BY YALCIN DOGAN
HURRIYET- People often send suggestions to the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) through emails, telegrams or letters. AKP deputy leader Dengir Mir Mehmet Firat is keeping a file of the suggestions to evaluate them when it becomes necessary. Nobody should say that discussing a new constitution is the province only of certain people such as academics, politicians or lawyers. The public is participating in this process of its own will and wants the best exercise of sovereignty.
Among these suggestions, there are some interesting ones. Obviously, certain cotton producers want the constitution to set cotton prices. Predictably, tenant-owner relations are rocky, and tenants want this situation solved in the Constitution. Some people also suggest that the chief of general staff and military commanders should attend the National Security Council (NSC) in civilian dress or that the opposition party leader should also be there. Some people say women should be required to do military service or have to work in social security or health institutions for 10 months, on the grounds that the current system is discriminatory. Some people also suggested that the number of deputies be reduced, as well as changes to the election and political systems. Some of the suggestions are related to the Constitution, while others are so detailed that they can't be in the Constitution.
There is also the issue of freedoms. Firat says the draft Constitution would greatly expand curbs on freedoms, arguing that the exercise of sovereignty is the essence of the issue. Concerning the issue of freedoms, Firat says that the Constitution of 1924 left sovereignty to Parliament, but its 1961 and 1982 successors transferred the exercise of sovereignty to authorized organs. All the organs that come to mind - the Supreme Board of Radio and Television (RTUK), Council of Tobacco and Alcohol, etc - exercise sovereignty. Firat also suggested that the main quarrel in the drafting process concerns sovereignty and that the official bodies which up to now have had sovereignty and those who want the public to have it are at odds. He argues that this is the essence of the entire debate: Do you think that your sovereignty should be used by authorized organs specified by the Constitution, or through the legislative, executive and judicial branches?