''There is a reality in the verbal duel between Constitutional Court Chief Judge Mustafa Bumin and (Parliament Speaker) Bulent Arinc, i.e. the position of the parliament in Turkish democracy is not strong enough even though Arinc argues the opposite,'' writes Asli Aydintasbas in her editorial in today's edition of Sabah daily.
Aydintasbas also writes, ''Arinc's response to Bumin that 'the parliament can close the Constitutional Court if it wants' can be valid for parliaments of other countries. But, the weakest of the three chains of the Turkish state order - namely legislation, execution and jurisdiction - is the 'legislative' organ, which is actually the direct manifestation of national will.''
''Parliamentarians don't have the right to defy their parties and leaders of their parties in Turkey. Neither the commissions (at the parliament) nor the parliamentarians individually have the reflex and capability to 'ask for an explanation'. Being elected a parliamentarian depends on the preference of the party leader due to the shortcomings in the electoral system. The real problem is in which line a candidate's name is enrolled in voting paper. Therefore, a parliamentarian commits a political suicide if he/she does something that is welcomed by the party leader,'' says Aydintasbas.
Aydintasbas adds, ''naturally, there are also some people who think about this matter under the roof of the parliament. For instance, Burhan Kuzu is a parliamentarian who often voices shortcoming of democracy. But, in his opinion, the only remedy is 'presidential system'. As long as 'parliamentary system' continues, a genuine democracy can't be enforced. Kuzu, who is a constitution professor, is such a fiery advocate of presidential system that he doesn't think the pillars of the parliamentary system like those in Britain are democratic enough. All these are worth thinking and discussing.''
(BRC-MS)
2005-05-05