As you all know, in parliamentary systems of government, the Presidents, as Head of State, stand for the state, which charges them the obligation to reflect neutrality, no matter whether they are from a political party out of the parliament. In Turkey, additionally, the President is supposed to stand for the republic and, thus, the “people of Turkey”, which enforces him to be neutral as an ethical and moral task.
The mentioned neutrality that should supposedly be considered by Presidents is of a greater importance especially in times of elections. Although the neutrality in state issues could not be properly observed throughout his presidency which is evident in the activities that he has carried out in his office so far: The immediate and absolute ratification of the government decrees and draft bills, the way of appointing university rectors, the expressions absolutely in line with those of government etc., one expected a clear attitude of neutrality from the President at least in the course of the general elections. This he pretended to show by declaring that he would not make official state visits within Turkey until the end of the elections. This can be taken to be an appreciable attitude; however, in his official visit in Poland, he transgressed the rule of neutrality more than once.
When he was asked about the questions concerning the “freedom of thought” and “freedom of press” in Turkey by referring to the journalists and authors under arrest, he reacted just like a judge saying: “those people were not arrested due to their writings, but due to what they have done as the members of illegal terrorist organizations”. It is a pity that Turkish President could clearly explain his prejudices about uncompleted case in which nobody is either guilty or innocent yet, as the universal rule of “presumption of innocence” envisages. This saying conspicuously showed the prejudices in background coated by the pretensions of so-called neutrality.
A second infraction of neutrality was in the course of the interview with the journalists, in which President Gul claimed to know that some MPs were threatened by the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) not to participate in elections of President in the parliament in 2007. Although the ones, claimed to do that denied the allegations, the agenda-setting mechanism of the power functions very well. It is another pity that Turkish politics
was thought to need to be interfered at the level of President, when we are five days away from the general elections. I think the subjects of the story are consoling themselves by saying “anything goes in politics”.
While saying these all, President Gul should have considered the peace and the safety of the election-process in Turkey which is psychologically a necessity with the sense of duty. Therefore I wish for President Gul to be more neutral, to reflect the will of the whole people regardless of any social cleavage and division. It is an ethical responsibility while standing for the “people”.
I expect the elections will bring people more hope and not more despair… I hope people will decide in its own favour…
Edgar ŞAR
Edgar.Sar@PolitikaDergisi.com