Call for responsibility to CHP: Second conference in Ankara before the 'March to the Palace'

Lawyer Muhammed Aybars Akdoğan, who argues that the government is responsible for the worsening living conditions in Turkey, but that the ineffective policies pursued by the opposition also play a significant role in the continuation of this regime, suggested that the spotlight should be turned specifically on the CHP.

Akdoğan also announced that they will organize a 'March to the Palace' that will start at 14:00 on May 19 at Tandoğan Square.

Akdoğan stated that they held the first of the conference series they organized under the title "The Situation of the 'Opposition' and the Democratic Consciousness of the 'Opposition Mass'" on April 11, and that they will hold the second of this conference, which was attended by names such as Prof. Dr. Örsan Öymen and Bahadır Selim Dilek, on May 9, again at the I.T.U House in Ankara.

Noting that after his opening speech at the meeting, Prof. Dr. Ahmet Saltık, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Fatih Yaşlı, Dr. Haldun Solmaztürk, and lawyers Doğan Erkan and Melek Neslihan Özfidan will each make a presentation, Akdoğan also expressed their intention to continue this series of conferences.

Lawyer Muhammed Aybars Akdoğan answered our questions before their events.

THE PUBLIC IS NOT INDIFFERENT

- The economy is inflicting terrible violence on the public. There is no need to even mention the judicial violence against intellectual layers; it is that obvious. The ones responsible for this violence are undoubtedly those who govern the country. However, speaking in light of the "no-election" theses developed by Dr. Fatih Yaşlı, the idea is spreading in Turkey that elections will no longer change anything and that the AKP will not hand over power through the ballot box. Can it be said that the public is in a state of indifference in the face of these extremely negative developments? How do you think such apathy and indifference, which is clearly "contrary to the natural flow of life," can be overcome?

MUHAMMED AYBARS AKDOĞAN - We have all seen and continue to see that citizens who would choose one of the options in a public vote are declared terrorists by the government, that the constitution was changed by unlawfully counting unstamped ballots as valid, that an election was canceled by declaring only one of the four ballots coming out of the same envelope invalid, and many other illegalities committed by the government.

This situation is not just a series of illegalities; it is the transformation of the ballot box from a reflection of the public will into a detail that should be removed, that is, a state of "no-election" with "elections."

Therefore, the idea you mentioned that is spreading, that elections will not change anything, is a thought reached based on facts. This thought needs to spread to much wider masses and be defended together.

The biggest obstacle to this is that the main opposition leader is carrying out the task of preventing this thought from spreading.

By calling for elections every day at rallies or on screens, the main opposition leader is drilling the idea into people's minds that the only way is through elections.

For this reason, instead of calling the public "indifferent," I find it more accurate to say "under the influence of the main opposition leader's propaganda." The idea that "the only way is elections" is so deeply ingrained in people's minds that this situation traps the desire for change in the election calendar. The segments who are convinced that there is no other way than elections and that this order will change through elections fill the rally areas with this belief.

However, according to poll results, there is a "Party of Undecideds and Those Who Say They Will Not Vote," which is the leading party. The high rate of undecideds in the polls is not an indicator of apathy; it is a passive but mass response given to the inadequacy of the current political spectrum in meeting the demands of the public.

According to a poll result published in December, 76.5 percent of society does not trust politicians. The fact that 76.5 percent of society does not trust politicians is a document of a rupture. Where there is such great distrust, we can speak not of indifference, but of a deep reaction to the existing options. For this reason, we cannot say that the public is indifferent to the negative course of events.

As a result, what we need to overcome is not the "indifference" of the public, but the major propaganda carried out by the main opposition leader himself.

We must stand against this propaganda and speak the truth out loud. I and people like me are trying to make our voices heard amidst this noise created by the status-quo-defending main opposition leader. For today, these efforts may seem scattered; however, when we bring this scatteredness together in a partnership of will, we can change this picture.

A VOICE AND WILL AGAINST SCATTEREDNESS

- There seems to be a problem in terms of those who govern. For example, it is debated whether the AKP administration has control over the base of the security bureaucracy it has determined itself. The same can be said for the judiciary and all other bureaucracies. Can it not be said that millions of people at the base of the bureaucracy administrations determined by the AKP will turn their faces to the opposition due to the violence in the economy and the judiciary? Do you observe a tendency for an emotional rupture in this base?

