Law cannot exist without the state

It is not that the Narin murder could not be solved; it was not solved, and perhaps it never will be. The streets are full of bandits; drug trafficking is progressing unchecked toward the upper echelons of society—including public agents (it could not be otherwise!)—while drug use is spreading toward the lower echelons.

Faced with the fact that such isolated incidents, the number of which could be multiplied, are not coincidental and are becoming increasingly widespread, we must seriously consider the reality that we are experiencing a profound transformation beyond mere social change. 

Law is a very fundamental public power. Law is created when a state is established; when the law collapses, the state collapses. This fundamental relationship between the phenomenon of the state and the legal system is an indispensable condition. The reason for this is that the legal system serves as the balance for both society and the state apparatus and its organs themselves. This is why, in the two-tier German education system, which is said to form the root of the global scientific system, philosophy, law, and medicine were placed in the first tier. Philosophy takes the top spot as the fundamental method of thought and analysis that encompasses all sciences. Medicine was seen as related to individual health, while law was seen as related to social health. If we take this system back a bit historically, theology, law, and medicine were initially in the first tier. When the Minister of Education of the time, Humboldt, took office, he demoted theology to the lower tier and elevated philosophy to the upper tier instead. 

While these processes were being carried out in the German education system, let us take a look at our own Turkey. Philosophy has already been seen as unnecessary. Mathematics, which is the quantitative manifestation of philosophy, has not even visited the port of our youth. As such, we have been able to develop neither a system of thought nor a legal system, even if only in practice. 

They say we are building the world's largest courthouse in Ankara. If a vitamin or substance is missing in the human body, it is supplemented artificially. Building the world's largest palace of justice is a matter for shame, not for pride. We are so devoid of philosophy that those who have the audacity to confuse a matter for shame with a matter for pride are able to occupy political offices. 

The deliberate and intentional destruction of the legal system stems from a disrespect for maintaining the functioning of the state mechanism itself in an arbitrary manner. While the legal system is related to individuals through the field of private law, it is related to public area activities as much as, and even more than, it is related to individuals through the field of public law. Could the AKP's discomfort with the Court of Accounts (Sayıştay) be coincidental? Could the AKP's discomfort with the Court of Accounts be related to errors made inadvertently in transactions and some accounts? Such errors can be eliminated with minor penalties or expressions of remorse. However, the situation that angers the AKP is the exposure to the public, through the Court of Accounts, of certain public transactions related to the party itself or personal interests. 

The same situation applies to the Constitutional Court. The biggest concern of Prof. Dr. Hüseyin Nail Kubalı, who taught Constitutional Law in the 1960s, was social freedoms and, in this context, the limitation of political power. The absence of a Constitutional Court at that time and the lack of judicial review (legal oversight) against the violation of the constitution bothered the professor immensely. Well, the Constitutional Court was established with the 1961 Constitution, nearly 70 years have passed, and the new constitution that the AKP government is disrespectfully and irregularly imposing on society appears to be a text that will either include a hollowed-out Constitutional Court article or, more likely, will not include such an organ at all. Well, has our society reached such a superior maturity in these 70 years that it does not need an institution like the Constitutional Court? Or, on the contrary, has it reached the high intelligence of surrendering its existence entirely to an organization that looks like a government that has seized all power!

Almost no government structure adopts the legal system because it restricts its room for maneuver. For, according to the fundamental constitutional understanding, constitutions are the supreme law that establishes the state and prevents it from using its immense power (Leviathan) oppressively over society. Do you think a mentality that likens democracy to a tram—a vehicle to be boarded when necessary and exited when necessary—would accept legal oversight? While the AKP started out with the deception that it would join the European Union, those dim-witted individuals who appeared to be intellectuals, incapable of realizing that they had boarded the democracy tram suitable for its purpose and that they could drive this tram wherever they wanted, were even able to pave the way for them to come to power with the slogan "not enough, but yes." Now that the time has come to get off the tram, can a strong Court of Accounts, Constitutional Court, and Court of Cassation be designed in the proposed new draft constitution?

At the beginning of this article, I addressed the legal system and the state apparatus together. Yes, a very important area where the state apparatus manifests itself is the field of law. The state and the government organs under it act within the boundaries of the law. In today's management system, if merit has been pushed into the background in favor of loyalty, it means there is no law. As in the Narin case, if a simple murder is not solved due to political profit-loss calculations, if the known perpetrators cannot be brought to justice, and if the relevant minister recklessly occupies his office, it means there is no law. Well, if there is no law in the Narin incident and other similar areas, and if there is no state, then why is the Narin murder still not being solved due to concerns about political votes? Yes, there is a concern for votes, but the existence of a concern for votes is necessary not only in modern state administration but also in tribal administration.

Our country is being managed not coincidentally, but intentionally. All the disorders we experience or what we perceive as mistakes are done knowingly, willingly, and intentionally. Because Turkey is also being placed somewhere in the global exploitation system. The survival problem is not for the country, but for the collaborative organs and individuals. The people and society can save themselves only by uniting, and politicians never can!