An analysis of some members of the 1961 Constituent Assembly

The National Unity Committee clarified how the constitution would be drafted through two laws (numbered 157 and 158) published on December 16, 1960. The new constitution was to be drafted by a Constituent Assembly, which would have two chambers: the National Unity Committee and the House of Representatives.

This article will not address the political parties, provinces, universities, judicial bodies, professional organizations, and other institutions that sent their representatives through their own elections. My article will focus on the members directly selected and appointed to the House of Representatives by the Head of State and the National Unity Committee.

According to Law No. 158, which regulated the formation of the House of Representatives, Head of State Gürsel was to directly select and appoint 10 members, and the National Unity Committee was to directly select and appoint 18 members. In this article, I wanted to examine the significance behind the selection of these individuals.

First, I would like to draw your attention to two names appointed by Cemal Gürsel from the Head of State quota: Kazım Orbay and Abdurrahman Nafiz Gürman. These individuals were figures who had held important positions in the Turkish army since the War of Independence. After Fevzi Pasha, who served as Chief of General Staff for 20 years, was retired, Kazım Orbay, Salih Omurtak, and Abdurrahman Nafiz Gürman served as Chief of General Staff in succession.

As soon as the Democrat Party government came to power, it carried out disruptive "operations" on the military bureaucracy. The top management of the army was retired by a Council of Ministers decision on June 5, 1950.

The Menderes government intended to establish a military hierarchy close to the “Democrat Government.” Nuri Yamut Pasha was brought to the head of the army. General Yamut's appointment as Chief of General Staff was the first step toward a military hierarchy that was loyal/dependent on the DP government. This situation would, of course, create some tensions. The concrete situation followed such a development: the DP promoted generals loyal to itself within the hierarchy and then made them members of parliament. For example, Nuri Yamut was elected as a DP deputy in 1954 and 1957.

This also includes the Korean War commanders. Major General Tahsin Yazıcı and other commanders were made deputies from the Democrat Party. The only exception to this is Colonel Celal Dora. Colonel Dora was elected as a CHP deputy in 1957.

We can liken this phenomenon to the Entente-Unionist division in the army. On the morning of May 27, which we can interpret as a Young Turk action, the revolutionaries humiliated and interned the “pro-government commanders.” They were tried on Yassıada, as in the cases of General Yamut and Erdelhun. Yamut Pasha—who was already in poor health—unfortunately passed away on Yassıada as a result of mistreatment. Erdelhun was sentenced to prison.

On May 27, while the revolutionaries were purging the collaborationist generals, they directly appointed the War of Independence commanders who had been purged in 1950 to the Constituent Assembly that would draft the constitution. If he had been alive, Salih Omurtak would also have been selected as a member of the House of Representatives, just like Gürman and Orbay.

Now it is useful to examine these names in some detail: For example, Kazım Orbay Pasha had held important positions in the army since the First World War. He was Enver Pasha's Chief of Staff. He had also established a kinship relationship by marrying the sister of the Deputy Commander-in-Chief.

He had become Chief of General Staff after Marshal Çakmak. When his son Haşmet's name was involved in a murder case, he was transferred to the Supreme Military Council membership. Omurtak was brought in his place. He did not leave the army. For this reason, the fact that the May 27 Revolution made Orbay and Gürman members of the constituent assembly is a reaction to the 1950 retirement decisions. These generals were honored by the NUC.

Kazım Orbay Pasha's election as Speaker of the House of Representatives also holds special importance. Lütfi Akatlı and İbrahim Hilmi Senil, who were brought in as deputy speakers, were also selected for the assembly from the high judiciary list. The election of two judges as deputy speakers of the Assembly is significant. It is also noteworthy that Akatlı and Senil became the 2nd and 3rd Presidents of the Constitutional Court after it was established. In summary, while the Speaker of the Assembly was a commander from the War of Independence, the deputy speakers were figures who would later be elected as Constitutional Court presidents. One more note should be added here: After Cemal Gürsel was elected President on October 26, 1961, he appointed his former commanders—Orbay and Gürman—this time as quota senators.

Some of the names directly appointed by Gürsel can be defined as the group that parted ways with the ousted Democrat Party. After the DP came to power for the second time with a larger majority in 1954, it had returned to the understanding of “absolutist national will.” It had adopted an attitude that equated the majority will manifested in the parliament with the will of the nation.

