Reforms of Ataturk (Kamalism)

Historical Background:

Turkey remained citadel of the grandeur of the Ottoman Empire for many centuries in the past.
Its pristine hegemony declined gradually especially during nineteenth century. Western
imperialism through intrigues and diplomatic techniques infused disruption in the Muslim
Ummah with the object to destabilize and annex Muslim territories. The secular and the anti-
Islamic elements got organized under the banner of Arab Nationalism in pursuance of their own
goals.

During World War I, Turkey was an ally of Germany. Its territorial integrity got setback as a result
of defeat in the World War. Consequently, it lost not only its dependencies in the Middle East,
but was deprived of certain purely Turkish territories at the hands of the western nations. Some
of these parts of Turkey were liberated by the Turkish forces under the command of Kemal
Ataturk. He became the national hero and got developed the cult of his personality. Imprints of
his thinking later dominated and shaped the socio-political life of modern Turkey.

Ataturk introduced multi-dimensional changes in all spheres of life for the purpose of national
reconstruction and development. These reforms aimed not only at the material advancement
but focused at the nourishment of progressive thinking and inculcation of new secular values as
well. He was deadly opposed to the adoption of conventional life style which reflected religious
thinking. Consequently, Ataturk initiated anti-religious policies in order to uproot the
conventional attitudes and stagnation. An important step in this direction was the shifting of the
capital from Istanbul to Ankara.

Ataturk was elected by the Grand National Assembly as head of the state and invested with
absolute powers. He pronounced the following principles as the basis of the new order:
Republicanism, Secularism, Turkish Nationalism, Revolutionary reforms and ascendancy of the
popular will. He introduced various reforms in pursuance of these declared objectives.

1. Secularization:

Anti-religious activities were encouraged during the Secularization of the society while whole
process of revolutionary changes under official patronage, explicitly manifested anti-religious
trends. Turkey was declared a secular state and Islam discarded as state religion in 1928. The
long-standing traditional institution of “Khilafat” was also abolished which symbolized the unity
of Muslim Ummah. The last Ottoman Caliph was put in exile and on 3rd March 1924, the
abolition of Caliphate was approved by the Turkish Grand Assembly. Sunday was replaced by
Friday as weekly holiday; all religious institutions and Madaras were deprived of official
patronage and denied financial grants.

Arabic script got substituted by Latin One in 1928 while many constraints were put on the
promotion and publication of Arabic literature. It is to be noted that the Constitution of 1945
was written in Latin Language. The so-called progressive elite and self-styled intellectuals
attributed all ills of the contemporary Turkish society and the miseries confronted by the people
to religious past of Turkey.

2. Changes in Legal System:

In his drive for Europeanization of the society, Ataturk abolished the whole system of Shariat
Courts and replaced Shariat laws with European code. Civil law of Switzerland was adopted and
given name as Turkish civil code, replacing Muslim law of inheritance, family laws and other
aspects of personal law. The Criminal Law of Italy and Commercial Law of Germany were
assimilated in the respective codes of Turkish Law. The principle of “Rule of Law” borrowed from
British Legal System, however, ensured to some extent, the protection of fundamental rights.

3. Direction of Social Change:

The cultural patterns and lifestyle of the Turkish Society was remodeled. Women folk were
ensured equal rights in all walks of life with men and their active participation in public life
encouraged. They were recruited in civil services on large scale. They were required to wear
Western dress and discard “Burqa”. Polygamy was disallowed. The wearing of traditional dress
by Turkish men was discouraged and many constraints were put on it. They were not allowed to
wear Turkish cap. All the government servants were ordered to wear European dress along with
hat. European calendar replaced “Qamri” calendar. During this drive for secularism and
modernism, Ataturk was fully supported by the military while the secular elements and so-called
progressive intelligentia also sided with the regime.

