13.09.2025 19:31
In a workshop on the constitution organized by HÜDA PAR, former Speaker of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, Prof. Dr. Mustafa Şentop, emphasized that the new constitution should be inclusive. Şentop stated, "Everyone living in Turkey should find themselves in the constitution."
Former Speaker of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, Prof. Dr. Mustafa Şentop, emphasized that the new constitution should be inclusive at the constitutional workshop organized by HÜDA PAR. Şentop stated, "Everyone living in Turkey should find themselves in the constitution."
The "Search for Social Consensus and New Constitution" workshop was organized by the Human Rights and Legal Affairs Presidency of HÜDA PAR in Istanbul.
"EVERYONE SHOULD FIND THEMSELVES IN THE CONSTITUTION" Speaking at the workshop, Former Speaker of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, Prof. Dr. Mustafa Şentop, said, "I believe that the discussion of a new constitution is valuable. Inclusiveness in the constitution is important. Everyone living in Turkey should find themselves in the constitution and believe wholeheartedly that the constitution addresses them."
The 29th President of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, Prof. Dr. Mustafa Şentop, gave a presentation titled "Why a New Constitution? Turkey's Constitutional Journey." At the beginning of his speech, Şentop thanked HÜDA PAR for organizing the workshop, stating that such programs focusing on the constitution are very valuable.
"CONSTITUTIONAL DISCUSSIONS HAVE ALWAYS BROUGHT TURKEY TO A BETTER PLACE" Şentop stated that constitutional discussions are inherently valuable and beneficial, saying, "I believe that constitutional discussions have always brought Turkey to a better place regarding the rule of law and freedoms. There are certain reasons and dynamics behind this. For nearly 40 years, I have been someone who has spoken and thought about these issues in my own capacity. God granted me the opportunity to be involved in some important works. Especially between 2011 and 2013, I was part of the Constitutional Reconciliation Commission established in the Grand National Assembly of Turkey. That commission was the first time political parties with groups in Turkey presented a complete constitutional proposal to the Assembly.
"THAT PROCESS WAS NOT SUCCESSFUL" Before that, there had been proposals regarding certain parts or articles of the constitution, but for the first time, we saw the experience of a commission as a whole. These texts are available on the Grand National Assembly of Turkey's website. Of course, that process was not successful. A complete consensus was reached on about 65 articles. The point where it got stuck was the discussion of the government system. At that time, in 2012, we, as the AK Party, proposed a government system based on a presidential system to the commission. All the other political parties in the commission categorically stated that they would not discuss this. In other words, each party's proposal was put forward, discussed, and debated. However, they said they would not discuss the presidential system categorically."
"THERE IS A CONSTITUTIONAL DISCUSSION IN TURKEY SIMILAR TO FRANCE" Şentop then explained that the change in the government system was realized with very few revisions. He pointed out that keeping Turkey within the constitutional discussion is very important, stating that this situation has always advanced Turkey.
Şentop said, "The first point I want to express is why the constitution is being discussed in Turkey. When we look at it roughly, there are some countries that experience constitutional discussions, but in many countries, the constitution is not discussed. There is no constitutional discussion in America or England. However, there is a constitutional discussion in France. There is a constitutional discussion in Turkey similar to that in France. Over the past 150 years, the constitution has always been on the agenda; we can call it a kind of constitutional romanticism. When we research this a bit on the examples of England, France, and Turkey, I think the fundamental issue is tied to the traditions and customs of politics and public law."
HE EXPLAINED WITH HISTORICAL EXAMPLES Continuing his speech, Şentop conveyed the constitutional discussions through the examples of England and France, and spoke about the historical practices in Turkey:
"The reasons for the preparation of constitutions in our country throughout history differ from those in other constitutional traditions around the world. When the 1876 Constitution was prepared, there were more international concerns. After the Tanzimat, a bureaucracy developed within the state outside of the sultan. Of course, there was no legal framework for this bureaucracy to rely on. The 1921 Constitution is not actually a complete constitution. As you know, there is the Kanun-ı Esasi. This Kanun-ı Esasi was prepared according to the Assembly of Istanbul. However, a parliament was established in Ankara in 1921, so we can say that the parliament in Istanbul was actually moved to Ankara. There is no constitutional text that would serve as the basis for the activities of the parliament in Ankara. The Teşkilat-ı Esasiye law was designed as a text to enable this structure in Ankara to function and to serve as a constitutional foundation. After the declaration of the Republic, the 1924 Constitution was created. This constitution is a text that establishes a constitutional ground covering the establishment of a new government and the shape of the state.
