Around two weeks ago, the Turkish people voted in support of changing a portion of their constitution in order to grant President Erdogan’s additional far reaching powers in the government.
The referendum in its totality, has been under some harsh scrutiny since it was passed due to some ballots tallied without official stamps or markings. Some opposition parties in Turkey are in favor of this referendum annulment for reasons such as voter fraud, the elimination of the Prime Minister’s office and even allowing Erdogan to possibly remain president until 2029. The main opposition parties, in conjunction with civil liberty groups also have solid evidence that these fraudulent votes account to around 2 million.
With a narrow victory of 51.4%, there is no doubt that the country is deeply divided when it comes to both how the referendum was passed and its various outcomes.
For many, Turks who are pro-Erdogan see this public vote as giving the president more power to allow for additional economic growth and development, given his track record in these areas. On the other the hand, the opposition parties are demanding a 37% recount of votes while also firmly believing that this referendum is a sudden means to acquire more power and secure his position without the influence of outside forces. Erdogan’s supporters see the changes as effective government-based alternatives to secure a more stable, prosperous financial future for Turkey.
Tana de Zulueta, who is currently the head of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, has recently released a report stating that the opposition campaign was muted and the media coverage was partial.
More importantly, Zuleta confirmed that the electoral authority’s decision to accept unauthorized ballots resulted in a legal contradiction, changing the validity criteria. This public vote signifies the first time that Erdogan has actually lost the majority in large cities such as Istanbul, Ankara, and Izmir.
The recent changes will see the removal of the prime minister position, with those responsibilities transferred over to the president. Minimizing the role of the prime minister has been an ongoing discourse for some time now, but the referendum will structurally alter how power is handled in both positions. Throughout his political career, Erdogan has made it clear that he strongly supported a presidential system that would include extensive executive authority.
With regard to appointing Supreme Court members, the vote has also altered the number of members the president can appoint from 4 out of 22 to nearly half (5 out of 13). Unlike before when the president was not permitted to have any political affiliations under the constitution, the new referendum would allow the president to align with a political party.
Another main area in which Erdogan will have additional power will be circumventing parliament when it comes to regulating ministries and handling senior civil servants. While the president would be unable to alter or modify decrees related to human rights or freedoms, Erdogan would have the ability to bypass the cabinet, declaring a state of emergency.
In terms of legally repealing the referendum, lawmakers from the CHP (the Republican People’s Party) have recently appealed to ask the European Court of Human Rights to provide insight into this divisive public vote. Only time will tell if there will be any legal amendments as a result of these appeals in the weeks to come.