This anti-democratic attitude met with reaction, and some important names who were in the founding cadre of the party broke away from the party. These are the team that founded the Freedom Party. The Proof of Right discussions and the September 6-7 Events were interpreted as “moving away from the founding liberal values” in the party, and those who were uncomfortable with these developments moved to the opposition. One of them is Professor Fuat Köprülü, who said, “I have become unable to recognize my party.” Köprülü was one of the four founders of the Democrat Party. In fact, he had expectations of becoming Prime Minister. However, the political veteran Bayar did not make him Prime Minister. He gave the task to Menderes. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs remained for Köprülü. The DP changed the election law to prevent Köprülü from running as a candidate from the Freedom Party in the 1957 elections.

According to the change, a condition was introduced to resign from one's former party 6 months in advance to be a candidate from another party. As a result, Köprülü could not be a candidate. He could not be elected. The May 27 revolutionaries took his son, Professor Orhan Köprülü, into the Constituent Assembly in place of this victimized former Democrat.

There was a sensitive point here. Köprülü and the Governor of the time, Fahrettin Kerim Gökay, were being tried in the case related to the September 6-7 events at the Supreme Court of Justice. They were eventually acquitted, but they were arrested at the beginning. For this reason, it would not have been possible for Köprülü to be taken into the Assembly from the “victimized former democrat quota.” I believe this is the reason behind his son Orhan Köprülü being directly selected and appointed as a member.

With this appointment, Gürsel may have wanted to send a message to the DP circles that maintained their commitment to founding liberal-democratic values: we are not against you; we are against the autocrats.

Another victimized and acceptable name is Mehmet Esat Çağa. Çağa had taken an active part in the founding of the DP. He had served as Istanbul Provincial Chairman and was a well-known educator and lawyer. Gürsel must have selected him for the assembly due to his founding Democrat qualities that stood against the “former and deposed” government.

Esat Çağa became the chairman of the Homelandist Free Party while the '61 democracy was being established. He was invited to the Çankaya round table meetings in his capacity as party chairman. It is also noteworthy that Gürsel appointed Çağa as a quota senator after his Constituent Assembly membership ended. It is understood that Çağa's credit with the May 27 revolutionaries was quite high. Another interesting point is that Esat Çağa is one of the two senators who joined the Workers' Party of Turkey along with Niyazi Ağırnaslı.

Orhan Cemal Mersinli, who was directly appointed by Gürsel Pasha, is among those who fall into the category of son replacing his father. Orhan Mersinli was the son of Little Cemal Pasha. He had studied Civil Engineering abroad. His inclusion in the Constituent Assembly could have no political meaning other than the memory of his father. Mersinli Cemal Pasha—a.k.a. Little Cemal—was a commander whose path crossed with Atatürk's since the First World War. He had served as Minister of War during the Armistice. When Atatürk was sent to Anatolia with the duty of inspector of the third army, he was the inspector of the Second Army, whose headquarters was in Konya.

He took the side of the defense of rights movement. He was among those exiled to Malta in 1920. Upon his return, he became a deputy for Mersin. Although he was close to the Second Group, he was elected to the second parliament. He did not take part in the Mustafa Kemal front like Pashas Yakup Şevki and Cevat Çobanlı. After Atatürk's death, İnönü ensured that he was re-elected as a deputy. He was one of the commanders of the generation that made a military career in the single-party period Republican army. For this reason, he belonged to the class of previous generation generals whose memory should be respected. I even think there is a possibility that he was Gürsel Pasha's commander on the Palestine Front.

Another representation through the Head of State quota is “non-Muslim” citizens. One person from each religious minority was selected for the House of Representatives. The representation of non-Muslims in the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, which was initiated during the Atatürk and İnönü periods, had been continued during the Democrat Party government; however, the September 6-7, 1955 events had created a serious trauma on minorities. For this reason, the May 27 revolutionaries wanted to include these segments in the constitution-making process. The Jewish community was represented by Erol Dilek, legal advisor to the Chief Rabbi; the Armenian community by Hermine Agavni Kalutsyan, a mathematics teacher at Eseyan High School; and the Greek community by lawyer Kaludi Laskari, who lost his right arm for this country in the Gallipoli wars (he must have been conscripted as a reserve officer).

These selections can be evaluated both as a reflection of the idea of equal citizenship and as a message to Western democracies. This path must have been thought of to alleviate the grievances of our non-Muslim citizens to some extent. Let us also remember that the enthusiastic poet of the single-party period, Behçet Kemal Çağlar, also joined the Constituent Assembly in the Gürsel quota.

