Activists Will Vote "No" in Referendum

The upcoming referendum has confused many people in Turkey. Many are unsure what exactly they are voting on, and others have criticised the fact that so much money is being spent on a referendum to change a few articles of the constitution when a complete new constitutional draft is being prepared anyway.

The referendum has come about because a legal package passed by parliament in the previous legislative period was vetoed by then President Ahmet Nejdet Sezer.

Four changes to be voted on together 

The package includes the suggestion to change presidential time in office from seven to five years, but to let a president stand for two terms, and for the president to be elected by the people rather than parliament. The package also foresees that general elections be held every four years and that the presence of one third of the 550 MPs be enough to hold votes.

Initiatives: Protest by voting 'no' 

The Citizens' Initiative and the Peace Initiative have announced that the will vote "no" in the referendum on Sunday (21 October):

"In order to protest against the referendum, it is not right not to go to the poll boxes, not to join the referendum; in order to support a democratic parliamentary regime, the best way is to use the 'no' vote in the referendum."

The two initiatives have called on everyone to vote 'no', arguing as follows:

• We do not want a departure from the "parliamentary regime" which has been applied in Turkey for many years; we want the regime to continue while becoming more democratic.
• Using the crisis among political parties during the presidential elections as an excuse, there are attempts to change a few constitutional articles as an emotional reaction and in an unorganised fashion. We know that this will not benefit Turkey or democracy.
• We believe that it is possible for the president to be elected by the people. However, even if the president is elected by the people, the authorities and responsibilities of this position need to be reevaluated as a whole. We believe that only regulating the way the president is elected will not be of use, but rather increase the crisis and confusion.
• We are against bringing up the crisis of the presidential election now. In any case, the crisis was solved, as in any democratic regime, by holding early elections, and within the parliamentary democratic system the 11th President was elected.
• It is ridiculous to start working on a new constitution on the one hand, and on the other hand attempting to change a few articles in the constitution with a referendum as if they were vital and urgent issues.
• We believe that the public has not been adequately informed of the constitutional changes it will be voting on in the referendum. There will not be informed choices made, and this is unacceptable to an understanding of democracy.
• We also say that it is wrong in terms of financial and legal considerations that political parties are trying to settle accounts with each other in the guise of the "referendum". The money spent on the referendum up to now has been wasted, and we demand that no more is wasted. (GG/NZ/AG)