Trustee remarks from two Ahmets: Response to Feti Yıldız's words

Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) Deputy Chairman Feti Yıldız recently made evaluations regarding the trustee appointment practice, stating that the practice should be reconsidered and that there is no obstacle to the reinstatement of Esenyurt's elected Mayor Ahmet Özer and Mardin's elected Metropolitan Mayor Ahmet Türk.

Yıldız's remarks, in which he noted that MHP Chairman Devlet Bahçeli referred to the two individuals as the "two Ahmets," have sparked widespread public debate.

CHP's Ahmet Özer and DEM Party's Ahmet Türk gave their first assessments regarding MHP member Feti Yıldız's statements to Halk TV.

In his statement to Halk TV, Ahmet Türk stated that the issue of reinstatement is not a personal priority, using the following expressions:

“We are against the mortgaging of the popular will. I don't actually place much importance on my own reinstatement. What is important for us, our expectation, is the end of the trustee politics. Whether I am reinstated or not is not a subject I care about much. In many municipalities, the popular will has been mortgaged. The reinstatement of 1-2 people does not mean that the trustee politics have ended. For that reason, I am not dwelling too much on the issue concerning me.”

Ahmet Özer, on the other hand, emphasized that the trustee practice is not just an individual matter, saying the following:

“The trustee issue is not only about me personally, but also about the manifestation of the popular will. I care about this issue out of my responsibility to the hundreds of thousands of voters who trusted me. During the process in which I was tried while detained, I fought not to let the people's trust in me fall to the ground, and as someone who has dedicated his life to peace and democracy, I continue to fight.”

“THE VOTER'S FAITH IN THE BALLOT BOX HAS BEEN BROKEN”

In his assessment of the social effects of the trustee practice, Özer used the following expressions:

“It must be emphasized that the trustee practice has broken the voter's faith in the ballot box, weakened civic consciousness, and deeply shaken political participation. If a people's preference is ignored when they go to the ballot box, the result is a decline in civic consciousness, a weakening of the sense of belonging, and a deepening of social rupture.”

“These practices reinforce the belief among voters that ‘those who come with the ballot box cannot leave with the ballot box,’ and create the feeling that elections have lost their meaning. Yet in democracies, the ballot box is not just a tool for voting; it is a mechanism for the people to exercise their right to have a say in their own future.”

In his statement, Ahmet Özer also touched upon the Imralı process and stated that the trustee practice should be ended:

“In today's conjuncture, considering the contradiction of the trustee practice with the ‘Peace Process’ and the ‘Constitution,’ the trustee usurpation should be ended immediately, and the Mayors should be reinstated. Because there is no peace without democracy, and no democracy without peace.”

Referring to the words of MHP's Feti Yıldız, Özer made the following assessment:

“For the peace process to take hold, there is a need for confidence-building steps, and the public is waiting for the restoration of the voter's will. In this vein, the statements of Mr. Feti Yıldız, who is a valuable jurist in addition to his politician identity, are extremely appropriate and important. Indeed, Mr. Yıldız, as one of the important figures showing a sincere and determined stance for the peace process to take hold, is aware that the continuation of trustees harms the process. In this sense, I thank him on behalf of all our voters whose will has been usurped for his valuable statement.”

WHAT DID Feti Yıldız SAY?

MHP's Feti Yıldız had used the following expressions in his statement regarding the trustee practice:

“Some parties had mentioned the trustee issue in their main reports. There was no issue regarding the trustee practice in the 118-page report presented by the Nationalist Movement Party.”

“However, this does not mean that the Nationalist Movement Party should not have an opinion on the trustee issue. In our opinion, the trustee practice is sometimes necessary.”

“For example, depending on the nature of the crime committed, if the trustee practice is a necessity, we think that instead of the center doing it, having them selected from the municipal councils to which the new administrators are affiliated is more appropriate, at least in terms of preserving the popular will.”

Yıldız had recorded the following words in his assessment regarding Ahmet Özer and Ahmet Türk:

“For example, when the trials of Ahmet Türk and Ahmet Özer, whom our chairman refers to as the two Ahmets, the course of their cases, the atmosphere we are in, and the purpose of our commission are combined, we see that it is actually an excessive practice that has exceeded its purpose.”

“So, to summarize briefly, there is no objection from our perspective to the reinstatement of Ahmet Özer and Ahmet Türk.”