Turkey referendum campaign takes nasty turn

Judges and prosecutors' association YARSAV called on Erdoğan to respect the law.

"We openly invite the prime minister to convene parliament and shut Yarsav down if he has the power to do so," Omer Faruk Eminağaoğlu, one of the association's leaders, declared.

Eyüp Can of the Referans daily commented on the TÜSİAD-Erdoğan row over the constitutional amendment package referendum in the following manner: "If we are talking about the culture of democracy at a minimum level, no-one can be forced to reveal his/her vote." 

However, Can refers to an old saying, "one who is impartial will be pushed aside," stressing how difficult is to remain impartial.

Güngör Uras of the Milliyet daily believes that Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan threatened TÜSİAD ahead of the 12 September popular vote because the organisation is very open to the United States and the European Union.

Writing in her blog, former MEP adviser Kader Sevinç claims that Turkey’s proposed constitution amendments fail to continue its path of Europeanisation.

"The opposition CHP will not support the AKP’s efforts to change the constitution due to the need for social consensus and a question of principles: the CHP wants a Constitution inspired by European democratic values", she writes.

The main objectives of the CHP’s constitutional amendments on the other hand, include "the principle of secularism as one of the main pillars of the Turkish Republic, judicial independence and the strengthening of women rights" according to Sevinç.

Writing for the Hurriyet daily, Yusuf Kanli described writers supporting the AKP as trying to "fool the nation in supporting a yes vote.

"These writers say that those who support a 'no' vote were unaware that they indeed are opposing a constitutional text which would provide wider liberties compared to the existing Constitution… as if the clause lifting Provisional Article 15 of the Constitution, granting full judicial immunity to the 1980 coup leaders, would provide a chance to bring to justice the Sept. 12, 1980 coup leaders and their collaborators", he states.

Reuters presents the proposed reforms in to the Turkish constitution in brief as follows:

Constitutional Court

• The Parliament will elect three members of the court whereas the president currently appoints all members directly or indirectly. The members of the court will increase to 17 from 11 regular members and four substitutes.
• The president will select judges from various courts, the Higher Education Board, senior administrative officers and various other lawyers, widening his choice of appointees.
• Court membership will be limited to one term of 12 years. The only limit currently is a retirement age of 65.
• The reforms also revise the functions and powers of the court, giving the right of individual recourse to the court and allowing for judicial review of the court's decisions to try the parliament speaker and military chiefs.

Judges and prosecutors

• The other most controversial element of the package is reform of the High Board of Judges and Prosecutors (HSYK), which appoints senior judicial figures and which has frequently clashed with the government. The EU has called for reform of the HSYK to ensure its independence, but critics say the AK Party wants to take over the judiciary to push its own agenda.
• The reforms increase the number of members to 22 regular and 12 substitute members from the current seven members, broadening the representation of judicial officials.

Military justice

• The jurisdiction of the military courts will be limited to the handling of military offences under the reforms. Offences against state security and the constitutional order will be dealt with exclusively by the civil judiciary.
• Appeals will be possible against decisions by the Supreme Military Council to discharge officers.
• The reforms also abolish an article which prevents the trial of members of the National Security Council formed after the 1980 military coup. This would technically pave the way for those behind the coup to be tried, but it is unclear whether this would be feasible in practice.