Reflections on the memoirs of Ord. Prof. Dr. Ali Fuat Başgil

ALİ FUAT BAŞGİL  WAS  IN FRANCE  DURING THE YEARS  OF THE NATIONAL STRUGGLE 

In Professor Başgil's   biography,  my first  that caught my attention  National  Struggle was ongoing  while  he was in France.  The professor was born in 1893.  During the First World War,  as a reserve officer   had been conscripted. He had not yet  finished high school.  With the Armistice,  he was demobilized.  Between 1920 and 1929,  he studied in France. His high school, university,  and doctoral studies      were completed during these years. (Grenoble and Paris Law)  He returned to his country. Shortly after,  he was appointed  as an  Associate Professor.

The professor,   especially by right-wing   circles,   was written  biography  is impressive. It is understood that he received   certificates not only in law,  but also in many    subsidiary fields, including sociology and anthropology.  Although these were all  recorded as  diplomas;  but it cannot be. It could be a minor field certificate.  

However, the point   that interests me  the most is this:  Many reserve officers  who participated   in the   First World War,  During the   National Struggle, he was conscripted again. It is interesting why Başgil  after   1920   chose to go to  France instead of  crossing over to  Anatolia.  And also, for that many  years  what financial resources he used to continue his education   I am curious about  to be honest.   

As far as I have learned, Başgil's family  of Samsun Çarşamba's   prominent   from their families.  One of them. From the notables and the scholarly class. Still, I would have liked to  learn the details. For nine years,  I have been curious about  how Başgil lived  in France. However, I have not encountered any  source  or information.  

This is the   interwar period, during which France  underwent significant  social, political, and ideological  transformations. There is a split on the left. The left  is divided  between those affiliated with the Comintern    and the Second International. Socialism  communism   debate  exists. Important figures on the left  Daladier, Herriot.  In the 20s  the "Cartel of the Left" was established.  On the right as well  Gaston Doumergue from the Radical Party is an important politician. These  experienced   There is a doctoral student in France: Ali Fuat Başgil from Çarşamba. 

Başgil   dedicated his doctoral thesis to the   founder  of the new state, Gazi Mustafa Kemal Pasha.  He returned to Turkey   in 1929.  In Ankara and Istanbul   he held positions  at higher education institutions.  We can say that Professor Başgil  actively participated  in the establishment of the Kemalist university. 

Başgil,  after returning to Turkey   a short   time later   he was appointed as an Associate Professor. Becoming a Professor and an Ordinary Professor did not take  long. Having studied abroad and completed a doctorate  gave him  a rapid advancement   in terms of  a great advantage  must have provided. 

BAŞGİL'S BREAK FROM THE KEMALIST ELITE: LANGUAGE AND RELIGION ISSUES 

Başgil's  writings from the 30s  are  highly compatible   with the revolutionary ideology. In those  years, Başgil's  it would be accurate to say that he was a typical Kemalist elite. 

There are several turning points  that caused Başgil   to break away from this structure:    The practices   of the  National Chief  era are among these.  comes first.  Secularism, the language of science   in universities being translated  into pure Turkish  and the like. This agenda gradually distances him from the Kemalist  elite.   

It is useful to describe one event  in detail.  Given that Başgil included this at length  in his memoirs. I believe the date must be 1942. The movement for pure Turkish  is continuing at full speed.  Professor Başgil is against the language revolution and in favor of evolution.  He is opposed to the efforts  to coin new words. He often even  meets them with irony.  With Velidedeoğlu   they are picking on  each other. Their legal connection with Velidedeoğlu may stem from their  years  in Switzerland.  Başgil   was a professor who frequently traveled to Switzerland. Velidedeoğlu also  spent a long time in Switzerland for his doctorate. 

Başgil, at the time  at the time, the university rector, National Chief İnönü, and Minister of National Education   Hasan Ali Yücel  come face to face.  

The first confrontations take place in university language commissions.  I believe that from those  dates  onward,   İsmet Pasha  opponent. In my opinion  he is also belittling İnönü.  This  attitude   I likened to   the stance of the Second Group   in the First Parliament. I compared it to the attitude of the “braided ones”  as  there is an expression of his. With this,  the officer class   is meant. The gold-braided ones,  the Unionists and the Kemalists. Civility   and democracy   against the gold-braided ones  is achieved by being  opposed. The Erzurum Congress  since his days.  He does not find Inönü  intellectual. 

Başgil,   objects to   the use of certain   words. In some of his objections,  he is right  is present.  I am  of the same opinion. For example,   the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM)  as the equivalent  for  accepted  he objects to the word 'Kamutay'. Every word has a history  says it fits the context. 'Kamutay'  is a forced  word and does not  correspond to the Grand National  Assembly of Turkey. He believes  it weakens its  greatness and history. Here, Professor Başgil  and I think alike. The TBMM   He is saved thanks to Başgil's resistance.

 WHO DOES BAŞGIL  DISLIKE? 

Başgil is mostly silent  regarding the Atatürk reforms.  On the issue of secularism, he always attacks İnönü. Yet, secularism is   the most fundamental  aspect of the republic and the Atatürk reforms.   principle. 

A   thought present among the entire  republican elite is also present in him.  “To save religion from the hands of  reactionaries, to train enlightened clergy” 

İnönü’s   institutions that train clergy completely  neglected  he says. This  is not true.  The  National  Chief  era's Diyanet policy, the Diyanet  organization's   more than is necessary  religious education  not to open schools that will provide.  In my opinion, this is the right policy. 

