Kılıçdaroğlu stokes tension again in parliament: You are selling parliament

Kılıçdaroğlu stoked tension again as he addressed parliament. With Kılıçdaroğlu saying that parliament had been surrendered to the president, voices rose from the AKP benches. At this, CHP General Chair Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu said, ‘You have to listen to me. You speak of the national will and the national will. You do not respect the national will. Your consciences are troubled but you will hear me out. I am obliged to defend the rights of this national will.’ Kılıçdaroğlu burst into the salvo, ‘You are selling parliament’ at the MPs heckling him.
 

THIS IS A COUP AGAINST THE NATIONAL WILL. FULL STOP.

Kılıçdaroğlu said the following in reply to Parliamentary Speaker Kahraman:

I want Turkey to be governed by those who are brought in by the national will. You deputise for an elected president as an elected member of parliament. This is how we want this to be again. But, in the new system, a person who does not represent the will of the nation will deputise for the president. This can only happen in coup periods. This is a coup against the national will. Full stop.
KILIÇDAROĞLU'S REPLY TO BİNALİ YILDIRIM
Kılıçdaroğlu took the floor again in reply to Prime-Minister Binali Yıldırım. Kılıçdaroğlu said the following:
I have heard the comment made by the Prime-Minister once more. His excellency the Prime-Minister cites Numan Kurtulmuş by way of example.
The government came to parliament and obtained a vote of confidence. There was no problem once the government had obtained the vote of confidence. Regardless of who it was. If it does not obtain its power from the national will, we reject it. Secondly, the dissolving of parliament. The Minister of Justice made a statement. Look at the parliamentary records. Now you get up and say there is no power to dissolve parliament. Are you telling tales to a child, by any chance? There is most certainly a power to dissolve parliament.
The full text of Kılılçdaroğlu's speech is as follows:
Mr Speaker, Esteemed Members of Parliament,
Esteemed citizens watching us in front of your screens,
Dear children,
I greet all of you with respect and sincerely congratulate you on your public holiday.
The Great Leader Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, on 23 April 1920 ... 97 years ago today ... described his feelings as he took his first step at this time into the first building of the Turkish Grand National Assembly in Ulus:
‘While entering the door of the assembly building at around two o’ clock in the afternoon on Friday 23 April, I found myself engulfed in the concerns and emotions that had occupied my entire presence for days and evenings. However, once I had entered and seen the members of parliament who had filled the assembly auditorium turned towards me with looks that comforted and reassured, I realised once again that our undertaking accorded fully with the goals of the people. And I was happy that I would from now on work together with these colleagues through fate who were representing the people with ideas and goals they had in common with me.’
Because, for Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, 23 April was, ‘The beginning of Turkish national history and a new turning points. It was the miracle that the Turkish people, who had rebelled against the entire hostile world, had accomplished in bringing the Turkish Grand National Assembly into being.’
Yes, this Heroic Assembly, which brings us all under its roof, is the beginning of Turkish national history and a miracle that the Turkish people themselves brought into being.
Moreover, the gifting of 23 April 1920 by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk to our children at the same time expresses the belief felt that our republic would always remain as pure, clean and simple as a child.
This belief is also present in the source of the love and belonging that our people feel towards the Republic of Turkey.
Mr Speaker,
Esteemed Members of Parliament,
The Turkish Grand National Assembly, the only parliament in the world to have the title of ‘Heroic Assembly’ due to the direction it gave to the National Struggle has performed its task of monitoring the government with decisiveness from its first day.
The esteemed members of the Turkish Grand National Assembly did not shrink from their responsibilities even in the most critical periods of the War of Salvation.
For example, at the time of the debate over the interpellation on ‘the discharging of certain civil servants from their posts at ministries’ submitted by the MP for Sinop, the gentleman named Şerif, certain towns in the Aegean interior were under occupation by the Greeks. And the gentleman named Şerif was the person who made the opening speech of Turkish Grand National Assembly on 23 April 1920 in his capacity as the oldest member. The first speech to echo under the roof of this heroic assembly was the speech of the MP for Sinop, the gentleman named Şerif.
In June 1920, when the Saruhan MP, the gentlemen named Refik Şevket, addressed an oral question about the moving of the Ankara Male Teachers’ School to another place to the Minister of National Education of the day, the War Court established in Istanbul was preparing to pass the death sentence on certain heroes in the national struggle, including İsmet İnönü.
The reason I give these examples is that, even under the most strenuous of conditions, the Turkish Grand National Assembly performed its task of monitoring the government and nobody mounted the rostrum and asked, ‘The country is in a state of war so why are you asking these questions?’ or ‘Why are you making this interpellation?’
Because these honourable members of parliament earned respect for parliament by performing their task of monitoring government.
Apart from a few small quibbles, no issue was made over members of parliament exercising their powers to monitor through oral and written questions and interpellations; these were never considered to be an impediment.