If an interim evaluation needs to be made here, the first striking phenomenon in the Head of State quota is that symbolic names who held important positions in the War of Independence and whom the DP purged as soon as it came to power were appointed to the Constituent Assembly. Apart from this, the second striking feature is the membership of the segment that participated in the founding of the Democrat Party—even though they assumed political responsibility in the first period of its government—but left the party after the majoritarian authoritarianism understanding became dominant after 1954. This segment was also represented through the Head of State quota.

To interpret these preferences, the May 27 Revolution can be defined as the republic's founding elite taking back power from the Democrat Party, to which they had transferred power. However, this is an incidental situation. The ultimate goal is Western democracy. Elections will be held, and power will be transferred. In this period, a new alliance is needed that will observe the status and privileges of the former owners of the state. This is possible with the separation of powers and the sharing of sovereignty.

Since there is a representation space vacated by the Democrat Party, there is a need for “new democrats” to fill it. This is what the revolutionary cadres expect from the Homelandist Free Party, the New Turkey Party, and the Justice Party. We can say that Democrats who have engaged in self-criticism have been represented in the assembly.

As for the member selections made by the National Unity Committee, it is possible to evaluate the sent members as several groups. First of all, there are some names who will take part in the constitutional commission. I think Hıfzı Veldet Velidedeoğlu Hoca comes at the beginning of these. Velidedeoğlu, together with Onar, led the report that solved the legitimacy problem of the revolution. In addition to this, he is the academic who ensured the maturation of the idea of constituent power. As an important addition, Velidedeoğlu became a man of law who led the way in the opinion that the ousted government should be tried. For this reason, it can be said that he is the professor most condemned in the right-wing literature with the definition of “coup fatwa-giver.”

Most likely, Cemal Gürsel and the Committee members were consulting him from time to time. It can be said that Velidedeoğlu had a special place in the eyes of the revolutionaries. As expected, Velidedeoğlu took part in the Constitutional commission; Tarık Zafer Tunaya, who served on the commission, entered the House of Representatives as the Istanbul provincial representative, Bahri Savcı as the University representative, and İsmet Girit as the Bar Associations representative. Velidedeoğlu, on the other hand, was a member directly appointed by the NUC.

Professor Ragıp Sarıca's assembly membership should be evaluated differently. We cannot see the activism of Velidedeoğlu in him. Sarıca Hoca is an extraordinary authority in the field of administrative law. In the 60s, he came after Sıddık Sami Onar. He is one of the most important figures of public law. He participated in the work of the Science Commission in Istanbul and the Constitutional Commission in Ankara. Ragıp Hoca does not draw a politically engaged image to the committee. He is a scientific authority whose stance is solid, reliable, and whose word is listened to. I think he was included in the list without hesitation because of these features.

One of those who entered the assembly from the committee quota is Münci Kapani. Kapani is a young and respected name. Kapani is known as one of the professors who conducted the first studies in the field of political science at the Ankara Faculty of Law. He will also serve on the Constitutional commission.

Among the members directly appointed by the NUC, one of those selected as a sign of loyalty to Atatürk's spiritual memory is Yakup Kadri Karaosmanoğlu. Karaosmanoğlu has always been a name taken into account as a writer and diplomat.

In addition to the numerous books he wrote with the idealism of loyalty to the leader and the Republican revolutions, he became the leading figure of the Kadro Magazine, which was established after 1932 as a leftist interpretation of Kemalism. With the magazine's cessation of publication, his diplomatic life began. His “Forced Diplomacy” began with his ambassadorship in Tirana, and he mostly served in Central European countries. He had retired while in Bern in 1955. On May 27, he was the chief editor of the Ulus newspaper.

At the beginning of the 60s, Yakup Kadri was one of the iconic names of the Atatürk revolutions. After his constituent assembly membership, he was elected as a deputy in the 1961 elections. He undertook the difficult task of presiding over the first joint session of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (the session for the transition to the new regime). The most important event that explains where Karaosmanoğlu stood politically is his resignation from the CHP. He left the CHP on the grounds that concessions were made from Atatürk's revolutions in the coalition government established under İnönü's prime ministry. As can be understood from this, Yakup Kadri symbolized Turkey between 1920-1950 with what he wrote, said, and the attitude he adopted.

There are two more important names that should be mentioned in this category. The common point of both is their relationship with the War of Independence and the founding leader. The first is Dr. Nihat Reşat Belger. Dr. Belger is the physician who made the correct diagnosis of Atatürk's illness. He is a Young Turk. He is a Young Turk closer to Prince Sabahattin's school of individual initiative and decentralization. He is not in the Committee of Union and Progress line.