Başgil's statement that "religious education is not encouraged"  is correct. In a secular state,  this should be the correct choice anyway.  Başgil  is complaining about this. I am not. According to the need  and in a limited   number, personnel recruitment  is being carried out. There are courses accordingly.  The teaching of religious  elective  courses  in public schools is also again   In the  İnönü era. After 1946.  It is 

clearly   evident that  Başgil  does not like İnönü at all. Fuat Köprülü  and  Hamdullah Suphi  also  for similar reasons  did not particularly like the "Great Atatürk." But they  tried not to  show it. 

Başgil,  within the CHP  regarding organized individuals, politicians, journalists, and academics  in general  negatively  thinks. 

At the root of these feelings  are certain events  from the 1940s. He does not speak very  favorably of journalists Falih Rıfkı Atay and Ahmet Emin Yalman either. 

Rectors,   he also does not approve of Cemil Bilsel, Tahir Taner, and Sıddık Sami Onar  both as scientists and  as administrators.  He does not approve of them.  He criticizes their attitudes   toward the party-state with a mocking tone. 

FREE IDEAS  SOCIETY FOR THE DISSEMINATION OF FREE IDEAS 

Başgil, along with  figures disillusioned with İnönü such as Fevzi Paşa, Tevfik Rüştü Aras, Ahmet Emin Yalman, and Zekeriye Sertel,  establishes the Society for the  Dissemination  of Free Ideas. He also begins  publishing a magazine  under the same name.  begins (1947) The group  a very short time later  dissolves.    When some CHP  partisans accused the society  of being communist,  first Fevzi Pasha  would leave the Free Ideas  community. Meanwhile, Fevzi Pasha's  society  has only one common point.  Being against  İsmet Pasha. Fevzi Pasha  liberal thought  does not have much   to do with. 

RELATIONS WITH  DEMOCRAT PARTY  LEADERS 

From its inception,   party leaders wanted to bring  Başgil  into the DP. They valued him. A parliamentary  candidacy  are  offering. 

It is perfectly normal  for Başgil's name to be associated   with the DP in the 50s. All  opposition figures  are receiving offers from the DP. Some  of them   are elected   as members of parliament.   For example,  Ali Fuat Pasha, Halide Edip Adıvar,  and even  Nadi Nadi. The relationship between  Cumhuriyet newspaper and  İsmet Pasha sours during the Second World War.  years. Martial law  shuts down the newspaper many times for long periods. Nadir Nadi   two terms  from the DP list  is elected   as a member of parliament.  Without  joining the party   as an independent member of parliament.  The same situation also  applies to Ali Fuat Pasha. 

The Democrats also extend an offer  to Mehmet Ali Aybar. Aybar  is known as the author of the "Chained Freedom" manifesto.  And he is an important intellectual  of his era.  At the same time, an associate professor of  International Law. 

Professor  Başgil does not want to  enter active politics. During the  three terms the DP  was in power,  he declines offers for parliamentary candidacy. To the DP    while providing support on every issue. He continues to write articles   in newspapers  like Yeni Sabah throughout the 50s. 

AFTER MAY 27  ACCUSATIONS AGAINST BAŞGİL 

Başgil  after May 27  was labeled the "mentor of the deposed"  of being  accused. Quite a lot   of negative things were written about him. The reports that he   advised  the former  government to 'purge'  at the Çankaya table  were, of course, untrue.  The word 'tenkil' (punishment/exile)  belongs to Bayar. Başgil tried to find  solutions to save the Democrat Party.  But by then,  there was no time left. 

Regarding the    publications about him, to Cumhuriyet Newspaper  a  sent the article.  In the Professor's  memoirs,  this subject  is a "memory  from the time of the  former    government"   under the heading  has been addressed.  The newspaper  to which Başgil sent    his article is interesting:  Cumhuriyet.

Başgil's relationship with  Falih Rıfkı Atay and Ahmet Emin Yalman was already  is not good. Falih Rıfkı,  incites the Committee against Başgil. He denounces him   as the ringleader   of the reactionary  masses.  There are also those who warn him. For instance, Tiritoğlu tells the Professor,  “Do not write or speak during these times,”  he says.  

BAŞGİL  MARTIAL LAW  WHAT WAS HE ACCUSED OF IN COURT?

When Başgil  was arrested,  he was charged   under Article 159 of the Turkish Penal Code.   Martial law  The Military Court issued a release order. When the  martial law commander of the period, Cemal Tural, became enraged, saying, "This man will be released, you hear me!..."  another case was opened in the  Second Court.   

Başgil, regarding the  formation  method of the  Constituent Assembly, wrote  he was arrested due to the article. To prevent  his release, this  time a lawsuit was filed  for "acting against  national interests"  and his continued   detention was ensured.  

 BALMUMCU  IN HIS BARRACKS  DAYS OF DETENTION 

Once it was confirmed that Professor Başgil  would be tried while in custody, he was transferred  to the Balmumcu Barracks. After being taken there, he was  physically more comfortable. This is because all   political   detainees  they had gathered. 

Initially,  a  visitation ban was enforced, but later, the regime applied to  political  prisoners  relaxed significantly. While all this was happening, the Constituent Assembly was convening  and  constitution  making process   began. There are political prisoners in Balmumcu, but at the same time, in Ankara,  the Constituent Assembly  has begun its work. This  process will continue until July 1961.  A referendum  will be held.  In Balmumcu,  freedom is granted for inter-ward meetings and conversation gatherings.  Together, they listen to the   Yassıada Hour broadcasts on the radio. 

