Following the preparation of the Parliamentary Commission’s report within the scope of the Peace and Democratic Society Process, the transition to the stage of “legal regulation” is expected, while the Justice and Development Party (AKP) and Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) pointed to the post-holiday period for submitting draft laws. However, MHP Chair Devlet Bahçeli’s remark, “There is no need to rush,” drew reactions.
Öztürk Türkdoğan, Co-Spokesperson of the Legal and Human Rights Commission of the Peoples’ Equality and Democracy Party (DEM Party), spoke to Mezopotamya Agency (MA) and pointed to the need for preparing laws and said: “These reports bear the signatures of the ruling parties. In their statements, they also expressed that these steps would be implemented gradually. Determining a timeline here is the responsibility of the government. Because in legislative work, the majority in Parliament belongs to the parties forming the People’s Alliance. They need to take responsibility and put forward their proposals.”
Shift from dialogue to negotiations
Türkdoğan added that they frame these laws as “Peace Laws,” stating that following the report, the process has entered a new phase and that it must now be decided whether this phase will proceed through dialogue or negotiations. Türkdoğan said: “When we look at global conflict resolution examples, after such concrete preparations, what is needed now is negotiation. So, with whom will you negotiate? From the Kurdish side, since Mr. Öcalan is the main actor of the process and the primary interlocutor, there must be talks conducted with him. These talks must now take on the character of negotiations. Of course, this issue will also be discussed in Parliament with the DEM Party and other political parties. It will be discussed with the Kurdish Movement. It has been decided that the person who will negotiate on fundamental issues on behalf of this side will be Mr. Öcalan. At the dissolution congress, the conduct and management of the process were entrusted to Mr. Öcalan. In this case, we need to discuss Mr. Öcalan’s legal status.”
Process delayed under various pretexts
Öztürk Türkdoğan addressed the condition put forward by AKP and MHP representatives regarding the “verification and certification of disarmament” for legal regulations and said they do not view this as a crisis or a deadlock. Describing such statements as a “unilateral approach,” Türkdoğan said: “In the sixth section of the commission’s report, there is mention of the laws that must be enacted during the process. The issue is not only laying down, verification, and certification of weapons. When we read the report as a whole, it also refers separately to the laws that should be enacted while the process continues. For this reason, we maintain our position. The problem here is not the verification of disarmament; the problem is that the government is projecting its own timing. It does not share this timeline with the public. If it has a timeline in mind, it acts accordingly. For example, the preparation of the report was prolonged on the grounds of developments in Syria. The government acts in line with political developments, both in foreign and domestic policy. It also makes electoral calculations in relation to domestic politics.”
Legal guarantees are necessary
Öztürk Türkdoğan referred to the “status” of Abdullah Öcalan and said: “When there are clear disagreements between the parties, the leadership of those who manage and carry forward the process must come into play. Who will resolve the areas of dispute? Of course, the main actors will. For this reason, political leadership is crucial in such periods. Only in this way can problems be resolved, not by focusing on what cannot be done. We need to proceed by asking how and in what way these ‘impossibilities’ can be overcome. I believe that there is a very high possibility of finding solutions in the negotiations that the state and those appointed for this task will conduct with Mr. Öcalan. For the talks to be carried out in a healthy manner, the legal status of the chief negotiator must be secured.”
Must be granted free working conditions
Türkdoğan pointed to statements by Devlet Bahçeli that the “status of Imralı” should be clarified and said: “We have been raising this issue for a long time. Mr. Öcalan has legal rights, one of which is the right to hope. The government has international legitimacy in its hands, as well as a high court ruling. Have the requirements of Mr. Öcalan’s call been fulfilled? They have. Has the commission prepared its report? It has. Now we are faced with the need for concrete legal developments, the enactment of laws and their implementation in practice. Mr. Öcalan is one of those who carry forward this process. Therefore, it is not possible for him to conduct this work from the cell where he is currently held like an ordinary prisoner. He must be granted free working conditions. There are various ways and methods to achieve this. Accordingly, our party and our delegation have conveyed their demands to the relevant counterparts. A solution can be found, and I believe we will soon see the state’s approach. It will become clear in the coming days. I believe that, since Mr. Erdoğan and Mr. Bahçeli also support the continuation of the process, steps will be taken.”
Legal guarantee must come first, as international law required
Türkdoğan said that political and legal legitimacy for this situation already exists and that these factors strengthen the government’s position and continued: “This situation can certainly be resolved through regulation. This lies in the hands of the government. By making such a regulation, the government can ensure that Mr. Öcalan attains free conditions. In this way, it can pave the way for the process to proceed more smoothly. Otherwise, these debates will continue. One side will say, ‘You need to pass a law for me to lay down arms,’ while the other will say, ‘Lay down arms first, then I will pass a law.’ When we look at examples around the world, the law is enacted first. There must be legal guarantees so that people can trust this and participate in social integration. We are now at a stage where methods and procedures need to be discussed in a healthy manner to find a way forward. It is enough for both sides to adopt a positive approach and to sustain it.”
Leave a Reply