Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 7 - Countermajoritarian Institutions in Turkish Constitution Making

  • from Part III - Debating and Drafting the Constitution in 2011–2013
  • Edited by Felix Petersen, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Zeynep Yanaşmayan
  • Book: The Failure of Popular Constitution Making in Turkey
  • Published online: 19 December 2019
  • Print publication: 16 January 2020, pp 218-248

  • Summary

    Countermajoritarian institutions have shaped the course of modern Turkish politics. Because they have mainly acted as institutions of military tutelage, they have been identified as one of the greatest obstacles to democratization. The most notable countermajoritarian institutions in Turkey are the Constitutional Court, the High Council of Judges and Prosecutors, the National Security Council, and the Council of Higher Education. This chapter analyzes the deliberations on possible reform to these institutions in the writing commission of the Constitutional Conciliation Commission ‘Anayasa Uzlama Komisyonu, AUK’ from 2011 to 2013. It shows that delegates agreed on some issues and were close to reaching agreement on others. Yet, the requirement of consensus among all parties enabled certain actors to obstruct final agreements. The partial agreements ultimately yielded no lasting results. After adoption of constitutional amendments in 2017, it seems that countermajoritarian institutions now function as institutions of partisan, executive tutelage.