The conditions reminded me a bit of the   Polverista Barracks  days  of the Malta Exiles. Philosophy, literature, and history meetings  is permitted  to be held.  The officers on duty  also monitor these meetings. 

The conditions at the beginning of the detention  improve significantly. Afterwards, a system   that looks out for  the professor is established.  These must be the fairly large wards organized around  well-liked and well-known  prisoners  that the professor   described as a "quartier." It is clear that  movement between the wards was free. 

Every day from Balmumcu to Yassıada  to testify   or those being taken to testify. The Yassıada  ferry  departs every day  from the Dolmabahçe Pier. From there,   it returns after the trial hours. The trials   Yassıada Hour  under the name  on the radio  openly   published.  These publications  are being closely followed throughout Turkey. 

WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF HE HAD ACCEPTED MEMBERSHIP IN THE CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY? 

After the  Constituent Assembly law was enacted,  Fuat Arna from the CKMP  They sought out  Professor Başgil. A  membership in the  House of Representatives was offered  via the party quota. However, the Professor  objected to the corporatist  formation   style of the Constituent Assembly.  because he was opposed to it  he did not accept.  He even wrote articles  against the Constituent Assembly  Law. He said, 'While this is my view,  I cannot accept.'  When Başgil   did not accept, the CKMP turned to Abdülhak Kemal Yörük   had proposed it.   Professor Kemal Yörük accepted  it. The reason Yörük became a member of the Constituent Assembly  under the CKMP quota  is that Başgil did not accept. If the professor  had accepted, he might have become  a member of the Constitutional Commission. 

 TESTIMONY AT YASSIADA: REGARDING BAŞOL AND EGESEL 

From the memoirs   I understand that  Professor Başgil  was taken to Yassıada  several times.  In fact,  after the acquittal  was issued in his own case  and then  as a witness  to Yassıada  it is seen that he was invited. 

They bring the Professor   from Balmumcu  to the Beşiktaş Liaison Office.  they bring him.  From there, they take them to Yassıada by ferry.   Chief Prosecutor of the Supreme Court of Justice Ömer Altay Egesel   had been invited to a meeting at the university  a few days earlier. There, he made remarks  such as, "I will make Başgil regret being born."   When I examined the trial 

records, I found that the President of the Court, Başol,  was...  and   Chief Prosecutor  Egesel as a man of  law  I did not like at all.  His attitude toward the defendants and witnesses was  extraordinarily  bad. 

This  attitude  reminded me of  small-town gendarmerie commanders  who knew no bounds  in their mistreatment of others  once they seized power. 

The Democrats'  despite the many crimes they committed during their time in power, the trial panel's  primitive stance caused the impression that they were  subjected to injustice. Adnan Bey, who gave hundreds of thousands of   lira from the secret fund to Necip Fazıl so that he would disparage and  belittle İsmet Paşa,  could be considered 'innocent'.   

The Supreme Court of Justice  President Salim Başol is also such a person. Every  the attitude of both  is incompatible with  their identity as   jurists.   It must have been Başol who said, “the will that put you here   wants it this way,” he said  on one occasion. These are narrow-minded people. Their historical  knowledge  almost non-existent. They had   no foresight that the era  would one day change.  They sought to take revenge   for the Democrat Party administration's  harsh treatment of the judiciary  most of the time. 

For instance, Chief Prosecutor Egesel,  Pointing to  Başgil,   “the witness's place  should have been  behind  these bars”  he is able to say. Where the detained  defendants are located  by pointing to the section.  Truly a regrettable situation.  I completely agree with Professor   Başgil here. 

WHEN THE REQUEST FOR RELEASE IS DENIED  HEART COMPLICATIONS  BEGIN  

While Professor Başgil was in Balmumcu, his request for release at the Martial Law Military Court  requests  are  rejected  twice. Heart  problems begin. One of the  imprisoned   doctors begins treatment with Quinidine and Coramine. When the expected  release does not occur   The Dean of the Faculty of Law, Naci  Şensoy, comes to visit the professor. They reach the  conclusion that it would be appropriate to grant power of attorney to Sahir Erman  from the Criminal Law department.  Başgil, by a team of legal experts  that  also included  Professor Sahir,  is being defended. On March 29, 1961,  he is released. Two  hearings later,  an acquittal  verdict is issued. 

INVITATION TO POLITICS 

The Justice Party   Ali Fuat Alişan from the Samsun organization invites Professor Başgil, who is from Çarşamba,  invites him to the party.  At that time, the party's chairman   is Ragıp Gümüşpala.  Within the AP,  there are those who want to make  Başgil the chairman. They view Gümüşpala's chairmanship as temporary. General  Gümüşpala is a kind of political lightning rod. The AP members  take advantage of his resentment toward the Committee   are positioning themselves behind him. 

As he did in 1950, Başgil  asserts his non-partisanship. Upon requests to  “lead us,”  he accepts his  candidacy  for the Senate. In this way, Başgil,  from the AP list  is being nominated.

He was abroad during the elections. He was attending meetings of the International Institute of Administrative Sciences in Brussels,  Lisbon, and Geneva. 

The elections were held on  October 15. The results were announced.   Elected  Senator Başgil, on October 21, 1961,  from Geneva   He sets out to return to Turkey. This date is the day the War Academies  made a protocol to intervene in the opening of the Turkish Grand National Assembly (TBMM) by the Armed Forces Union. 

