consequently, a strong desire for self-criticism and a search for solutions develop.

It is not sufficient to deal with the Susurluk scandal by putting the guilty parties in prison for a few years. What is expected, rather, is that the deficiencies in the system should be eliminated. The solution is a broader-based democracy, and the Turkish people is ready to listen, discuss and work towards this end.

Are all these TÜSİAD's duties?

Our concern with this subject necessarily follows from TÜSİAD's purpose. In our statutes this mission is defined thus: "TÜSİAD, which is committed to the universal principles of democracy and human rights, together with the freedoms of enterprise, belief and opinion, tries to foster the development of a social structure which conforms to Atatürk's principles and reforms, and strives to fortify the concepts of a democratic civil society and a secular state of law in Turkey". The association, believing that industrialists and businessmen represent the leaders and entrepreneurs of Turkish society, monitors the steps taken in this direction. Not only TÜSİAD but all Turkish citizens and all institutions representing the civil society are obliged to strive towards the improvement and internalization of democracy in this country. Our future depends on it.

Turkey's future does not lie in isolating itself from the world; on the contrary, it should keep up with global developments. The world is removing one by one all the barriers against democracy. Henceforward, economic and political relations cannot evolve independently of democracy and human rights. It is not by increased co-operation with countries less-developed than itself, but by increased co-operation with developed countries that Turkey can accelerate its economic growth, thereby gaining the competitive impetus required for the 21st century. We must organise our strategies not according to where we find ourselves now, but according to the target we wish to reach. We need to take the developed Western democracies as our model. We should see that, by adopting a more broadly based democracy in Turkey, political and economic stability will be strengthened. Rather than becoming desparate and resorting to superficial remedies, if we aimed at fundamental solutions, confidence in state and democracy would grow. In addition, this would improve Turkey's image abroad.

A broader-based democracy will certainly not result from this study, nor will it be realised by TÜSİAD alone. This can only be achieved by those who adopt the perspectives put forward in this document and who are willing to come together to reach an agreement on the details. Thus it would be possible only by the concerted efforts of groups such as: non-governmental organisations, trade unions, professional bodies, industrialists and businessmen's associations, whose struggle would be reflected in the Parliament by political parties.

After all, if we decide that "now is not the right time, or it is not our job" then we, as the true sovereigns of this land, who authorize politicians to represent us in the Parliament, we as members of civil society organisations should ask ourselves this question: If not us - who?, If not now - when?

TÜSİAD Board of Directors