Let us look at the point we have reached today, dear members of parliament.
Thanks to the ‘Stampless Poll’ whose legitimacy has been brought into question by the Supreme Election Council, we, that is we members of parliament, cannot even mount the rostrum and ask a minister a question.
Even if we asked a question, the esteemed minister would not even condescend to mount the rostrum and reply to our questions. Is there anybody whose conscience is not troubled by the pitiful spectacle that has been created?
Esteemed Members of Parliament,
In this context, I consider it beneficial to recall the debate over the new constitution that began to be discussed immediately at the end of the National Struggle.
Article 25 of the Constitution that began to be debated in the Turkish Grand National Assembly on 23 March 1924 took the form, ‘Parliament may either itself resolve for there to be fresh elections, or the President may, having obtained the government’s assessment, resolve for there to be an election on condition that he or she notify parliament and people of the reason.’
The members of parliament of the time opposed granting the right of dissolution to the President, even if this was on condition of having obtained the government’s assessment and notifying parliament and people of the reason.
For example, Saruhan (Manisa) MP, the gentleman named Reşat, said:
‘Let his heroic majesty the Pasha be absolutely sure that the people will not once more submit and surrender one grain of their sovereignty at their own proposal and suggestion to any authority or individual, regardless of their name or office and who they are.’
The gentleman named Mahmut Esad expressed his thoughts as follow:
‘In which corner of the world, in which state organisation can embracement of the notion that sovereignty belongs unconditionally to the people result in the dissolution of parliament? We say, “Sovereignty belongs unconditionally to the people” and then the president can dissolve such a great power.’
And, the gentleman named Saraçoğlu Şükrü, with his words ‘History, the law and the revolution clearly show us that absolutely nothing can reverse the rights that are today assembled in the person of the National Assembly,’ came out in opposition to granting Mustafa Kemal Atatürk the right of dissolution named a veto.’
In the end, the Article 25 granting the president the power to dissolve parliament was rejected.
This is its history, and instead of standing by the Turkish Grand National Assembly’s established past and founding values, the wish is to grant the power to dissolve parliament to one person and, moreover, without stating any reason.
This procedure is a massive shadow that falls over the ‘national will’ and is a rejection of the national will.
History will certainly not forget the members of parliament who paved the way for the national will to be surrendered to one individual.
Mr Speaker,
When his excellency the President goes abroad or steps down temporarily from his duties, your exalted person deputises for him.
Because you are a member of parliament who has been brought in through election. You also undergo election as speaker of the Turkish Grand National Assembly. You represent the Turkish Grand National Assembly, the heart of the national will. At the same time, you are required to maintain your impartiality as against all party groups.
Let us note with sadness that in the new single-person regime you cannot deputise for the President. What is more dolorous is that an appointed deputy President and not a person who has been elected will deputise for his excellency the President. In our history, such a situation has been an implementation peculiar to coup periods. This sad truth must not be forgotten.
Esteemed Members of Parliament,
This Parliament is a Parliament that has known since it was established how important merit-based state governance is for Turkey’s survival. That is, it has imposed the rule that governance of the state be entrusted to those who are up to the task.
This Parliament has always set the rules of the merit-based system in the state – to avoid giving rise to arbitrary practices. The executive organ has until today made appointments on the basis of these rules. Now, thanks to the ‘Stampless Poll’ that has been tainted by the Supreme Election Council, the Turkish Grand National Assembly has also been stripped of this power. The way has thereby been paved for an arbitrary rather than a merit-based approach to government to prevail.
Let us note with sadness that today the Turkish Grand National Assembly has undergone a great loss of prestige. To the extent that even the Supreme Election Council’s failure to abide by a statute enacted by the Turkish Grand National Assembly is turned into a rule and unlawfulness is made legitimate. For a parliament to fall into this state is indeed a most dramatic spectacle.
Esteemed Members of Parliament,
Another reality that harms this parliament and vitiates the national will is the ten per cent electoral threshold. The ten per cent electoral threshold is the product of a warped mentality that disregards the national will, ignores citizens’ preferences so as to steal their representation rights and deems all means legitimate to remain in power. Those who defend this arrangement that was introduced by coupists must not forget that they are on the same parallel as coupists.
Esteemed Members of Parliament,
Valued citizens,
The history of the democratisation of the Republic of Turkey is the history of the defence and expansion of the powers exercised by the Turkish Grand National Assembly on our behalf. We have until now always opposed all anti-democratic regulations that make one even yearn for coupists, and will continue to do so. Human history has honoured, not those who have slaughtered democracy, but those who have expanded and defended democracy.