The new period in Turkey has once again brought the importance of local administrations to the fore, while the continuation of the trustee policy remains one of the greatest obstacles to democratization.
The process that began with the call of Abdullah Öcalan brought steps toward democratization onto Turkey’s agenda, yet government resistance and the imposition of trustees have made the process more difficult. Replacing elected representatives in local administrations with appointed officials is regarded as one of the major barriers to democratic development.
Mustafa Yıldız, who served for years as an inspector in municipalities run by the Kurdish political movement and authored the book Municipalities under Trustees Deprived of Law, spoke to ANF about the peace process and its connection to the importance of local administrations.
Can the parliamentary commission bring real progress in Turkey’s democratization?
After the calls of Mr. Abdullah Öcalan and Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) leader Devlet Bahçeli, the government established a parliamentary commission within the framework of peace talks, sparking intense debate. In this context, increasing public trust and strengthening democratic participation have been put forward as central goals.
Formed within the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM), the “National Solidarity, Brotherhood and Democracy Commission” is composed of 51 members. Its founding purpose is to seek solutions to Turkey’s long-standing issues of social division, the Kurdish question, and problems within the axis of democratization.
The commission’s main objectives include addressing the Kurdish question, determining how to ensure the integration of Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) members into a new life after the organization’s decision to end armed struggle, minimizing social polarization, and building consensus on solving the country’s democratic challenges.
When we ask what the “National Solidarity, Brotherhood and Democracy Commission” is, the answer lies clearly in its name: solidarity, brotherhood, and democracy. These three concepts represent the happiness and peace of the country. This commission must determine the roadmap for the march toward a democratic republic. It should be the commission that crowns the Republic’s second century with democracy.
However, looking at its members, there are almost none with the knowledge or experience required to carry out such a process, or with prior work and research in these areas. When we examine their occasional individual statements, we see no indication that they grasp the scale and significance of the problem, nor even an awareness of why this decades-long war began. The fact that the leaders of the parties represented in the commission appear unaware of its founding purpose further underscores the concern.
A striking example was when Commission Chair Numan Kurtulmuş intervened after a Peace Mother tried to express herself in Kurdish, declaring it against the rules. Does this not show that the commission still regards Kurdish as an “unknown language”? How are we supposed to rebuild democracy while denying the language spoken by millions of people? How can my mother tongue be against the law? Does this align with democracy, with philosophy, with the logic of social life? I cannot tell.
President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan says “this commission is Turkey’s last chance,” yet the government adheres to none of the democratic principles. Believing that commission members will think differently from their leaders would mean not knowing the country or its politics. The commission’s role cannot be limited to developing recommendation and monitoring mechanisms; it must also recognize its critical importance in building trust among different social groups.
If members of the political parties within the commission attempt to steer the process with narrow political interests, step outside their mandate, promote their own policies, or politicize the technical process, the commission’s ability to make decisions could be paralyzed. For this reason, its members must not deviate from their core duties and goals. Otherwise, the functioning of this structure could be irreparably disrupted, weakening and damaging the entire process.
The commission therefore needs to create an inclusive and constructive atmosphere for joint work. The people must believe that the country has reached its current state due to the Kemalist, nationalist, religious, and racist rhetoric of past republican governments, and that this commission, in the second century of the Republic, must build a more democratic and freer country. They must also recognize that what is achieved through this effort will determine the future of the nation.
First and foremost, the commission should enact regulations ensuring the release of Kurds imprisoned unlawfully for their political views. Mayors removed by trustee appointments must be reinstated. Recently detained Republican People’s Party (CHP) mayors should be released, and the accusations against them should be resolved swiftly.
How did the trustees appointed to replace the DEM Party and previous Kurdish political party freely and legitimately elected officials affected peace and local democracy?
The year 2016 was a disaster both for municipalities in the Kurdish provinces and for the country’s democracy. In the local elections, the Democratic Regions Party (DBP, today’s Peoples’ Equality and Democracy Party-DEM Party) won 102 local administrations. Of the 102 DBP co-mayors, 94 were removed from office, while three resigned or were forced to resign. By the 2019 local elections, the DBP was left with only five municipalities.
Approximately 75 percent of the dismissed co-mayors were arrested, thousands of employees were fired, and civil servants were expelled through statutory decrees. Under the law, decisions taken under the state of emergency are valid only during that period. Yet this was not the case. Although the state of emergency declared on 20 July 2016 and extended seven times was lifted on 18 July 2018, the dismissed mayors were never reinstated.
According to Article 45 of the Municipality Law No. 5393, when a mayor is removed for any reason, the municipal council must elect a deputy mayor to complete the term. This was not followed, and appointed provincial governors continued their trustee duties until the 2019 elections. The central government had inserted into Law No. 5393 the regulation brought by Article 39 of Decree-Law No. 674 of 10 November 2016. (At the time, the Republican People’s Party – CHP brought many of the changes before the Constitutional Court but interestingly did not challenge Article 39. A footnote for readers.)
The government had turned trustee appointments into a habit. In the 2019 local elections, the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) won 65 municipalities. Within a year after the elections, trustees were again appointed to 52 of these municipalities. In addition, seven elected mayors were denied their mandates on the grounds that they had been expelled from civil service by decree.
In the March 2024 elections, the DEM Party won 78 municipalities in the Kurdish provinces. Within about a year, trustees were appointed to 10 of them. All these appointments and removals were unlawful.
Trustees appointed to DEM Party municipalities not only trampled on internal peace and local democracy, but, for us Kurds, they also signified the formation of an anti-Kurdish bloc in the west of the country. We regarded the usurpation of Kurdish local administrations as an attempt to govern them through neo-colonial methods. Trustees nullified the efforts of elected municipal administrators to run municipalities in line with their party’s principles. For us Kurds, especially the appointments to the metropolitan municipalities of Diyarbakır (Amed), Van (Wan), and Mardin (Mêrdîn), were perceived as general governorships, and their style of administration confirmed this perception.
The trustee has become the symbolic name of the coup carried out against internal peace, local administrations, and the Kurdish people striving to govern themselves locally within a legal framework. From 2016 to 2024, the will of the Kurdish people has been usurped. The trustee system drew strong reactions both in Turkey and internationally. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe, the Venice Commission, and reports of the European Parliament described these practices as a violation of the voters’ will. Trustee appointments have also opened Turkey’s democratic standards to debate internationally. These debates have peaked recently with similar interventions in municipalities run by the CHP.