He is an internal medicine and hydroclimatology specialist who practiced medicine in Europe. He was present as a press advisor in the Turkish delegation at the London conference in 1921 and at the Lausanne conference in 1922-1923. Following the conclusion of the Lausanne Conference with a peace treaty, he returned to Turkey with the delegation. However, when he was not given the public duty he wanted, he went to Paris and continued his medical practice there.

In 1936, upon Atatürk's call, he came to Turkey to transform the Yalova healing waters into a modern thermal facility. He was a doctor whom Atatürk attached great importance to. Among the medical staff, the most important internist is Belger, and the most important surgeon is Mim Kemal Öke. After İnönü became President, a chair was established at the Istanbul Faculty of Medicine and he was appointed as a Professor.

Dr. Nihat Reşat Belger was elected as a deputy from the Democrat Party in 1950. Since he was in the Prince Sabahattin line, there is nothing surprising about this. He was brought to the Ministry of Health in the first Menderes government. Dr. Belger parted ways with Menderes a very short time later. For these reasons, Dr. Belger had two credits in the eyes of the NUC: being Atatürk's doctor and parting ways with Menderes. These features of Dr. Belger were enough to make him a member of the House of Representatives.

The other name is Fahri Belen. Fahri Belen is a name associated with the War of Independence and the Republican army. He was the chief of staff of the 23rd Division that took Trikoupis prisoner in the Great Offensive. He retired with the rank of Lieutenant General in 1950. He was elected as a deputy from the Democrat Party. He had served as Minister of Public Works for a short time. He was one of the generals of the Atatürk era who was not satisfied with the course of the DP government and left. With these features, he became one of the people selected by the committee.

As for the other names that need to be mentioned, an interesting figure is Adnan Başer Kafaoğlu. We know Kafaoğlu from his time as Minister of Finance in the Bülent Ulusu government on September 12. It is useful to remember that Kafaoğlu was one of the directly appointed members in the 1961 Constituent Assembly.

Raif Aybar, one of the founders of the New Turkey Party, was also elected as a member from the NUC quota. One of the young members of the assembly was Alp Kuran. He had attracted attention with his anti-Democrat Party activism. He was an assistant at the Istanbul Faculty of Law. He was the son of the famous Unionist Ahmet Bedevi Kuran. He was writing in Akis, Kim, and Forum magazines.

In the Assembly, the Republican People's Party had 49 members, and the Republican Villagers Nation Party had 25 members. Apart from this, there were 75 provincial representatives, 6 Bar Association representatives, 12 press representatives, 2 combat veterans, 6 tradesmen representatives, 1 youth representative, 6 labor union representatives, 6 chamber representatives, 6 teacher representatives, 12 university representatives, and 12 judiciary representatives. These members were selected by their own institutions. In the meantime, an important point: I would like to remind you that the members of the Council of Ministers were natural members of the House of Representatives.

As a result, although the number of elected members was higher, when the identities of the directly appointed members are considered, it is seen that the atmosphere in the House of Representatives carries a meaning beyond the arithmetic distribution.

In the Assembly, there were young people like Alev Coşkun, Hüseyin Onur, Altan Öymen, and Mümtaz Soysal, as well as figures like Doğan Avcıoğlu, who would publish The Order of Turkey in the near future, and commanders who came from the battlefields.

When all these are taken into account, it is understood that the “May 27ers” tried to establish a balance in the House of Representatives with the appointments they made directly. Beyond this, it should not be forgotten that the committee was the upper chamber of the Constituent Assembly.

Considering the profiles of the members who took part in the constitutional commission and the ideological framework on which the resulting constitution was based, the members selected and appointed by the Head of State and the National Unity Committee stand out with their emphasis on commitment to the founding values of the republic and Atatürk's revolutions.

It can be said that the cadre of administrators-elites, battered by the DP period trauma, acted with a “class consciousness” during the restoration of the regime and the establishment of the constitutional order.

This class is not a class like the bourgeoisie that derives its power from economic processes. This class, which weakened the monarch's power considerably from the Tanzimat to 1922, had seized power in the republican revolution. To put it in leftist jargon, this is the petty-bourgeois class. It is an atypical class-for-itself. In other words, it is both the cadre and the owner of the state apparatus. Atatürk is a revolutionary who emerged from within this class. It is the class that, under his leadership, brought the war of independence to victory and founded the republic.

The way the Senate of the Republic was formed, constitutional jurisdiction, the National Security Council, the fact that Çankaya was seen as a position that could never be abandoned, and the increase in the guarantees of the administration—the increase in the power of this class—established a new status quo. The 1961 Constitution adopted the separation of powers as the fundamental value of liberal democracy. But I see the class basis of the issue this way.