The Istanbul Martial Law Command   warned the Justice Party (AP) Provincial Chairman  regarding the   return program. The professor landed at Yeşilköy at 17:30 on October 22. He was met  by a massive crowd. His former  students Ferruh Bozbeyli and Tahsin Demiray were there to welcome   committee  are among them. These two names  from the Justice Party   had been elected  as members of parliament.

Starting from October 23, Başgil,   is on the way  to Ankara.  He is welcomed everywhere   by the cheers of partisans. His  presidential  candidacy is being encouraged. The professor   is very pleased by this. On the other hand,  there are other developments in Ankara.  In Çankaya,  the Committee,  the army  the high command  and political party  leaders  are holding a meeting regarding the opening of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM) and normalization.  The meeting has a dual purpose.  To render the War Academies protocol  ineffective  and Gürsel  as president  by electing   the institutions of the Second Republic  to begin  operating. 

BAŞGİL IS GETTING INTO THE  PRESIDENTIAL MOOD 

The team around Başgil   does not take these developments  into account at all. They continue  on their way  with their own  enthusiastic agendas.  Would I like to remind  you of this on September 5th  A roundtable meeting was held  at Çankaya, and another protocol was signed  with the party leaders  regarding the  likely  outcomes of the elections.  Those around  Başgil   the committee   these negotiations  by ignoring  that they could achieve results in parliament  they must be thinking. 

Their goal is to nominate Başgil  and by having him elected  president, the May 27 Revolution   With the opening of the  Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM), to defeat.  

Some AP, YTP, and CKMP    deputies also  visit him.  In the face of this  enthusiastic  atmosphere, Başgil  he gains a great deal of confidence. He writes a petition  addressed to the  Speaker of the  Grand National Assembly of Turkey by hand. He can no longer hold back and declares his candidacy. The deputies who  support  him also add their  names  to the petition and sign it. The Professor   wrote that there were a large number  of these signatures. However, the   exact number  of signatories is unclear. In terms of comparing this figure  with the number  of blank  ballots  cast during the session in which Gürsel was elected  is important.  Indeed,  was there a possibility  of Başgil being elected?  This  can be understood from the numbers. 

 MEETING REQUEST  FROM THE PRIME MINISTRY 

There is an exaggerated claim on the Turkish right. They say Professor Başgil was  at  gunpoint   threatened.   They blocked his candidacy.   If he had not been    blocked,  he would have been President.  it was a very strong possibility that he would be elected. 

Both  statements  are incorrect.  The truth  is this: with the October 24 protocol in place, it was not possible for Başgil  to  violate the protocol and become a candidate.  His candidacy  was  certainly  a constitutional right. But  realpolitik  did not  say so.  This election was not just any election. The power   transfer to civilians  was the choice. 

In 1966, Başgil  could not see the reality  that Demirel saw. He acted too bookishly.  He should have followed  a strategy   suited to extraordinary conditions. 

The High Court of Justice  decisions  after their pronouncement   45 days later, a chance for  retaliation  was not possible.  This was  contrary to the nature of things. 

Furthermore, within the army  there were developments  that went beyond the National Unity Committee. Developments  that would lead to  the power  slipping completely  out of the committee's  hands.  the Justice Party would have  suffered the most.   With the protocol signed  at Çankaya  the day before,   a middle ground  had been found. 

The extremists in the army  the (angry) faction from taking  action  was for Gürsel, İnönü, Gümüşpala, Bölükbaşı, and Alican to act together. The  way to achieve this  was to make Gürsel  president  and  civilianize the status quo. 

Başgil,  was in a meeting  at the hotel with the  extremist group  organizing his candidacy. Perhaps the professor  was dreaming  of the presidency. We cannot know. 

An order from the Prime Ministry  officer arrived.  by Fahri Özdilek    was invited  it was communicated. Özdilek  de facto  was serving as prime minister. General Gürsel, the National Unity Committee  chairman   and  was the prime minister.  The most senior general in the committee after Gürsel was Özdilek. He held the rank of  four-star general. 

The invitation was accepted. The professor was  accompanied by Tevetoğlu, Alişan, and Pehlivanoğlu.  Başgil was welcomed at the Prime Ministry by   Fahri Özdilek and Sıtkı Ulay.  He was received by them.  

From what the professor  has written,    it is understood that he did not grasp the issue.  The professor  at length  about his  War of Independence  memoirs and his time as a reserve officer,  mentioned. He gave Constitutional Law lectures  to the pashas. From what is written,  I gather that the pashas  listened  with respect. 

Professor Başgil,  meanwhile,  the National Chief  criticized the era, and continued to give  state  theory  lectures. He spoke of  gendarmerie rifle butts and the public's   growing coldness   toward the government. I am sure that İsmet Pasha  took some jabs in between. 

He spoke at length about education, administration,  and politicians,  giving lectures to the generals.  Generals Özdilek and Ulay  listened patiently.  Finally, General Ulay said: “These are very interesting ideas. 

However, there is a subject  we really want to discuss.”  If you will allow me. Let us  talk about that"    he said, getting to the point.  

As can be seen, there was  no gun held  to the head  of Professor Başgil at all. 

Ulay  very clearly: "We cannot allow  another candidacy against  General Gürsel"; there is a new  junta in the army that can  override   the will of the National Unity Committee (MBK). "We cannot   guarantee  your life"  he said. 

