Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) co-chair Sultan Özcan said that a new chapter has opened regarding the Kurdish question, criticizing the parliamentary commission for failing to establish its sub-mechanisms and describing the process as incomplete. Özcan said, “The solution is not an Imrali–Qandil issue, but a democratic integration in which all forces of democracy take part as active subjects.”
The negotiation table should be the Parliament
Özcan evaluated the current stage of the process and the mission of the Parliament, and said: “During the period of negotiations and talks, we have always represented a multi-layered spectrum as the opposition of democratic politics in Turkey. In our positioning, we have consistently pointed to Parliament. From the HDP to the DEM Party line, we have positioned ourselves as an active subject from the streets to the parliament. In our founding purpose, we defined the democratic solution to the Kurdish question and the democratization of Turkey within a programmatic framework as a ‘Democratic Republic’ and ‘Local Democracy.’
In this sense, the role and mission of the Parliament is to breathe life into Turkey’s path to a solution. It would also revitalize foreign policy by taking the initiative for a strong democracy, a strong parliament, and a strong local democracy. This has always been our proposal, and it remains valid today.”
Özcan described the establishment of a parliamentary commission with the participation of the majority of political parties represented in the Parliament as an important step. Özcan said: “We should not underestimate the significance of this commission. The establishment of a commission in the Parliament also points to the legislative body reclaiming its proper function. Following the 2017 referendum and the 2018 regime change, Parliament’s role was weakened. This step could pave the way for the Parliament to regain its real role and for democratization to advance.
This is not only important for social democracy but also for the democratization of Parliament itself. Whether this role has been fully embraced by everyone or commonly understood in this way is another question. However, from our perspective, it will contribute to that goal.
When we look back at the 2013–2015 period, the establishment of such a commission is significant as it allows for a broad consensus and a shared will to resolve the Kurdish question through democratic means, a consensus that spans a wide political spectrum. In the 100-year history of the Republic, this represents an important initiative. The commission’s task of preparing recommendations that will form the legal and political groundwork for the general assembly and related specialized committees is also crucial. This is how we can define the true significance of the commission.”
Transition from armed struggle to a democratic and libertarian political ground
Sultan Özcan pointed out that significant developments have taken place since the process began with Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) Chair Devlet Bahçeli’s handshake with the Peoples’ Equality and Democracy Party (DEM Party) members. Özcan said: “The call made by Abdullah Öcalan and the subsequent steps are of historical significance. The fact that Mr. Öcalan’s call received a positive response from his organization, which then held a dissolution congress, shared its final declaration with the public, and symbolically held a weapon-burning ceremony on July 11, has been approached not only as an issue concerning Turkey but also as one involving the four parts of Kurdistan across the Middle East.
We interpret this as a transition from armed struggle to a democratic and libertarian political ground. It is highly significant that the movement has positioned itself within the realm of democracy and has projected this shift toward socialism, an understanding of socialism that is democratic and rooted in freedom. This carries vital importance, as it reflects a simultaneous reorientation that does not place ideological matters ahead of practical and political realities.”
It opened the breathing channels of the struggle
Sultan Özcan underlined that this call, by opening democratic channels, carries vital importance as it has the potential to reconnect the shared lifelines of struggle between the Kurdish people and the peoples of Turkey. She said: “These steps should not be viewed as something belonging to the past, but as measures that are vital and essential for today. I believe that all democratic forces must correctly understand this newly opened space for democratic struggle and position themselves as active agents in realizing it. Because after such a long period, we must not overlook the crucial significance of overcoming the approach that has dominated, terrorized, criminalized, and polarized all spheres of struggle, including those for nature, women, labor, faith, and the recognition of peoples. All of these are essential and vital steps.”
The commission fell short in hearings: Legal groundwork is delayed
Özcan noted that the establishment of the parliamentary commission took place after the February 27 call, which was an important step in itself. However, she criticized the commission for not creating subcommittees such as “truth and reconciliation” or “social hearing,” describing this as a major shortcoming.
Özcan continued: “If these subcommittees had been formed, past traumas, pains, mourning, anger, and expectations could have been heard directly. This would have provided the process with a stronger social and legal foundation. So far, the parliamentary commission has largely remained in the stage of listening to different groups. It has heard from various segments of society from those who suffered deeply during the conflicts, to democratic forces, labor unions, civil initiatives, as well as women’s and youth movements. Next week, youth and women’s organizations will also be heard.
