In December 2013, Turkey pulled through a great crisis. In December 17 – 25, the country came face to face with a coup attempt of a group, which uses some corruption files as a shield and weapon, and which had been placed within the judiciary and police. The coup attempt continued for months as this group, which wiretapped the whole country, published these in a way that is convenient for them and circumvented the rulership, and while some groups within the police and judiciary came across each other.
In the segments against the rulership, this illegitimacy had been supported with the claims like “corruption files” and “government's attempt to cover those”.
However, neither the existence of corruption files, government's reactions against the coup attempt nor their precautions, which forced the limits of a constitutional state time to time, could remove this essential fact; the coup d'état fact.
As of those days, I've written dozens of articles stating that this matter has two sides while underlining this priority. While pointing out the coup attempt and the fact that the structure behind this attempt is forming a serious source and pressure of becoming authoritative, I've also mentioned that some of the precautions taken are creating a similar situation and the country is under the pressure of the country's double authoritativeness.
Political life is dynamic. Balance points and issue centers changes place in time. As a matter of fact, while the coup attempt was in the front with such a dire display in the first period, a period after that the immoderation in the precautions taken against the coup started to coming into prominence.
With incidents that exceed democratic limits, like the arresting of the judges, Gülen-led group started going through the same things they've done to others. The changing in the HSYK (Supreme Council of Judges and Prosecutors) law was maybe an inevitable situation in obviating the coup attempt. However, while the precautions, which were supposed to be temporary, gained continuity, this paved the way for those precautions to be displayed as being connected to the government and being under their control, and caused the principle of separation of powers to be ruined.
Let's return to the present time.
Two matters are still right in the open.
First one is the Gülen-led group matter and the risk it presents for democracy. Gülen-led group cannot be only remembered by their coup attempt towards the AK Party government. Besides defiling and using all the critical law and purgation processes, we are talking about parallel state organization with their liquidation within government and field expansion policies, policies directed at hegemony over law and security units and policies directed at substituting the government on essential political matters. The struggle against this structure is long-termed and it should always be kept on the agenda.
Second matter is related with the democratic necessities of this struggle. I think that the following precaution, which I mentioned in my last article in 2014, on this matter is still valid:
“No extraordinary situation removes the rules of the law and the necessity and principle of their supervision. The government should also adapt to these principles in the struggle against the Gülen-led group, despite all the difficulties, the existence style of the Gülen-led group and the institutions it hides behind, like the judiciary…”
The recent developments related with this binary situation were decisions of the Constitutional Court related with some individual applications within the context of the Gülen-led group investigation and their cancellation decision related with the “law that shuts down prep schools”.
The justified decision related with the cancellation of the law is not yet announced. However, we are assuming that the Constitutional Court found the law in question incongruous with the 13th Clause, which regulates the limitation of liberties and fundamental rights, and the 42nd Clause, which secures the usage of educational rights freely, of the Constitution. The Constitutional Court is pointing at the administration of the precaution taken by this decision, rather than the precaution itself, and stating that in terms of form it's not suitable for democratic and judicial methods. The government should take this into consideration and should interpret it like this, without getting into a conflict with the Constitutional Court. Because it's clear that the Gülen-led group – prep schools relation is forming the human resource and starting point of this dark organization. Every democratic government should take precautions against such situation, as long as the legislated laws pursue democracy…
As a matter of fact, the most important evidence, alongside the cancellation decision, that shows that the Constitutional Court is not adopting a political attitude against or on the side of the Gülen-led group, but rather it's only attributing itself with legal warnings, are; the 4 separate decisions that were taken yesterday. Each of them is an individual application filed by the members of the Gülen-led group and each one of them had been declined. The declination of Fethullah Gülen's application related with the link between the parallel structure investigation and hate speech, and Hidayet Karaca's application claiming that his rights were seized concerning imprisonment, are important developments.
If you are not one-dimensional and obsessed; this is the reality you will reach.