Home > Current Affairs News > Referendum call from Erdoğan's chief advisor Mehmet Uçum

Referendum call from Erdoğan's chief advisor Mehmet Uçum

Mehmet Uçum, Deputy Chairman of the Presidential Legal Policies Board, reacted to those who argue that the public has no demand for a new constitution. Stating that a referendum is mandatory even if a new constitution is accepted by 400 or more votes in the Turkish Grand National Assembly (TBMM), Uçum said, "The first reason is the necessity to complete democratic legitimacy with the approval of the people, who are the primary constituent power. The second reason is the requirement of the people's right to audit whether a legal text in line with the people's political constitutional vision has been accepted in Parliament. Final word: There can be no new constitution without a referendum."

12punto

AKP Chairman and President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s chief advisor Mehmet Uçum continues his 'Sunday writings' that he shares on his X account on weekends.

Uçum had recently opposed the comments that “A new constitution is wanted for Erdoğan’s re-candidacy” and had written that Erdoğan could be a candidate once more if a decision for early elections is taken.

Uçum, whose agenda is again the new constitution, reacted to the views that citizens have no demand for a new constitution with the words, "A superficial assessment that ignores the revolutionary dynamic and future perspective of the people's demands, and has no factual basis."

Underlining that there cannot be a new constitution without a referendum, Uçum stated, "Even if a new constitution is accepted in the TBMM with 400 or more votes, there are two main reasons for the necessity of a referendum: The first reason is the necessity to complete democratic legitimacy with the approval of the people, who are the primary constituent power. The second reason is the requirement of the people's right to audit whether a legal text in line with the people's political constitutional vision has been accepted in Parliament. Final word: There can be no new constitution without a referendum."

The full text of Uçum's article is as follows:

"In this series, we will finally focus on the 'claim that the public has no constitutional agenda'. This claim, besides being a distortion, also points to intellectual inadequacy. The Constitutional Nature of the People's Demands! In the routine functioning of democracies, the public does not express its expectations regarding the constitution in legal language. To determine the public's constitutional demands, one must look at the legal equivalent of all their political, economic, cultural, and justice-related visions for change or development.

If laws or secondary legislation remain insufficient to meet the public's expectations for the better regarding the system, a need for constitutional norms arises. This should also be understood as the public's constitutional demand. In other words, the task of democratic politics is to translate the public's desire for a fairer and better-functioning order—regardless of the subject—into a need for constitutional change, in terms of demands that cannot be met with sub-constitutional norms. This is the essence of the matter."

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PUBLIC'S CONCRETE DEMANDS AND THE CONSTITUTION!

"If the public's expectation regarding the solution to general and current problems requires developed rules and improved institutions, some of these emerge as constitutional demands due to the level of the norm. For example, the public's expectation for the implementation of price ceilings when needed in the fight against high costs should be accepted as a constitutional demand. The public's wishes regarding the right to a reasonable and humane life can be concretized as the inclusion of such a right in the constitution. Again, the public's wish that no one should be in financial distress can turn into guarantees in the constitution such as minimum livelihood support or the right to a minimum income. The public's wishes for voter will to be more effective in parliamentary election processes can be a constitutional rule and institution that includes the 'right of recall'.

The public's desire to be more active in legislative processes can be accepted as a demand for a right and authority regarding the public's ability to propose laws, which should be included in the constitution. Many examples like these can be given for every field. As can be seen, the view that 'there is no demand for a new constitution on the public's agenda' is a superficial assessment that ignores the revolutionary dynamic and future perspective of the people's demands and has no factual basis."

POLITICAL CONSTITUTION AND LEGAL CONSTITUTION!

"Therefore, a new constitution is actually a fundamental need created by the public's continuous and general vision of something better in terms of the system. For this reason, a distinction is made between a political constitution and a legal constitution. A political constitution is the constitution revealed by the public's vision regarding the system and order, and their demands and needs for something better.

It is possible to see the elements of a political constitution more clearly in the programs of those who engage in 'demand politics' from political parties, which are the democratic and legitimate representatives of the people. If the political constitution put forward by the public is legally translated and accepted as a holistic law in the Parliament, which consists of the people's representatives, and enters into force with the approval of the people, then a new constitution exists legally."

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PUBLIC'S NEW CONSTITUTION AGENDA AND THE REFERENDUM!

"In a democratic order, as long as the public always wants something better regarding the system—which has been the case until now—a new constitution will always be the ordinary and dynamic agenda of the public. For this reason, the Parliament, which is the representative constituent power, must make the new constitution by taking into account the public's permanent constitutional agenda and the necessity of obtaining approval from the people, who are the primary constituent power. Because the public shows the harmony between the constitution they envision and the new constitution accepted by the Parliament only through the approval they will give.

Even if a new constitution is accepted in the TBMM with 400 or more votes, there are two main reasons for the necessity of a referendum:

The first reason is the necessity to complete democratic legitimacy with the approval of the people, who are the primary constituent power.

The second reason is the requirement of the people's right to audit whether a legal text in line with the people's political constitutional vision has been accepted in Parliament.

Final word: There can be no new constitution without a referendum."