After the Supreme Court banned the Democratic Society Party, all eyes were turned to Europe. The comments of European countries and institutions on this closure decision are followed with curiosity. The European officials who especially supported the Kurdish initiative in the context of the democracy initiative launched by the government evaluate the part closure decision as a step taken backward in that process.

The party closure decision still echoes in Europe

The Democratic Society Party (DTP) banned over links with the terror organization PKK is still on the agenda of Europe. However, the European Union bodies states different opinions. The European Council in which Turkey joined as a member in August 9, 1949 is careful in making a comment, the European Parliamentary criticizes Turkey for this issue.

Turkey has always been criticized for the minority rights during the process of Turkey’s membership to the European Union and it has been emphasized that the description of minority should be handled in a broader sense than the one in the Treaty of Lausanne which lies in the foundation of the Republic of Turkey. Therefore, the democratic initiative process launched by the AK Party government was well-received by the European Union and it was stated that on the condition that Turkey took concrete steps, it would fulfill one of the criteria of the Copenhagen Criteria. But, upon the closure of DTP, the European Union brought a new criterion to Turkey which is Venice Commission Constitutions. According to Venice Commission Constitutions, the closure laws are such: The ban and closure of a political party are only just when the parties use violence as a political means, destroy the constitutional rights and freedoms, and support the use of violence in order to destroy the democratic constitutional order. The defense of the peaceful changes in the constitution by the political parties can never be accepted as the only evidence to ban or close them.

A political party cannot be hold responsible as a whole for the individual activities of the members, which are unapproved by the party.

The enforcement such as banning or closing a political party should be used as an exceptional precaution as a last resort. Before the application for the closure of a party to the judicial authority, the applying government or the other governmental bodies, considering the conditions of the country and whether they pose a clear threat to the democratic political order or to the rights of others, should pay regard to the solutions such as the betterment of the situation with some precautions instead of the closure of the party. (click-1)

The European Parliamentary indicated the Venice Constitution mentioned above as the goal while criticizing Turkey and argued that the decision of Turkey is worrisome and it is a mistake done during the process of the democratic initiative.

As for the French parliamentarian Helene Flautre who is the co-chair of the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee evaluates this decision as “hard to imagine”. Flautre, “It is not good at all. What else can be said? Everyone knew that the process of democratic initiative and handling of the Kurdish problem thoroughly with its all aspects would be a bold and hard way. I also said this personally for many times. However, in this process I could not even imagine there would be a significant obstacle like the closure of a party that represented the desires of the Kurdish people and democratic expression.” (click-2)

Throbjorn Jagland, who is the new secretary general of the Council of Europe, did not make remarks beyond extraordinarily wary reaction. Jagland, who became a president, the minister of foreign affairs, and the president of council in the past in his country Norway, prefers the European Court of Human Rights comment on the issue instead of giving his political reaction. Throbjorn Jagland said:

“As I feel, DTP will bring the closure decision to the agenda of the European Court of Human Rights to Strasbourg. Consequently, I will be waiting for the decision of the Strasbourg Court. However, I agree with the Turkish government on the punishment of the individuals for violence instead of the punishment of the political parties. I also appreciate the struggle of the Turkish government for intensifying the dialogue with the Kurdish population. “(Click-3)

The closure of DTP is indeed a false step during the initiative process. When Turkey just started to illustrate to the European Union that it had changed, this decision not only gave harm to the membership process by causing to start everything from the bottom, but also the closure of DTP would lead to a increase in terrorist incidents rather than bringing them to an end. Instead of the closure of a party, preventing the parties that the government considers as a threat to the independence of the country will provide domestic peace and security and it will also help Turkey giving more democratic image of it abroad.

Asis. Prof. Dr. M.Nail ALKAN, Gazi University