MUHAMMED AYBARS AKDOĞAN - Even though people at the top of the bureaucracy live their lives in sterile environments, disconnected from the public, those at the base mostly live among the public as citizens from the public.

For this reason, an emotional rupture can certainly be seen at the base of the bureaucracy, but we cannot say that this will turn towards the opposition. Because the current opposition does not promise a very different order from the current one regarding the violence in the economy and the judiciary. Yes, there are people who say "I wish my hand had broken and I hadn't voted," but I don't think they will turn to the opposition.

What needs to be focused on here is not so much the emotional rupture in the government base, but the emotional rupture in the general public. The massive rate of undecideds in the polls and those who do not trust politicians is not a state of "indifference," but on the contrary, it is the accumulation of an objection that does not fit into the current political spectrum.

The real issue is the transformation of this scattered and passive rupture into an organized and conscious political will that will shake and change the order. And we are working to turn this scatteredness into a voice and a will.

THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

- The right of the public to resist against despotic administrations and oppression had even entered constitutions. We have known it since the right to resistance in the May 27 and 1961 Constitution. Despite the oppression and deadlocks it experiences, can we say that the public in Turkey does not perceive the current government as a regime of oppression? Or is it the opposite?

MUHAMMED AYBARS AKDOĞAN - The right to resistance is the most fundamental right to be used against a government that has lost its legitimacy with its unlawful attitudes and behaviors and has turned into a tool of oppression over the public by deviating from its purpose of existence. In a society where oppression and therefore fear are made dominant, resisting the government requires great courage.

The fact that the public has not yet used its right to resistance does not stem from not perceiving the current situation as a regime of oppression, but on the contrary, from feeling this oppression to their bones. On March 19, 2025, the chains of fear created by this regime of oppression were broken, but the rightful resistance of the public was extinguished by the main opposition leader.

Of course, we all have a responsibility; however, I refuse to blame the public while there are politicians who do not put a way out in front of the public and who tame the resistance instead of growing it. The problem is not in the "perception" of the public, but in the "leader"s who put a barrier in front of the public's will.

THE OPPOSITION IS NOT SILENT, IT IS JUST TALKING

- You criticize the silence of the opposition. CHP rallies, which no longer bring anything and do not really disturb the government, are indeed a subject of criticism. Well, would the demand of a large mass of people, for example, to gather in front of the CHP Headquarters first and then march to the "Palace" and protest what is happening, bring the opposition to its senses? It is clear that there is a distance of perception and priorities between those who manage the intra-system opposition and the masses of people at the base who have turned their faces to it. How can this distance be closed? I assume you don't expect the CHP-DEM administrations to change their minds immediately... What could happen?

MUHAMMED AYBARS AKDOĞAN - Actually, I am not criticizing the silence of the opposition, but the fact that they do nothing but talk. I do not see their failure to engage in any real action that would shake the government while saying the harshest words against it as different from the government's relationship with Israel: While the loudest slogans are being chanted on one side, that silent consensus that ensures the continuity of the order is being maintained on the other.

As for the distance of perception and priorities you mentioned, one must first reveal the reason for this distance. There is an irreconcilable opposition between the deputies and the majority of the public in terms of social, economic, and legal opportunities. It will be enough to think about the social, economic, legal, etc. privileges they have, especially the salaries they receive and the shield of immunity they possess. Unlike a university student, a mine worker, etc., they have a lot that they receive from this order and expect to continue receiving throughout their lives.

For them, this order is not a tool of oppression that needs to be changed, but a source of privilege that they hope to maintain throughout their lives. This is the reason for the distance of perception and priorities you mentioned in your question.

The only way to close this distance is to shake this comfort with social pressure. As long as there is no social pressure, they will continue to "oppose" without leaving their comfort zones.

The will to march to the Palace from in front of the CHP Headquarters is, in this respect, a confrontation imposition that reveals the true intentions. Whether this will "bring them to their senses" is not our problem. Our main issue is not to discipline the opposition, but to bring the public's own will to the streets. If this pressure does not move them from their comfortable seats - which I have no such hope for - then one must say this without hesitation: "Turkey is greater than 600" and we will walk this path without them.

QUESTIONS: OSMAN ÇUTSAY