Governmental System Discussions Ahead of the 2023 Elections: Why the Nation Alliance's Proposal for Semi-Presidentialism Is not a Viable Option.

• Author: Uzun, Cem Duran

Introduction

Turkiye will hold presidential and parliamentary elections on May 14, 2023. The February 6, 2023 earthquakes, together with the economy, domestic politics and foreign policy, and national security, will be the main items on the electoral agenda. At the same time, the drafting of a new constitution and the system of government will remain subjects of public debate as major issues in domestic politics. In 2017, Turkiye held a constitutional referendum to amend its Constitution after long years of aiming to abandon parliamentarism and adopt a new system of government that was rooted in presidentialism yet had certain unique aspects. Opposition parties have constantly criticized that new system since then, calling for the restoration of parliamentarism. As a matter of fact, it was the parliamentary system's restoration that initially brought together and motivated the six opposition parties that currently call themselves the Table of Six.

This article analyzes the approaches of the two major electoral alliances set to compete in the upcoming elections, instead of focusing on each political party's proposed system of government separately. The Justice and Development Party (AK Party) and the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) will contest the 2023 elections under the People's Alliance banner -as they did in 2018. In contrast, the Nation Alliance, which the Republican People's Party (CHP) formed with the Good Party (IP) in the most recent general elections, is expected to enlarge by incorporating the Felicity Party (SP), the Democracy and Progress Party (DEVA), the Future Party (GP), and the Democratic Party (DP). Indeed, those six parties, which identify themselves as the Table of Six, have been meeting regularly and forming working groups to develop common policies. Judging by public statements by both alliances, the drafting of a new constitution and the system of government will presumably be major issues on their campaign trail.

The AK Party and MHP, which formed the People's Alliance, designed Turkiye's new system of government, which became operational on July 9, 2018, and campaigned for its adoption through a constitutional referendum in 2017. Accordingly, the People's Alliance maintains that the presidential system must remain intact and possibly be consolidated. Furthermore, it reflects on five years of experience and discussions to acknowledge the possibility of implementing certain reforms. In other words, the ruling alliance does not reject proposed changes, which are intended to rehabilitate the system, categorically. The People's Alliance also pledges to make harmonization laws, which Parliament was unable to pass in 2018 due to early elections and a quicker-than-planned transition to presidentialism and to build on administrative reforms that Turkiye implemented simultaneously with the new system's adoption.

Last but not least, it is necessary to note that the AK Party and President Recep Tayyip Erdogan have not limited themselves to reforming the system of government and have been urging all political parties, without any preconditions, to participate in the drafting of a completely new constitution for a very long time. As such, those calls and the clues that a new draft constitution, which the AK Party commissioned a scientific board to prepare, regarding the system of government also deserve attention.

In contrast, the Table of Six unveiled its concrete proposals for constitutional reform in two documents. The first one, called the "Augmented Parliamentary System", was released on February 28, 2022, and the second one, titled the "Constitutional Reform Proposal for the Augmented Parliamentary System," was released on November 28, 2022. It can be argued that Turkiye's opposition parties did not work harder or agreed more on anything except overhauling the system of government. This article will provide detailed information about the key aspects of the Table of Six's proposal for an "augmented" parliamentary system, how it differs from the pre-2017 parliamentary system, and how it intends to design the legislative and executive branches. Subsequently, it will discuss the meaning of "augmented" parliamentarism, whether the proposed arrangement qualifies as a parliamentary system, the reasons why critics have accused the opposition of having designed a semi-presidential (as opposed to parliamentary) system, and that system's applicability in Turkiye. This article will pay special attention to the president's powers and election by the people as part of that analysis and reflect on the proposed system with reference to past crises in Turkish political life. Therefore, the proposed system will work like a semi-presidential system, not a parliamentary system. It can be said that this system, which has uncertainties, will cause two-headedness, conflict and crises in the executive.

The Presidential System and the People's Alliance ahead of the 2023 Elections

First and foremost, this section analyzes the fundamental qualities of the Turkish presidential system of government, which was designed by the political parties that later formed the People's Alliance and was adopted in the 2017 constitutional referendum. Later, it provides a summary of the discussions and lines of criticism regarding that system. Finally, it evaluates the People's Alliance's position on Turkiye's political system ahead of the 2023 elections.

Basic Characteristics of the Turkish Presidential System

Turkish presidents have always had a broader range of power than heads of state under the parliamentary system. The country's various constitutions, which were drafted in the wake of military coups, were designed based on the assumption that the president would always be a military member. As such, those jurists imagined the Presidency as a body of tutelage over civilian politics. (1) That is why presidential elections at the Turkish Parliament were traditionally surrounded by political crises and tension. The 2007 presidential election took place under such conditions, as the Turkish Armed Forces (TAF) issued a memorandum and a controversial Constitutional Court ruling created a deadlock. (2) In response to those developments, the AK Party called for a constitutional referendum (3) to introduce direct presidential elections and shift the country's system of government from parliamentarism to semi-presidentialism.

The process of changing the system of government, which started in 2007, resulted in the adoption of a new system of government in 2017. On April 16, 2017, the people voted for constitutional amendments (which became effective on July 9, 2018) (4) to adopt a new system of government under which the executive would consist of a single popularly elected official. Those amendments, which focused on the legislative and executive branches, entailed an overhaul of the system of government that the 1982 Constitution had put in place.

The constitutional reform package (which also addressed issues other than the system of government) (5) resulted in the following changes: (6)

(i) The Council of Ministers was removed from Article 8, which related to executive authority and duties, to give executive powers to the President alone (Article 16).

(ii) It was decided that presidential and parliamentary elections would be held simultaneously (Article 4).

(iii) The vote of confidence and motions of censure, which reflected the executive's political accountability to the legislature, was abolished (Article 6).

(iv) The clause relating to cutting off the elected President's ties with their political party was struck down (Article 7).

(v) The amended text stated that the President would serve as head of state and exercise executive authority and make necessary arrangements for presidential powers (Article 8).

(vi) The president ceased to be criminally unaccountable and it was decided how presidents would be held accountable for crimes related to their official duties and other types of misconduct (Article 9).

(vii) It was decided that the President could appoint multiple vice presidents and that vice presidents and Cabinet ministers would cease to be parliamentarians (Article 10).

(viii) It was decided that vice presidents and Cabinet ministers were politically accountable to the President and determined how their criminal liabilities would be treated (Article 11).

(ix) The President and the Parliament were permitted to renew elections. Elections would be held for a president and the legislature simultaneously if and when one of them calls for new elections (Article 12).

(x) The budget will be prepared by the President and approved by the Parliament. If Parliament does not approve the draft budget, it will pass a temporary budget law. Failure to take that step shall result in the previous year's budget being automatically approved with an increase according to the official re-appraisal rate (Article 16).

It is quite obvious that the new system of government handed executive power to the popularly elected president with no political accountability to the legislative branch. Since the Prime Ministry and the Council of Ministers were abolished, the executive branch consists of a single wing. Vice presidents and ministers have no individual or collective liability vis-a-vis Parliament. Keeping those main characteristics in mind, it is possible to say that the country abandoned the parliamentary system and adopted a new system of government that bears a striking similarity to presidentialism. (7) Kemal Gozler, a constitutional lawyer, compared the new system with the primary and secondary characteristics of presidentialism and parliamentarism to conclude that it shared four characteristics with presidentialism yet does not qualify as a presidential system since the President and the Parliament have the authority to renew elections. (8)

One could argue that the 'presidential' system of government is based on presidentialism yet...