Celal Fırat, an Istanbul MP for the Peoples’ Equality and Democracy Party (DEM Party) and a member of the parliamentary commission established at the Grand National Assembly of Turkey to address the Kurdish question, spoke to ANF about his party’s approach to the joint report the commission is set to prepare.
Fırat said the report must not be confined to a one-sided state perspective or reduced to a framework limited to security-driven and administrative measures. He stressed that it must be drafted through an inclusive approach that considers the political, social, and historical dimensions of the conflict.
Fırat said the DEM Party approaches the process based on democratic politics, the rule of law, and social peace, and underlined that the joint report must not remain a set of abstract aspirations. He added that it should put forward a concrete and binding roadmap that includes fundamental changes to existing legal regulations, particularly the Turkish Penal Code, the Anti-Terror Law, and the law on the execution of sentences, ends the practice of appointing trustees, and opens the way for democratic politics.
What are the essential headings for the report the commission is expected to prepare from the perspective of the DEM Party, at a time when work on the joint report has not yet begun?
Our party approaches this process based on democratic politics, the rule of law, and social peace. We stress that the commission report must be drafted through an inclusive approach that does not remain confined to a one-sided state perspective, and that considers the social, political, and historical dimensions of the conflict.
As the DEM Party, we believe that the core framework of the commission’s joint report must be set out clearly, without falling back on old reflexes and without limiting the issue to a mindset that views it solely through security-driven and administrative measures. First and foremost, we see it as indispensable that a clear political and legal will for a solution is revealed; that changes are made to existing laws, particularly the Turkish Penal Code, the Anti-Terror Law, and the law on the execution of sentences; that trustee policies are brought to an end; that unlawful practices in prisons are eliminated; that the path to freedoms is opened; and that regulations are clearly laid out to remove the structural problems democracy has created over society.
The nature of legal amendments will shape the course of the process
The joint report to be drafted must include concrete headings that define the legal ground on which the peace and democratization process will move forward, rather than abstract aspirations, because the nature of the legal amendments to be introduced will serve as a guide to how the process will take shape from this point onward.
DEM party sees it as a fundamental principle that the report should contain clear assessments and proposals aimed at expanding democratic participation, freedom of expression, the right to organization, and the political sphere, and that practices producing impunity, arbitrariness, and a regime of exception must come to an end. This approach is based on the understanding that the report prepared by the commission should not remain in a mere assessment text but should constitute a binding roadmap capable of opening the way to a new legal and political period.
How do you assess the approaches to democracy, social peace, and fraternity expressed so far by the government and other parties, either publicly or within the commission? What are the main points of convergence and divergence between the DEM Party and these texts?
I can say that the approaches to democracy, social peace, and fraternity voiced so far by the government and the other parties represented on the commission have largely remained at the level of wishful thinking, and that they have avoided confronting the political and legal dimensions of the issue. From our perspective, this approach is still confined within limits that largely adopt a security-centered framework, fail to question existing unlawful practices, and do not move beyond a state-centric viewpoint.
We clearly see that the emphasis on democracy and fraternity is being reduced to the shallowness of a ‘Terror-Free Turkey,’ confined to a line focused solely on the silencing of arms and the dissolution of the organization, with the intention of concluding the process through a handful of palliative measures. It is evident that there are spokespersons and commentators, particularly in the pro-government media, who are attempting to construct and promote this misguided understanding.
DEM parties’ reports lack depth and courage
At the most basic level, no concrete or binding approach is put forward as to which rights, which freedoms, or which legal arrangements of democracy and fraternity are supposed to be realized through. In this respect, it must be stated that the reports submitted to the commission by other parties lack the depth and courage required to build a genuine process of social peace.
The minimum point at which our party overlaps with other parties is the desire to bring the period of conflict to an end and to strengthen the will to live together. However, the points at which we fundamentally diverge are quite numerous; to the extent that we are faced with an approach that even refrains from uttering the word ‘peace.’
Other parties have failed to put forward a clear stance on the fact that the process requires legal and political transformation. While the approaches of the government and other parties suggest that partial changes could be made, through forced interpretations, to the existing Turkish Penal Code, the Anti-Terror Law, and Law No. 5275 on the Execution of Sentences, our party argues that these laws themselves are part of the problem. We maintain that without their abolition or fundamental amendment, and without the enactment of a new framework of law, genuine democratization will not be possible.
When different political actors’ perspectives come together, where do you see a realistic common ground emerging? What concrete steps and binding mechanisms does the DEM Party advocate to ensure that the joint report does not remain a set of mere wishes?
I can say that when different political actors’ perspectives come together, a realistic common ground can only emerge by moving beyond abstract rhetoric of ‘fraternity’ and ‘unity’ and by giving concrete form to minimum points of consensus within a legal and political framework.
We say this openly: the first step toward reaching a realistic ground begins with everyone maintaining their own position while accepting the fact that the problem cannot be resolved through security-based methods. Although different approaches are voiced within the commission’s work, the recognition, however limited, of the need for non-conflict, the strengthening of the sphere of democratic politics, and social peace offers us a shared starting point.
As the DEM Party, we argue that concrete and binding steps must be clearly defined so that the joint report does not remain limited to statements of goodwill. In this context, the report must clearly state the need for comprehensive changes, particularly to the Turkish Penal Code, the Anti-Terror Law, and the law on the execution of sentences, as well as the need for a new integration law. It must also explicitly include the release of seriously ill prisoners and those whose sentences have been unlawfully extended, and the termination of trustee practices. Our party considers it essential that the report be taken up directly by specialized parliamentary commissions and tied to a concrete timetable within the parliamentary process.
We also state that the report must include guarantees that expand democratic participation and political rights and incorporate binding principles that will put an end to arbitrary practices.
From our party’s perspective, this approach is the fundamental condition for transforming the commission report from a symbolic text into a roadmap capable of genuinely advancing the process of social peace and democratization.
We wish that 2026 brings peace to our peoples; but this can only be achieved by going beyond mere wishes, by reaching out to one another, building empathy, choosing understanding over denial, and addressing the issue in an objective and solution-oriented manner.