Özgür Özel evaluates framework law as 'wrong in procedure and style': No change in our approach

Speaking to journalist Murat Yetkin, Özgür Özel evaluated the bill to be introduced as part of the process initiated for the resolution of the Kurdish issue. Özel stated that the proposal is a requirement of the 6th article regarding the laying down of arms and the dissolution of the PKK, which was included in the final report of the TBMM's National Solidarity, Brotherhood and Democracy Commission, but that it has no relation to the 7th article concerning democratization.

The Yeni Party Chairman expressed that once the National Security Council (MGK) confirms that the PKK has laid down its arms and dissolved itself, it is necessary for the 'common future of Kurds and Turks' to also bring the 7th article to the agenda, which includes many democratization measures ranging from the implementation of Constitutional Court rulings to ending the appointment of trustees to municipalities.

Criticizing the lack of a joint effort in drafting the bill, Özel said, 'There is no change in our political approach, but it is an extremely wrong move in terms of procedure and style. Keeping the text of the proposal a secret, collecting signatures on blank papers, and submitting it to the Speaker of Parliament half an hour after sending it to the other political party is contrary to the spirit of the issue.' 

Özel's evaluations regarding the proposal were as follows:

“No joint work was carried out while this bill was being prepared. The AK Party collected signatures on blank paper from its own group. They sent them to party groups in sealed envelopes around noon today.

While our delegation, consisting of the heads of the relevant parliamentary commissions where we would work on this and the friends we sent as representatives to the 'Terror-Free Turkey Commission' established in Parliament, was multiplying the text and starting the meeting, they submitted the text to the Speaker of Parliament within half an hour.

"Keeping the proposal text a secret is contrary to the spirit of the issue"

There is no change in our political approach, but it is an extremely wrong move in terms of procedure and style. Of course, deputies and party groups can contribute to the text and express their criticisms in the Parliamentary (Justice) Commission. However, keeping the proposal text a secret, collecting signatures on blank papers, and submitting it to the Speaker of Parliament half an hour after sending it to the other political party is contrary to the spirit of the issue.

“The commission report we are involved in had 6th and 7th sections regarding the process. This proposal is about the 6th section. We said it then; these things should not run one after the other, but intertwined. The 6th is about the Penal Code, the 7th is about democratization, from complying with Constitutional Court and ECHR rulings to ending the trustee practice and regulating many democratic openings.

"It is essential to work on democratization steps"

Our sensitivity and reservation on this matter continue. After this law is enacted, it is essential to work on rapidly preparing the seventh section during the period that will pass regarding the confirmation and determination that arms have been laid down.

Solving the Kurdish issue is not enough with the sixth section alone. Solving the problems of the Kurds or solving Turkey's democracy problem cannot be done with the sixth. The 6th article may be the end of a process, a technical necessity, but the 7th article should be the beginning of a democratic process, the beginning of peace, the beginning of brotherhood, and the beginning of the common future of Kurds and Turks walking together safely.

Furthermore, our criminal lawyer friends and lawyer deputies have technical criticisms regarding the bill, which we will also express separately. But the main issue we want to draw attention to is that we can solve the root causes of the problem we are trying to solve today by taking bold, decisive, and rapid steps towards the 7th section of the commission report. Otherwise, an execution regulation eliminates some consequences but does not eliminate the cause.”