That Başgil was taken aback by this statement   is very surprising. Before him  was a revolutionary government.  Başgil  very much  to his candidacy   to convince the generals  he struggled quite a bit. You have held  a fair and free election.  You must complete this,   he said. 

Even  to persuade  them,   “Gürsel’s  I am sure he will be elected. Let him win this position through free  elections"  he used the expressions.  Under the conditions of that day, it seemed truly  strange  to me  that Başgil would think such an  election could take place. 

In other words, Başgil will win. The state will  fall into line  before him. Could such a thing  happen? Political history  shows us that this is impossible. 

Those who interpret  Gürsel's election as  a continuation of tutelage  exists.  I do not think so. This new  regime's  establishment.  The Second  Republic  was established this way. A transition could only be achieved like this without leading to a new intervention. 

Başgil's  The Justice Party,  from which he was elected  Senator for Samsun, especially its provincial organization, had worked  for the rejection of the constitution. 

They had campaigned with the slogan  “there is good in saying no. Look into my eyes and you will understand.”  This was directly intended to  ensure the rejection of the constitution.  The issue   was not the constitution either. It was to plunge the May 27 administration into a  legitimacy  crisis. 

The professor's expectation was that within the Justice  Party   there were those   who wanted to break the Çankaya protocol   extremists  and  other  with the support to come from parties  President  was to be elected. However, on the day the TBMM  opened  the May 27 revolution   would mean defeating  it. 

During such a transition  period, neither the cadres  within the National Unity Committee (MBK)  nor the Committee of National Union (SKB)  power  this  would not have transferred under those conditions.   anti-May 27  front  had it been successful.  the National Unity Committee  another coup that would have sidelined  would have occurred. Things could have become chaotic. The Grand National Assembly of Turkey  could not be opened. At the head of the Justice Party members  quite  bad things could have happened.  Recall the Talat Aydemir  uprisings of 1962 and 1963. 

The professor pushed an option that was not viable  too hard. He was quite uneasy   at the end of the talks. That is what is understood from his writings. 

BAŞGİL  COULD HE HAVE BEEN  ELECTED PRESIDENT? 

Başgil could not have been elected  president on October 26, 1961. The newly elected  deputies and senators of the CHP and other  parties would have remained  committed to the Çankaya  Protocol. Başgil  the power of the faction  that put forward  was, in my opinion, limited to the "blank votes" cast.   One must look at the result of the  vote taken.  The votes cast for Cemal Gürsel: 434, the number of blank votes:  156.  Meanwhile, for İnönü,  There were votes cast for Ürgüplü,  for Başgil,  and for Bayar.  

It could now be said that  “a free election was not held.” This is partially  true. There was  a bargain in place, and  the parties honored their commitments.  New regimes  are established this way in history. Consider the founding  of the Fifth Republic in France, the election of  General Charles de Gaulle as president, and the conditions  under which the  Republican revolution  in Turkey took place. In regimes,  crossing the threshold  it happens this way. 

Professor Başgil   instead of consulting with  the extremists, it would have been  more appropriate to meet with the party's  chairman, Gümüşpala. 

Regarding Fahri Özdilek, Başgil  said, 'from public opinion'   and the country  wrote that he was 'unaware of the reality'. But he himself  does not seem   very aware  of the 'political reality'. The dynamics  of politics  are often  constitutional law  in his books  does not happen as foreseen. 

He also uses the phrase  “the victory of the democratic front”  in his memoirs. All parties   other than the CHP  the democratic  front  while forming, from the elections   first  emerging and  millions of  citizens' votes received by the Republican People's Party   does not find "democratic." İsmet Pasha and CHP  hostility  Başgil  the professor's  judgment has been quite impaired, in my opinion. 

Furthermore,  the CHP  other than  that the parties would unite around his own candidacy  he believes  they will. This  politically  not realistic. 

RELATIONS WITH THE REPUBLICAN PEASANT NATION PARTY 

The Democrat Party  having been closed down, the Republican  Peasant Nation Party could have  filled  the political vacuum that emerged. There was even some movement in this direction. The party's    its leader is well-known: Osman  Bölükbaşı.  

Bölükbaşı had participated in the founding of the Democrat Party but later  parted ways.  It is understood that he  met with Başgil several times  to discuss  the political balances after May 27. 

Başgil extends significant credit to the CKMP. After a while, when the ballot box  appears,  he states  that the CHP will once again fail to be elected.    He criticizes the CHP for its “Moscow-style  statism”   and    secularism.   accuses. 

He follows a logic  like this. The space  vacated by the DP could be filled by a  party close to it. And that  is the CKMP. From the memoirs, Bölükbaşı's  the Professor    of political activities  after his release, to the CKMP  invited  it is understood. 

COULD BAŞGİL  HAVE LED  A COALITION  OUTSIDE  OF THE CHP?

Başgil,  resigned from his  senatorship and returned to Istanbul.  A short time later, he was visited by Istanbul deputy Ferruh Bozbeyli and Rize deputy Arif Hikmet Güner.  The date:  November 7, 1961. 

The visitors asked Professor  Başgil to support a candidate  of the parties   to lead the formation of a coalition government.   They wanted him to take the lead.  

Başgil, in order to meet  with politicians,  went to Ankara.  The atmosphere in Ankara was not at all   conducive to this.   These developments  show that some   members of parliament   are acting  independently  of their  party leader. The leaders (Bölükbaşı  and Alican)  to the event  positively  did not approach.  