4. Economic Development:

Economic system, under “Malukiat”, of course, remained stagnant, hence resulting in unfair
distribution of wealth and economic backwardness. None of the positive steps could be taken in
the field of trade and industry whereas the contemporary Western civilization had made
tremendous advancements in the field of science and technology. Ataturk paid special attention
to the issue of economic uplift of the society and introduced reforms in industry and agriculture.
A comprehensive economic planning was launched aiming at the improvement ion the
commercial and agricultural output. Mineral resources were exploited and divergent schemes,
attracting investments in industry floated. Certain big industries were put under state ownership.
Barter system was encouraged as a principle in respect of extending trade links with other
nations.

5. Administrative Reforms:

State administration was remodeled on modern lines and central governmental control made
more effective. For administrative convenience, the whole territory was divided into new
provinces, districts and in other small administrative units. The role of civil-military bureaucracy
was imperative in promoting administrative output. Nevertheless, bureaucratic elite adopted
European life style with full orientation to Western values and became allergic of oriental values.
This class vehemently executed all reforms in letter and spirit with a missionary zeal.

6. Changes in Political System:

Ataturk paid much attention to the promotion of national solidarity, attainment of political
stability and adopted a policy of administrative centralism. In foreign affairs, he acted on the
principle of Peaceful Coexistence and the promotion of good relations with other countries. His
main concern was the promotion of internal peace and advancement in all directions. Turkey
under Ataturk, strengthened ties of friendship even with those Western European countries who
has been its enemies during World War I. the same policy was adopted in promoting cordial
relations with countries of Eastern Europe.

Political system remained autocratic under Ataturk as he ruled arbitrarily. The opponents were
crushed and their political activities banned. Religious elements, specifically became the target
of brutality of the ruling Junta, as they were deprived even of their fundamental rights. Anti
Islamic policies were enforced in the guise of secularism. They consciously obstructed the way of
all such efforts as indicated policy of revulsion to religious past.

...........................................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................

Turkish Constitution

The intention of the Framers of the constitution was to ensure political stability and promotion
of domestic tranquility and for this purpose they envisaged a quasi democratic structure that
would suit to the needs of Turkish society. Hence people’s expectations and requirements of
stable order are judiciously integrated within the framework of the constitution. Parliamentary
system has been reinforced under a strong Presidency. Multiple party system has been allowed
under the constitution, and constitutional protection provided to public liberties.

Salient Features

Preamble:

The constitution of 1982 is a lengthy document comprising 177 articles divided into seven
chapters. According to the Preamble, this document truly manifests the aspirants of the Turkish
nation and the values and beliefs based on Kamalate culture legacy. Turkey has been declared a
modern secular polity in which religious beliefs have nothing to do with politics. The constitution
ensures the protection of fundamental rights to all without any discrimination, while Turkish
language has been declared as official language.

1. Supremacy of the Constitution:

The constitution recognizes the sovereignty of the popular will which finds its exposition through
established institutions. The constitution stands paramount and it ensures national
independence, its solidarity, democracy, peace and tranquility.

2. Amendment in the Constitution:

The constitution is partly flexible and partly rigid in the sense that different procedure is required
for constitutional amendment, than the one adopted for alterations in statutes. The Grand
National Assembly is authorized to initiate proposals for amending the constitution with the
support of its one third members and can be ratified by two thirds majority. It is worth pointing
out that the reforms introduced by Ataturk, which are regarded as the ideological and cultural
legacy of the Founder, are exempt from alterations. Some of these are, for instance secular
educational system, wearing of hat by men, banning “Derveish Madaras” the presence of state
officials at wedding ceremony, preservation of Turkish manuscript, prohibition of the use of such
titles as Afandi, Pasha etc.

