Sezai Temelli, Co-Chair of the Peoples’ Equality and Democracy Party (DEM Party) Parliamentary Group, emphasized the decisive role of deliberative democracy in resolving the Kurdish question and underlined that Parliament must take ownership of this process. Temelli also drew attention to Abdullah Öcalan’s position in the negotiation process and the social impact of a democratic solution.
Temelli spoke to ANF and said: “Mr. Öcalan has, from the very beginning, emphasized how crucial negotiation is and specifically pointed to the role of Parliament in this regard. Therefore, negotiation means establishing a ground where political interlocution is defined and maintained. This is precisely what we need today. Until now, the political mechanisms have failed to approach this matter with a mindset of negotiation and that has caused major shortcomings, which we have all experienced. Society has paid a heavy price for this. It is possible to see that almost every crisis we are living through today stems from the lack of a democratic solution to the Kurdish question. And why has this not been achieved? Because a healthy and functional basis for negotiation has never truly been established.”
Öcalan’s message to Parliament is highly valuable
Sezai Temelli reflected on past and ongoing efforts to establish a ground for negotiation and emphasized the crucial role of Parliament. He stated that the fact that the Parliamentary Commission has not met with Abdullah Öcalan has blocked the path to democratic negotiation, stressing that communication with him is essential for any meaningful progress toward a solution. Temelli continued: “Mr. Öcalan has made numerous attempts on this matter. In fact, there is a historical trajectory that dates back to 1993. Since February 27 of this year, he has repeatedly emphasized the need for a negotiation ground, particularly pointing to Parliament. This is extremely valuable and highly significant. Yes, a Commission was established, and its primary purpose was to make this possible. Looking back, the steps taken so far, while contributing to the process of negotiation, are still insufficient. That is precisely why there is criticism. Because what we call negotiation and what we mean by interlocution must be properly structured. In this regard, the main actor, the principal interlocutor, and the negotiator, who embodies all these roles is Mr. Öcalan. The fact that he has still not been allowed to meet with the Commission prevents the opening of a truly democratic path for negotiation.”
Part of radical democracy
Temelli emphasized that deliberative democracy is not only a means to address today’s challenges but also a framework for shaping the future. As part of the concept of radical democracy, he said that deliberative democracy holds the potential to create new forms of publicness across civic, public, and private spheres. Temelli said, “If we take the right steps, a solution is possible. To achieve this, we must start correctly and move forward in a healthy way. Mr. Öcalan’s criticisms also point in this direction. Of course, when we talk about democratic negotiation, we should not confine the issue to the present moment alone. His approach builds the foundations of deliberative democracy by combining a historical perspective with a vision for the future. He particularly stresses the importance of deliberative democracy and deliberative approaches for establishing the concept of a democratic nation within pluralistic societies.” Temelli also said, “This is a concept that has been discussed extensively, both academically and politically, but has not yet found sufficient space in practice. Deliberative democracy forms a vital part of our understanding of radical democracy. Therefore, while building the society of the future and constructing a democratic society today, deliberation occupies a central place in the public sphere, the civic sphere, and the private sphere alike. Deliberative democracy also serves as a bridge between the political and civic realms. When we look at it this way, the most important promise of the Third Way is undoubtedly the creation of a new public sphere, the encounters and gatherings within that space. In essence, these are the steps that will sustain and realize a democratic society. Thus, when we speak of negotiation, we approach it in two dimensions: negotiation as a means to solve today’s issues, and negotiation as a process of building the society of the future.”
A ground for negotiation is emerging in Syria, but Turkey fails to see it
Temelli underlined that due to Turkey’s foreign policy and its chronic approach to the Kurdish question, the country continues to misread and misinterpret developments in Syria, particularly in the North and East Syria region. He continued: “One part of what we call negotiation is actually unfolding there. In Syria, there is both an internal negotiation process between the provisional government and the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria, which began on March 10, and also a potential ground for negotiation that we have yet to incorporate into our own political life. Turkey’s insistence on not engaging in negotiations with the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria shows its failure to recognize that this too forms one pillar of democratic negotiation. Yet, when you speak of Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and Iran, you cannot shape foreign policy without considering the shared emotional and social fabric of the Kurds living across these four parts of Kurdistan. Especially in the Middle East, such an approach is simply impossible.”
Turkey fails to read the situation correctly
Temelli said that if one is to speak of a democratic solution to the Kurdish question, then it is essential to discuss democratic grounds for negotiation and resolution across all four parts of Kurdistan, noting that the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria is one of the structures closest to achieving this. Temelli said: “In this regard, it stands far ahead of all other entities in Syria and represents the most significant, perhaps even the most potential, allied force in ensuring Syria’s democratic transformation and lasting peace. Unfortunately, because Turkey’s foreign policy fails to interpret the situation in this way, this misunderstanding is reflected in its politics as well. The negative effects of past, chronic political attitudes continue to influence policy today, and this inevitably casts a shadow over the ongoing process. Yet the capacity for resolution, democratization, and peace carried by the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria is strong enough to overcome all these challenges before us.”
Commission hearings create consensus
Temelli noted that the Parliamentary Commission continues its hearings and said that once these are completed, an interim report will be released. Temelli also said: “Everyone who has come before the Commission so far, even those holding very different views, has reached a point of consensus on key issues. This, in fact, is what Parliament is responsible for ensuring. After this interim report, the negotiations aimed at the democratic resolution of the Kurdish question must now be placed within a legal framework. Which laws will guide this process? How will legal guarantees be established? What legal protections and political participation rights will be granted to those who lay down their arms? What will be the status of those imprisoned or living in exile? In this sense, there are thousands, even hundreds of thousands of people who have been victimized or trapped within judicial processes because of this issue. The steps to be taken for them are crucial.”
The living and working conditions of Öcalan
Temelli continued, “First and foremost, it is of course essential that Mr. Öcalan’s living and working conditions be immediately arranged in line with his own demands, and that the democratic negotiation process, based on the roadmap he has already defined, become a continuous one. Establishing this network of communication and dialogue is of utmost importance. Many groups wish to visit the island, to meet with him, and to contribute to this process. We now need a proper general assembly initiative for this. We need to implement the necessary laws, and for that, the Parliamentary Commission must reach consensus on a draft and promptly activate the relevant specialized commissions. This is what we are waiting for.”
Demirtaş ruling is part of a political conspiracy
Sezai Temelli criticized the objection filed by the Ministry of Justice against the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruling on Selahattin Demirtaş. He said that this attitude sabotages the negotiation process. Temelli stated that the stance of the Ministry of Justice is not only a legal matter but also a political issue and said: “It is time to free ourselves from this disgrace that has been created by politicizing the judiciary and wielding it as a weapon. The Ministry of Justice, instead of acknowledging this disgrace, once again files an objection. There is an attitude that seeks to sustain this political conspiracy. We have rejected this and organized a protest. We demanded that this mistake be rectified and that the objection be withdrawn. Unfortunately, there has been no initiative from the Ministry of Justice in this direction. On the contrary, they persist in this conspiratorial mindset. Of course, this issue is not limited to the Ministry of Justice alone. It still reflects the government’s fundamentally wrong approach to this matter. On the one hand, we talk about negotiation and process, and we act with tremendous responsibility and sacrifice. Yet on the other hand, there is an attitude that deliberately sabotages the process. Even this objection itself is an attempt to sabotage the process.”