Speaker of Parliament Numan Kurtulmuş held a meeting on Friday with the deputy chairs of parliamentary groups from parties represented in the Grand National Assembly to discuss the formation of a new commission related to the peace process. Attendees included Abdulhamit Gül of the Justice and Development Party (AKP), Murat Emir of the Republican People’s Party (CHP), Gülüstan Kılıç Koçyiğit of the Peoples’ Equality and Democracy Party (DEM Party), Erkan Akçay of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), Buğra Kavuncu of the Good Party (İYİ Party), and Bülent Kaya of the New Path Party (Yeni Yol Partisi).
Serhat Eren, MP for Amed (Diyarbakır) from the DEM Party, responded to our questions regarding the commission expected to take shape following the parliamentary meeting. Eren emphasized that the commission must begin by clearly defining its mandate, and that it should be both inclusive and participatory in structure, while also embodying the qualities observed in similar international examples.
A clear mandate must be defined
Serhat Eren underlined the importance of the commission first establishing a clear mandate. He also emphasized the need for it to be inclusive and participatory: “The commission we expect to be formed must begin by defining its scope of responsibility. Once this is clarified, the number of members should be determined accordingly. Sometimes, having too many members can make a commission unwieldy. Therefore, its mandate should also shape its size.
We always insist that the commission must be inclusive and participatory. It should be structured to represent the full breadth of Turkish society. Of course, it will include the political parties currently represented in parliament, but there are also nearly ten other political parties without parliamentary groups. In order to ensure that the process of peace and resolution becomes a societal one, these parties, despite lacking group status, must also be included. Likewise, there are independent members of parliament with no party affiliation. I do not know what the exact formula would be, but they, too, must have a place in this commission. What we mean by inclusive and participatory is precisely this. The commission should be broad and comprehensive in its structure.
For now, the commission is being established within the framework of parliament and consists of political parties, under the initiative of the Speaker of Parliament. But in the future, this body must evolve into a commission with broader reach. A commission composed solely of MPs from parties currently represented in parliament would be too narrow and insufficient to carry and sustain such a process. I believe it would fall short of being a functional and effective body. The commission should perhaps have the authority to establish sub-committees. These sub-committees could include civil society organizations, legal associations, and even political parties from Kurdistan and across Turkey that are not currently represented in parliament. Through these sub-committees, those parties could be incorporated into the process as well.”
Legal immunity must be provided for all actors involved
Serhat Eren of the DEM Party stated that, based on lessons from earlier efforts, a legal framework ensuring immunity must be established for all actors involved in the process.
Eren emphasized the importance of this step for enabling broad participation: “It is said that nearly 70 percent of the public supports this process. Even by global standards, that is a remarkably strong figure. Preserving that support is essential. To achieve that, trust must be built and that requires concrete, confidence-building measures. Above all, it requires a legal foundation. From the beginning, we have stressed the need to establish this legal basis.
We experienced many things during the 2013–2015 period. Most of the individuals who took part in the peace process at that time were left without legal protection. When the process broke down, they were exposed to serious risks. Only actors on the state’s side were able to benefit from legal cover. Today, as I said earlier, there is 70 percent support for the process. That support is represented in parliament, in political parties, and in civil society organizations. For all these actors to play a role, they must feel secure. That is why legal immunity is necessary.
For instance, we know that many civil society organizations, legal bodies, professional associations, and even political parties had intended to attend the July 11 ceremony held in South Kurdistan (Başur). But we listened to their concerns and saw that they chose not to participate because of them. If we truly want this process to be inclusive and participatory, the commission must urgently prepare a draft legal framework and present it to parliament. This is very importance.”
Risks must be eliminated
Serhat Eren stated that an independent observer delegation should accompany the process. Referring specifically to Indonesia as an example, he drew attention to the risks involved in the process: “This commission could, within a short time, do something important. We’ve seen this in many global examples, there needs to be an independent monitoring mechanism. When we talk about an independent monitoring mechanism, some circles tend to react with allergy when Europe is mentioned. But there are many examples: Colombia, the Philippines, Indonesia, Finland. Perhaps one of the most experienced examples in the world is Indonesia. So, an independent monitoring delegation made up of representatives from these countries could help facilitate this process. I believe it’s important for the commission to act as a facilitator and an enabler, especially when blockages or difficulties arise. There could also be a team from the United Nations, and they could play a significant role in ensuring the process flows and remains on track.
