Ertugrul Ozkok: Yesterday is yesterday, today is today

On July 19 2001.
What did the Constitutional Court do on that day?
They removed the political ban on Tayyip Erdogan.
On that day the same court and the same people were perceived as democratic, giving assurances of the rule of law.
Today it is acting against national will, and it is illegal.
What it did then is the victory of democracy.
Today it is the coup of law.
What do the prime minister and his supporters lose if they ask that, leaving their hatred and anger aside for a few minutes?
''Do those people who removed my political ban, now want to act against me?''
They had a case to decide on, the same as today.
Where does this anger come from?
It means that they are so sure the court will decide against them.
I have no such information nor am I sure about it.
Because that court is comprised of the same people who proved their neutrality in the past.
And when it suits, praise them as being "democratic" and when it doesn't, accuse them of being "putschist."
So they will decide whether the decision of the top judicial organ in this country is democratic and lawful.
I am following this with a sense of surprise.
As if in the country there is a committee called 'sole selectors' that decides on democracy.
They determine the standards and all those who disagree with them are in favor of a coup.
All the courts, which try a case they are against, carry the banner of the coup.
The prosecutors, who write an indictment that they favor, are ''democratic and law heroes,'' while the opposite is seen as in favor of a judicial coup.
And these people, with such a privilege, blame others for being ''secular elitist,'' but it is they who are trying to introduce ''sole selector elitism,'' which they started to form and then present to us as democracy.
***
I think we should start with some basic questions to write a civil constitution.
- In which true world democracy can political power with two thirds of the media clearly in favor, be so intolerant of those who are not; how can it try to do away with the rest of the media?''
- In which true world democracy can a ruling party attempt to form a regime that says those whose wives don't wear headscarves and crosses on their necks, can't become a minister or under-secretary, or high ranking bureaucrat.
- In which true world democracy can a political power categorizes people as ''we' and ''they''?
- In which true world democracy can a political power perceive the only criteria of the national will as the logic that says 'I have 46.5 percent vote, so I can do whatever I want'?
- In which true world democracy can a political power attempt to do away with the Constitutional Court when it decided to judge the power, while it declares the court as 'the champion of democracy' when it decided in favor of the same power.
- In which European country, which supports Erdogan today, does democracy allow such an arbitrary understanding of power?
We can form a real democratic society, adopting the culture of living together and of pluralism, and ending arbitrary actions.
In addition: Those, who want justice for themselves, should show the same justice to others too.
* * *
Everybody needs the silence that the prime minister had during the party group meeting yesterday.
If we can maintain this silence, we can talk about the basic issues of democracy and a constitutional regime, and we can create a broad base for social compromise.
Then we should never face such closure cases.
We would build a powerful Turkey based on mutual respect, tolerance, democracy, justice and secularism.