Bölükbaşı did not even accept the  prime ministry offer. He said, "I cannot accept it" for the sake of the "salvation of the country."  he said.  

Bölükbaşı's    stance as merely "the soldiers would not accept  do not”  as  it is not correct to interpret.   The New Turkey Party was also a party founded by those who broke away from the Democrat Party with liberal arguments.  party.  Ekrem Alican is a politician who  accepted a ministry  in the National Unity government. The CKMP, on the other hand, is  In the 50s, he had built his politics  on opposition to both the CHP  and the DP.  I would like to make 

an observation   regarding this matter:    İsmet Pasha's   second government  even after  his resignation   (1963),  the parties   opposing the CHP  were hesitant  about forming a coalition government. Given that İsmet İnönü formed his third government    with independents, the anti-CHP  of the front    forming the government  conditions  did not yet exist.  These conditions would emerge after Demirel became the chairman of the AP.  would be born.

BAŞGİL'S SITUATION  AFTER 1965 

Professor Başgil  after resigning from his position as senator  went to Switzerland.  He lived there for a long time. He published articles in newspapers close to the Justice Party.  In the meantime,  a book titled "On the Causes of the   May 27 Revolution"   in French  wrote. The book was translated into Turkish by  former prosecutor Mehmet Ali Sebük.  Sebük, for  Nazım  Hikmet's  release  great  struggle  who provided  was a man of law. At the end of the 40s  he had  begun practicing law.  In Ahmet Emin Yalman's  newspaper  he published a long serial.  He titled his writings "Nazım's Struggle for Freedom"  under the title  had published.  Sebük, after the 50s,  for two terms  was elected as a deputy for İzmir from the Democrat Party. 

As for Başgil's  final position in the AP,  Justice Party General  Chairman  Following the sudden death of Ragıp Gümüşpala in Istanbul, an extraordinary  congress was held in  November 1964. 

At this congress, besides Demirel and Bilgiç,   there were  two more candidates.  Tekin Arıburun  and  Ali Fuat Başgil.  The last two candidates   received very few votes. Of the 1,679 votes cast at the congress,  1,072 were given to Demirel.   This result,    in October 1961, meant that Başgil, who was expected   to lead the party, had reached this point  far from  having fallen   shows.

Professor Başgil   was elected as a deputy for Istanbul in 1965, along with his student Ferruh Bozbeyli.  Istanbul  deputy was elected. 

Other interesting figures who entered parliament from Istanbul in this election  figures such as Çetin Altan, Sadun Aren, and Mehmet Ali Aybar  TİP   became members of parliament.  Orhan Birgit,  Orhan Eyüboğlu, and  Coşkun Kırca, on the other hand,  from the CHP  became members of parliament   were elected.  

PROFESSOR  BAŞGİL'S  PASSIVE SECULARISM  UNDERSTANDING 

Regarding secularism,   there are two concepts:  Passive secularism and exclusionary   secularism. The professor is in favor of passive secularism. But  on one hand  the state  is tasked with the duty of "training enlightened clergy."  

For this reason, Professor Başgil  holds contradictory views  on state-religion relations. He accuses Inönü of leaving religious education  to wither away over time.  accuses. Başgil, while calling on the secular state  to provide  more  religious education  and to train  Directorate of Religious Affairs  personnel,  on the other hand  of the state  in the religious sphere  a passive  understanding of secularism  that advocates for non-interference  believes. 

Passive secularism is religious  that remains distant from institutions and organizations  state. It does not intervene, nor does it provide  resources. For example, in the USA, every church   generates its own resources. In England,  the crown   is the head of the Anglican Church for historical reasons. The head of the English Church   is officially the king. The Anglican Church   has become identified with the British  monarchy. For this reason, in England,   it exists in practice.  Not officially. 

In France, however, in 1905  the church   the state  sphere  was removed from.  The church  is "outside the state" but is  controlled by the state. Religion is not left to its own devices.   It is kept  under surveillance  by the state.

During these years, Cumhuriyet Newspaper  is closer to the Democrat Party line. Nadir Nadi was elected   as a member of parliament from the DP list.  Professor Başgil's  articles   are being published  in Cumhuriyet. 

He argues that the state  should not interfere  with religious institutions. Başgil says, I advocate for passive  secularism.  and then  right into the middle of reactionism  in the time that will pass. One of Professor Başgil's  most erroneous views is believing that  passive secularism  could be implemented in Turkey.   

 BAŞGİL AND NURCULAR MOVEMENT 

Ali Fuat  Başgil  mistakes the Nur Community for  a civil  society organization.  Şerif Mardin will also say similar things later on.  After completing his doctorate in the USA and  at Ankara Faculty of Political Science  at Ankara Faculty of Political Science  after becoming  a faculty member.   We, too,  read his writings  in the 80s.   Said Nursi  since the Constitutional  era   a well-known name. He also came to the First Parliament  good treatment  received.  The Risale-i Nur treatises   are being copied  Nur  students  are being spread by. The Nur students of Said Nursi   apostles. The Democrat  Party wants to  utilize Nurculuk. Especially  Menderes.  Celal Bayar turns a blind   eye. Menderes has   allocated a car  to Said Nursi and is having him conduct party propaganda. The sects'  all of them support Menderes. The most powerful of these is  Nurculuk.

A small reminder:  Fetullah  Gülen is also a figure who  emerged   from within the Nur movement.  

