In a stinging 14-page critique of the proposed law, President Sezer returned it to parliament Monday, asking deputies to take out sections which would" open the door for big capital to establish their monopoly on TV and radio broadcasting."
Applauding Sezer's refusal, the Turkish Journalists Association said the president's ''approach provides an opportunity for the deputies to review the law in a coolheaded atmosphere and that they will be able to reconsider the public opinion's reactions."
"I am pleased that Sezer has erased my doubts that he might have endorsed this immoral and fascistic legislation," says TV programmer Sahin Alpay of CNN Turk. "He has given us fresh optimism that things might still change for the better."
Turkey's media bosses, on the other hand are unhappy that the president has rejected the amendments that the Turkish parliament passed, with a simple majority on June 7. The amendments envisaged the lifting of almost all the barriers to media concentration.
At present, big businesses control the bulk of Turkey's mainstream media -more than 10 national dailies, 17 commercial TV channels, a number of radio stations as well as weekly and monthly publications. They also have stakes in banking, insurance, tourist industry, health and football.
During the debate in parliament, opposition deputies and critics denounced the amendments as "forging emperors out of media moguls", and as "the death sentence of the local media," and called on Sezer to return the law for review by the parliament
Explaining his action, the president said, "The provisions in the amendments are incapable of preventing monopolization. And a monopolized audio-visual media would both gain supreme power for unjust competition in the economic field and become a roadblock for the realization of freedom of communication."
Sezer further criticized the proposed law for provisions which he said could put ''individual commercial interests'' ahead of the requirement for ''the functioning of the media as a servant of the public."
The president, echoing criticisms from the opposition, came out against the "lifting of the barriers against media owners to enter into commercial dealings with the state''. A result, of such dealings, he said, would be ''biased broadcasting and coverage in order to be able to sign contracts with governments."
"In most parts of the civilized world media ownership is deliberately separated from other spheres of business in order to prevent the media owners from prospective exploitation of their power," Sezer argues. "Therefore the provisions in the amendments that allow media owners to make business with the state violates the principles of fair competition," Seesaws.
According to the Turkish constitution, parliament has two options after president's refusal to sign a law: Parliament can either review the legislation taking into consideration the president's objections or it can send the law back to the president for ratification without any review.
In the second case the president is obliged to ratify the legislation but he might then use his authority to bring the matter before the Constitutional Court. In any case, the law becomes effective unless the Court annuls it.
Noting that the Turkish parliament is scheduled to start summer holiday in July, Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit told journalists that ''it is highly unlikely that the amendments would be immediately reviewed." But when parliament resumes, "We will take the president's opinions into consideration when reviewing the law," he added.
Sezer's refusal, in striking contrast to the jubilant headlines when the amendments passed on Jun 7, has been almost ignored by the two big media groups' newspapers and TV on Tuesday.
Hurriyet and Radikal newspapers belonging to the Dogan group gave very small space in their first pages, while the Milliyet newspaper of the same group ran the report in its financial section, under the headline, "Sezer's refusal causes the stock-market index fall."
The opposition newspapers however, greeted Sezer's refusal with banner headlines: "The Prohibiters are in Grief", Islamist Yeni Safak said in its headline while the left-wing daily Cumhuriyet said, "RTUK bounced back by the Presidency."
The media law amendments brought president Sezer and the government for a second time at loggerheads and coincided with government preparations for curtailing the president's powers.
President Sezer's returned a conditional amnesty proposal to parliament
last year for violating the equality of citizens before the law. This caused such angry reactions among coalition leaders that they agreed to limit the president's powers through a Constitutional amendment.
Ironically, president Sezer himself has occasionally criticized the Constitutional powers of the Turkish President and has called for transferring all power to elected bodies.
As President Sezer refused the media law amendments Monday, a parliamentary commission had already agreed on moving a Constitutional amendment aiming at curtailing President's powers to appoint the members of High Court, Higher Education Council and similar bodies. He will also lose his present power to bring Constitutional amendments to national referendum and the period for presidency will be dropped down to five years from present seven years.
In spite of hostilities with the government President Sezer's public prestige seems to have increased since his assumption of the post in May last year. According to public opinion polls more than 80 percent of Turkish citizens now believe Sezer is the most reliable figure among Turkey's leaders.