We remember this from the 2013–2015 period. Ultimately, governments tend to approach such processes like this: if they believe the process weakens their power, they might move to disrupt or even end it. That’s why, to eliminate that risk, we may need to consider the following: let’s say there’s an election a year from now. If the AKP sees in polls that the process is harming them as the ruling party, they may choose to end it. Therefore, in order to minimize this risk, the government must not be the sole actor managing the process. At the same time, the process must be extended across all sectors of society. By all sectors, I mean all political parties, all segments, all dynamics, civil society organizations and every part of this country that carries a concern for democracy. By including them, by distributing the responsibility across all of society’s dynamics, we can achieve a healthier functioning.
Otherwise, if the government is the only producer of this process, it could decide to dismantle or end it the moment it perceives a threat. That’s why I say: yes, the political and legal responsibility certainly lies with the government, but if the government is the only driver of this process, there will always be a risk. Therefore, including all social dynamics and making them responsible for the process might help reduce that risk.
This commission is perhaps being formed for the first time within the structure of parliament, because in global examples, you rarely see such commissions formed within legislative bodies. Most commissions tend to be more independent. Still, the fact that this commission is being formed under parliament is important. As I mentioned earlier, independent commissions could also be established.
In addition, there are many academics, both in Turkey and abroad, who have studied conflict and its resolution, who have invested serious thought into this field. Including them in this process, drawing from people who have studied and accumulated experience from many global examples, would, I believe, help ensure that this process, which began in October and is still ongoing, continues in a healthy and functional manner.”
Democratic obstacles must be removed to enable political participation
Serhat Eren shared his thoughts on what could be done in light of the emphasis on democratic integration expressed by the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), on July 11: “What I’ve said so far has been in general terms, but more specifically, once this commission is established, its first step could be to create the conditions for the PKK, which has declared a decision to disarm and dissolve itself, as it did on July 11, to participate in democratic politics, democratic life, and political life in Turkey. At this point, the commission could focus on preparing legal arrangements to enable participation in political and social life, meaning democratic struggle, not only for those who have laid down arms, but also for the thousands of people who were forced to migrate abroad and for those currently in prison. A draft framework could be developed for this purpose.
This commission should begin by creating legal mechanisms that strengthen the ground for democratic politics. It can take steps to remove the barriers to freedom of expression, press freedom, and issues like the policy of state-appointed trustees and hate speech, all of which obstruct democratic politics. These are just the first things that come to mind; there are certainly many more. And, of course, none of this can be achieved simply by declaring ‘Let’s pass a few laws.’ This will require a long-term effort.
To make this process belong to society as a whole, Abdullah Öcalan must be met with at Imralı. His conditions of freedom must be addressed and discussed in order to truly bring this process to completion. There must also be work done toward securing Mr. Öcalan’s conditions of freedom. Additionally, the commission could go into the field and conduct outreach with all segments of society, from legal organizations to civil society groups to political parties. Just as, though perhaps not identical, the wise persons delegation carried out a seven-region initiative during the 2013–2015 process to socialize the idea of peace and turn it into a public demand, this commission could undertake a similar effort.
Alongside legal reforms and the creation of a juridical foundation, the commission should also help initiate work and efforts in both the political and social spheres. These topics will likely be discussed in more depth over time, but the constitution, though perhaps not yet on the commission’s immediate agenda, will eventually become essential to establishing a lasting peace in this country. A societal contract will likely need to be reflected in a constitution. Therefore, even if not now, steps must be taken to pave the way for a civil, libertarian constitution that will ensure social consensus and peace. There must be a concentrated effort to draft democratic legislation.
The term ‘integration’ should not be viewed solely in a negative light. Laws enabling democratic integration are not just about assimilation, but also about ensuring the recognition of difference, of language, identity, culture, and belief, within the system itself. What I mean is that this process must guarantee these rights within the structure of the nation-state. Integration is often perceived negatively, but as far as I understand, international literature presents another dimension to it as well. I believe the commission should keep this in mind.”
Source: ANF News
