Our right to inheritance and beyond…

The Presidency of Religious Affairs (Diyanet) was established as a presidency on March 3, 1924, the same day both the Caliphate and the Ministry of Sharia and Foundations were abolished. According to academics who have written on the subject, this was a method of transforming the institution related to religious affairs from an actor in politics into a bureaucratic organization. Thus, the state, as part of the Turkish-style secularism, planned to control the religious sphere. At the same time, the transformation of a unit that was previously a ministry into a presidency reflected the structure of the regime. Today, in academic literature and the public debates that follow, the existence of the Diyanet remains controversial in terms of the principle of secularism…  

When we look at the history of the Republic, the state may have controlled the official religious sphere through the Diyanet, but especially after the 1960s, this bureaucratic apparatus also began to become politicized. Today, we are experiencing an extreme point of this politicization. For the institution acts as if it has taken on a fundamental and active role in the construction of a “new” society, as if it were a natural part of the ruling party. Moreover, despite the article in the 1982 Constitution—that is, our constitution which, as far as we know, is still in force—regarding the Diyanet… 

Article 136 clearly states, “The Presidency of Religious Affairs, which is within the general administration, shall perform the duties prescribed by its special law, in accordance with the principle of secularism, by remaining outside all political views and opinions and aiming for national solidarity and integration.” In other words, this article alone places a fundamental limit on the decisions and rhetoric of the Diyanet. This limit is “secularism”, which still constitutes the fundamental nature of the state, even if it is being eroded.  

Let us be brief and concise... While the Constitution sets this limit, and the Turkish Civil Code states that “children are equal heirs” without any gender discrimination, the Diyanet saying in a Friday sermon that “changing the measure of inheritance set by our Almighty Lord without mutual consent is contrary to divine justice; therefore, a person depriving their daughters of inheritance, and the daughters not being content with the right ordained by Allah, is a violation of the rights of the servants” shows that this institution is challenging the “modern law” framework, the constitution, and the fundamental nature of the state.  

This challenge is a product of the social engineering of the last 23 years. Or a part of it. So much so that while one sermon criticizes women over their clothing, another refers to the different natures (fitrat) of men and women, saying, “let us be vigilant against all kinds of harmful trends that threaten our family structure.” At the same time, some Diyanet “fatwas” make a woman’s employment subject to her husband’s permission—which conflicts with the principle of the Civil Code that spouses cannot interfere with each other’s choice of profession and work. 

Even at the center of the Diyanet’s stance against violence against women and femicide, there are “spouses” and the “family.” If you are not within a family union, it has nothing to say about these issues that are a bleeding wound of society. In short, this order says: work if your husband allows it, live if he shows you mercy, and receive a smaller share of the inheritance than your brother. It does not want you to have an existence outside the family. In short, it challenges whatever women have gained legally, however falteringly. 

But what is difficult to understand is this: sermons given to men aside, women in Turkey continue to be the subjects of their own lives, and they are resisting to remain as subjects. They will resist. 

Speaking of the rights of servants (kul hakkı), if the Diyanet wants to talk about this issue and problematize it in sermons, there are more than enough cases to analyze in Turkey today. It would be more appropriate for everyone if the Diyanet, as an institution expected to be closely related to matters that religion values such as morality, dealt with these. I think, as taxpayers, it is our most natural right to expect this from a presidency whose budget exceeds that of six ministries…