The Nur followers    It became one of the most effective weapons in the DP's  anti-CHP policies. To prove that the CHP was an  anti-religious party,  a great deal of  organized  propaganda was carried out. As if Menderes  were very religious. 

With Başgil  corresponding  many  Nurcu followers exist. They are sending him letters. They are asking  questions. The professor is still  in the mood for civil society and passive secularism.  The National  Unity Committee  government  by the  eventually arrested  Başgil, not only for the views  he put forward  in his writings  but also due to his  relations with the Nurists  is also being accused in the military court.  

I would like to remind you  of what the investigating judge said:  “Nurculuk is a crime. Don't you know that?”  Despite 

all  these relationships,  in my opinion,   Başgil was a religious person.  not at all. Certainly not a Nurcu. Despite coming from a  pious family from Çarşamba.  His relationship with religion  is the same as other Democrat Party elites. I do not  believe he was someone who  observed religious duties.   "My faith  is strong... God  may he forgive me"   a member of his party.  like Bayar and Menderes  that is. 

The Nurcu community benefited from him. Through his   views in favor of liberty,  they sought to create  a channel for themselves. 

For this reason,  Başgil  is seen  by Kemalist  circles as the person  who paved the way  for reactionaries and bigots. 

I, Başgil  I do not see a conscious encouragement of  reactionary thought in his ideas. The professor  believed he was defending freedom of  thought and belief. But the result was this. 

I would also like to   share  this observation:  Istanbul Law  In his faculty,  there are two chairs  of Constitutional Law. Those recruited   for the academic career    at the chair headed by Başgil  are all conservative   figures.  Servet Armağan, Selçuk Özçelik,  Just like Burhan Kuzu.  You can guess  who was  at the other  podium and   what they represented. 

BAŞGİL'S  MISCONCEPTION REGARDING SECULARISM 

Başgil,   viewed   religion  as a sphere of civil society     in which  the state  does not intervene.  But on the other hand, in contradiction to this  had views.  From the state   he expected  the training of   an 'enlightened' clergyman.  He expected İsmet Pasha     to [reform] the religious establishment  in time for   condemning to regression.   He was accusing. This was a  contradictory stance. 

Looking back from today,  Başgil's    views on "training clergy" and religious civil society  in the field of  freedom of organization   understanding as  entirely counter-revolutionary   has yielded results. 

In the realm of civil society,   the unregulated  organization of religion has left our country in a worrying  state  of a cult  into a spiral.  has dragged. 

The state-led  teaching of religion,  the formation of its  cadres, and the religious cadres  the state sphere  completely taking over  experiencing  the result  has yielded.  The professor's  views  were wrong. Time  has  shown this. 

Professor Başgil's   assertion that  the state does not interfere with religion in the West  is also not accurate. It does so when necessary. France, where he lived and studied for a long time,  is an example  of this. In the France of the 1920s,  where he  received his education,    the republic was politically  divided.  The limitation of the religious sphere  was a matter of great importance   to radical republicans, the radical  left, socialist,  and communist   parties.  was the subject. Apart from conservative parties,  no segment   in the religious sphere  was advocating  for freedom.  Freedom was limited  to church practices. 

It should not be forgotten that the French Revolution  both  against the aristocracy  and  against the clergy  was a revolution carried out.  The Enlightenment—at the same time—meant   a secular  world to create.  was coming.  

 France,  “religion within the state  under   control”  which it kept  a century-old  a   after the experience, the 1905  law  completely  removed it from the  state sphere. 

In France,    religion  is outside the state sphere. However,  is an institution supervised  by the state. In France, there is not passive  secularism, but    exclusionary secularism. 

Professor Başgil’s   for Turkey   passive   secularism   as a requirement of  liberal democracy  the proposition  was not realistic.  Başgil's thought put at risk  secularism, which is the foundation of the republic.   After the 50s  the religious policies implemented   of the state   resulted in its religionization. 

For the last  30 years,   Turkey has been governed  by a team that adopts  Başgil's understanding.  The implementation has yielded the exact opposite results. Religion in public life  has been the fundamental determinant.  In my opinion,  secularism  does not exist in practice. 

Ultimately, Başgil,  of religion  (with its institutions and personnel)  what kind of a   hegemony  power  has failed to see that it is. 

ANOTHER  THOUGHT OF PROFESSOR  BAŞGİL THAT I DO NOT  AGREE WITH 

The professor's   Another view I do not agree with  is his opposition  to proportional representation.  In my opinion,  parliament should be  elected through   full proportional representation.  General  vote  all  colors  to parliament  must be fully  reflected. The point I consider most important in terms of democratic  legitimacy is  in representation  is justice. 

Right-wing parties   for three-quarters  of a century  have derived  their governing   legitimacy  from the "national  explain it with 'will'. However,   the national will is not  an abstraction. It is the  will of the nation  reflected in Parliament. But  interestingly, starting with the Democrat Party, the Justice Party,  the Motherland Party, and finally the Justice  and Development Party  governments   in all the  election laws they have enacted  have attempted  to prevent  true representation. Since 2002,   we have seen   the most extreme examples of this.

Başgil,   was opposed to proportional representation,  which  makes it difficult  for elections to produce  a single-party government. He was a majoritarian. In my opinion, this stance  is,   deeply flawed (defective) in terms of the manifestation of the national will in the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM).   creates a situation. Başgil also  did not prioritize justice in representation,  and in parliament and government  adopted majoritarianism. This reflects  a style of thought consistent  with all colors  of the Turkish right. 