However, the lack of subcommittees has so far limited the depth of the process. Therefore, it would be premature to say, ‘Let the hearings end now.’ Society still has much to say; these testimonies are part of a process of healing, confronting the past, and achieving justice in matters that affect people’s lives and destinies. There is no harm in allowing these hearings to continue through subcommittees to prevent such pains from recurring.
Nevertheless, the commission must now begin preparing the legal and political groundwork that will ensure the reintegration of those who have laid down their arms into social, political, and public life, and guarantee that violence will not reemerge. I must say that there has already been some delay in this regard.”
Özcan added that the meaning they attribute to the Parliament also reveals certain weaknesses in how democratic forces have assumed initiative in ensuring that this process yields results in favor of society, peoples, the Kurdish people, and all social dynamics.
Özcan continued: “We see two main areas that need attention. The first is to establish a legal and political framework that will eliminate the conditions that lead to violence and armed conflict. In other words, to take steps that will permanently remove the causes of such outcomes.
The second, which must progress in parallel, is the long-term construction of a new democratic society and democratic way of life. The process of restoration and reconstruction must be evaluated from this perspective. Rather than overwhelming the commission with too many issues and creating a sense of hopelessness by saying ‘it’s not functioning,’ it is useful to address these matters in a sequence, not as a hierarchy but as a structured order.
Therefore, issues such as language, recognition, equal citizenship, and local democracy are directly related to the kind of future, the kind of Turkey, and the kind of country we envision. This process can only be built by enabling the broadest segments of society to come together and by conducting a legal ‘cleansing of the path.’
Essentially, what we define at the macro level is an integration process that removes war and armed struggle as a necessity, instead serving Turkey’s democratization within a democratic framework. Removing the legal obstacles to the reintegration of those who have laid down their arms into social and public life is the cornerstone of this democratic integration.
In this respect, as expressed by colleagues participating in the commission, our expectation is that there exists a clear will and plan to take these legal steps and establish this necessary groundwork.”
The government must take confidence-building steps
Sultan Özcan pointed out that the desire for peace is strong across society, yet there remains deep mistrust about how a just peace can be achieved. Özcan said: “The government’s practices so far have not created a stance against peace, but they have heightened concerns that the peace process might again be used for political gain. Therefore, restoring trust places a great responsibility on the government. At the same time, the opposition and all democratic forces also have a role to play, to pressure the government to take steps and to help steer the process in favor of society. Viewing the process merely as an issue ‘between the government and the Kurdish movement,’ or ‘between the government and Mr. Öcalan,’ or ‘within the Imrali–Qandil axis,’ only deepens passivity. To overcome this, confidence-building steps must be taken.
Some of these steps require no legal amendments and could be implemented immediately. For instance, returning trustee-appointed municipalities to the will of the people; implementing the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) rulings regarding Selahattin Demirtaş and Figen Yüksekdağ; urgently addressing the condition of ill prisoners; and ending the arbitrary extensions of sentences by Prison Administration and Observation Boards for inmates who have been imprisoned for more than 30 years. Swift and concrete action on these issues would not only demonstrate the government’s sincerity but also strengthen public belief in peace.
It is of vital importance that not only the parliamentary commission but all organized democratic forces abandon the notion that ‘nothing will come of this’ and instead embrace the will to transform this process into lasting peace and democratization. Despite Mr. Öcalan’s repeated demonstrations of will for a ceasefire, solution, and peace, the ongoing policies of inaction and postponement have led to immense loss of life, waste of resources, and profound social suffering.”
There is deep anger and mistrust towards the government
Özcan noted that compared to the 2013–2015 period, even the broad-based consensus within the Parliament today remains weaker than it was back then. She continued: “In those years, the Justice and Development Party (AKP) was in power, and there was a ‘reform wind’ blowing in line with European Union standards. During that period, there was hope that the government could bring about change. In other words, a partial atmosphere of trust existed. However, the ten years that followed, in which the peace process was put ‘on ice,’ created deep trauma and memory wounds within society. The state of emergency practices, violations of rights, the oppressive system of governance, and the imprisonment or silencing of thousands of Kurdish politicians, journalists, civil society representatives, and tens of thousands of members of the HDP have left profound anger and resentment across large segments of society.
This is precisely where the difference between then and now lies. The immense accumulation of pressure, pain, and injustice over the past decade has created a serious sense of mistrust and anger towards the government. Therefore, to heal this anger, the government must take concrete steps and enter a negotiation process that can restore trust. These negotiations must adopt both a discourse and a form of action that will open democratic channels. A genuine process of democratization can only be achieved by addressing this decade-long trauma through fair, lasting, and sincere steps.”