In the post-1945 world, the victors of the war are creating a new political environment in the new world. Democracy, multi-party life, etc. For this reason, Turkey is also forced to transition to a multi-party life in 1945. After 1945, it is said that there should be free elections and a party life, but it was desired that 'our children' govern. However, this was not possible with the method of free elections. Therefore, a formula was developed that said, 'Let there be free elections, whoever wins can win, but let them govern like 'our children.' This is done through the constitution. In other words, a political meaning is attributed to the constitution. In fact, many issues that are normally the domain of governments and many economic, cultural, and social issues begin to be regulated in constitutions. In fact, these are normally matters for governments to decide, but they are framed in constitutions. In other words, they start to do this so that 'whoever comes to the government does not go beyond a certain limit.'
"IT IS APPARENT THAT CHP HAS NO CHANCE TO COME TO POWER AGAIN THROUGH ELECTIONS" A similar thing is happening in Turkey as well. The period between 1950 and 1960 is a free period. The Republican People's Party, which has been governing Turkey for many years with a democracy that has elections but no options, loses the election in 1950. The Democrat Party wins. In 1954 and 1957, the Republican People's Party loses again. It is apparent that the Republican People's Party has no chance to come to power again through elections. For this reason, they come to power through a coup, but it is not possible to remain in power permanently through a coup. Because sooner or later, elections must be held. Therefore, a formula is needed that will bring an understanding that cannot come to power through elections to power even if it does not win the elections. That formula is the constitution. A framework is established in the constitution. In a sense, a dual power area is created in Turkey.
```html
There is an elected power in the picture, and there is also a power area that does not need elections; such as the judiciary, armed forces, and civil bureaucracy. The fundamental decisions are made by the power that does not need elections.
"IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE POWER, YOU WON'T SPEAK UP" Let me express this with an example; there are vehicles used for driver training. From the outside, a car looks no different from other cars. But there is a difference inside, which is that on the right side, there is an instructor who provides driving training. In front of this instructor, there are mechanisms to control the vehicle. Just in case the novice driver makes a mistake, the instructor can intervene with the mechanisms in front of them. The system has been set up like this since '61. The Prime Minister wins the election, takes the key, sits in the car, starts it, and steps on the gas. After a while, they realize that despite stepping on the gas, the vehicle is not moving forward. On the contrary, it starts to slow down. After a while, they understand that there is someone on the side who is intervening with the vehicle. What will they do? Either they will take them down, or if they have the power, they will fight. If they don't have the power, they won't speak up. Elected politicians in Turkey have adopted this.
"OUR MAIN ISSUE IS NOT IN THE CONSTITUTION" Şentop emphasized, "I believe that with the new government system, the mechanism has been dismantled. Now, it doesn't matter who sits on the right side; there is no difference from those sitting in the back."
Şentop highlighted that law can produce effective results when it is integrated within people's worldviews. "That's why I consider the constitutional debates in Turkey important. I believe they are beneficial. There are some fundamental reasons why the constitution is still being debated in Turkey. Political and public traditions are very important. When you eliminate these, it is very difficult to establish something new. But our main issue is not in the constitution; beyond that, we have a much more fundamental problem related to the rule of law and legal culture. Changing the rules, making new laws and constitutions will not fully solve our problems. Undoubtedly, I believe that the discussion of a new constitution is valuable as a step. Inclusiveness in the constitution is important. Everyone living in Turkey must find themselves in the constitution, believe that the constitution addresses them, and wholeheartedly accept it. This is a process. I believe that constitutional debates will lead us there."
```