OF THE NATIONAL UNITY COMMITTEE  CONTRADICTORY  PRACTICES 

The   National   Unity Committee  administration  engaged in many contradictory practices. For example, Başgil, regarding the opening of the Constituent Assembly,  opening  was arrested during those days, and in revolutionary  circles, he was accused  of being   a man  of the Democrat Party. 

The professor   was arrested.  In the end  was acquitted.  Meanwhile, the Constituent Assembly  continued its work. The constitution-making process was completed. 

Before the  referendum, it was  decided to hold  introductory talks on the constitution on the radio.   The situation  It was different from September 12. The committee did not  identify itself with the text of the constitution.  

Cemal Gürsel  did not go on tours to “promote the constitution on behalf of the state”  like Kenan Evren. It was possible to criticize   the constitution.  The result of the referendum  also demonstrates this.   

What is interesting  is that the Istanbul radio administration, prior to the referendum,  had included    Professor Ali Fuat Başgil on the list of speakers  and had invited him. To avoid speaking on the radio, the professor  went to Erdek  for a vacation.    In other words, Istanbul  radio had  invited   a constitutional law professor who had been detained for two months  to the radio station. 

A similar  situation applies to my professor Tarık Zafer Tunaya. Constitutional Law professor  Tunaya  was among the 147.  He had been dismissed from the university. This operation was  attributed  to the 'Group of 14' who were to be removed from the Committee. 

Ultimately, a few months later, Tunaya  joined  the Constituent Assembly as a representative for the province of Istanbul.  He took part in the constitutional commission. In fact, he was one of the architects of  the 1961 Constitution.  the magnificent literary preface (foreword)  written by  my mentor Tarık Zafer Tunaya. 

The conclusion to be drawn from these developments is that,  the National Unity Committee showed significant instability  during the period it held power.  The revolutionary  administration hardened  and   over  time  there were periods when he changed his policies  accordingly. 

ACCORDING TO BAŞGİL, THE CAUSE OF THE REVOLUTION IS ONAR'S  ATTITUDE 

28-29   The April events accelerated the path  leading to May 27. Following the enactment  of the  Investigation  Commission   law on April 27, students at  Istanbul and Ankara  universities  demonstrations had taken place.  The government had intervened  harshly against the students. 

Following the increase in demonstrations at Istanbul University, the Istanbul Governorship intervened in the university with  mounted police.  The police entered the university  without a request  from the Rectorate.  upon entering, Sıddık Sami Onar  begins a discussion with the police  chiefs regarding the  “administrative autonomy”  of the university.   Onar states that without the  request of the university rector,  police forces  that he cannot enter the campus.  A scuffle breaks out. The rector falls to the ground. Or is pushed down.  He is taken to the Police Department   and after receiving minor treatment,  is brought back to the university. 

Başgil finds it inappropriate   for Onar to appear before the students  while bandaged. The events  that it flared up after this, and that Onar   provoked the students with this  attitude. 

As Rector,  he should have maintained his  composure. There are times when one must "swallow blood and drink pomegranate juice"—  that is to say, endure in silence.  This is what greatness is," he writes. Başgil,  He believes that Onar  exaggerated his minor  injury during the scuffle to inflame the events. 

Başgil not only   disapproved of Onar's  conduct as Rector but also  held a dismissive  view of him academically.  expressions  used in his memoirs. 

WORDS REGARDING KUBALI 

In my opinion, Başgil finds not only Onar's but also Kubalı's legal expertise weak and belittles it. He particularly mocks his   demeanor and  attitude  during his testimony at Yassıada. The Court of Justice  “violation of the constitution  in his case,” he listened to Kubalı all day. While the President of the Court gave Kubalı  the opportunity to speak  at length, Başgil was able to speak  very little. He describes Kubalı’s  demeanor in court as “troublesome.”  From this, he characterizes Kubalı as “academically  empty—a person who is  arrogant.”  that he found  I conclude. 

SOMETHING PROFESSOR ALİ FUAT BAŞGİL DID RIGHT 

Başgil was invited to a dinner meeting at Çankaya   regarding the  constitutionality  of the Investigation Committee     established by the DP government.  It was a meeting where President Bayar, Prime Minister Menderes  and  the   relevant ministers were also present  this.  

Bayar's  “now is the time not for criticism but for punishment   time”   at the meeting where he said  Menderes    was uneasy.  He spoke  at length with Başgil. Başgil stated that he was not  a party to anything unconstitutional in the establishment  of the commission,   but that he saw constitutional violations regarding its powers.

The professor,  advised the commission  not to exercise these powers  which were unconstitutional. While Bayar  paid little attention to Başgil's views, Menderes listened to the proposals  that would save the Democrat Party government. 

Two of these  are significant: 

Başgil had proposed the formation of a new government  under the leadership of Ali Fuat Cebesoy. The name Cebesoy  was a name that the  CHP  could not say no to.  It would have lowered  the political tension. 

Başgil made this proposal  He had spoken with   Cebesoy and received a positive response. The other   proposal was for the government  to appoint  certain names  from the CHP as ministers. 

Başgil  had taken both proposals to İnönü; a definitive   had received no response.  

Even if the CHP  had not provided   any ministers to such  a government, a cabinet  to be formed  under the leadership of Ali Fuat Cebesoy could have calmed the situation. An early election could have been held with Cebesoy. 

Bayar's uncompromising,  Due to Menderes's hesitant stance and İsmet Pasha's  “political maneuvering,”  this option  could not be studied sufficiently.