3. Balanced Separation of Powers:

The constitution stands paramount hence it is the source of all authority. Grand National
Assembly is the supreme legislative organ while executive powers belong to the President and
the Council of Ministers. The President controls on the one hand, the Council of Ministers and
holds, somewhat superior position over the Prime Minister. He can exercise even such
administrative powers in collaboration with the Cabinet, as are normally exercised exclusively by
the Cabinet within a parliamentary form of government. The President also plays vital role even
in legislation. He can not only block the way of legislation rather is authorized to dissolve the
National Assembly.

All judicial powers are assigned to the courts established within the constitutional framework. A
comprehensive and well-knit distinct system comprising military and administrative courts
operate side by side with the normal state courts. Hence a balance has been maintained
between the requirements of traditional parliamentary patterns and the features of autocratic
military rule.

4. Parliamentary System:

The system of government in one sense can be termed parliamentary as the Prime Minister and
other ministers are taken from the National Assembly and are held accountable to it and to the
President. The latter is fully authorized to remove any of the ministers. The Cabinet is collectively
accountable to the National Assembly.

5. Unicameral Legislature:

Turkish Grand National Assembly has been indefeasible part of its political legacy. It was on the
basis of its religious decree (Ijma) that Ataturk had pronounced the abolition of “Khilafat”. Its
central and pivotal position has been preserved within the present constitutional setup as well.
National Assembly is elected for a period of five years, which can be extended or minimized
under extraordinary circumstances. Apart from its position as the supreme law-making body it is
vested with the power to control the executive, as most of the ministers are its members. The
Assembly also ratifies the treaties made with foreign governments.

6. Judicial System:

The constitution ensures the independence of courts and the judges are given security of service
in addition to many other privileges. Proper safeguards have been provided to preserve the
integrity and dignity of judges. The courts exercise the power of judicial review over all actions of
the administration.

7. Rights and obligations:

A list of fundamental rights has been incorporated in the 2nd part of the constitution. The
underlying philosophy of fundamental rights has been made subservient to the requirements of
justice, fair play and secular ideology of Turkey. The enforcement of fundamental rights can be
suspended partially or completely, as the circumstances so demand, during a period of
emergency, mobilization, war or Martial Law. Some of the important fundamental rights are:
right to life, personal security, security against servitude, right to privacy, freedom of movement,
freedom of expression, freedom of conscience and press, right to form associations, hole public
meetings, organize demonstrations within the limits of law, right to private ownership, right to
earn one’s livelihood etc.

8. Right to form Political Parties:

The constitution recognizes the right of all citizens of 21 years or above to form political parties
and join or leave their membership. Nevertheless, only such political parties can be formed as
pledge to adhere to secular ideology and promote national solidarity. Formation of a new
political party is subject to the permission granted within the limits of law. Parties are required
to observe rules and norms provided in the Political Parties Act, hence no party can be formed
on the basis of religion. Every political party is registered entity which is not permitted to give
financial help nor receive from any trade union or interest group. The constitutional court is fully
competent to make decision regarding banning any political party.

9. Proclamation of Emergency:

Under the circumstances of acute political unrest or economic disruption, emergency may be
proclaimed in any part or in the whole of the country. The Council of Ministers can make as
announcement to this effect. Such Proclamation shall be valid for a period not exceeding six
months.

10. Imposition of Martial Law:

To incorporate provisions regarding the possibility of imposing Martial Law within democratic
constitutional framework is a peculiar feature. Turkish constitution provides that under
extraordinary circumstances beyond the control of the civil government, Martial Law may be
imposed. Hence the President in the Council of Ministers can announce this step for the whole
of the country or any part thereof for a period not exceeding six months. Such a pronouncement
is required to be submitted before the National Assembly for its approval and in case it is not in
session, special session shall be convened. The latter is fully competent to make alterations in
the period of

;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

Role of Army in Politics

Historical Background:

Turkish society had to face an acute depression after its defeat in World War I. It was deprived
not only of its dependencies of Middle East of Ottoman period but lost also its certain purely
Turkish territories. Turkish army under the valiant command of Ataturk, liberated few lost areas
from the domination of allied forces. The military leadership vehemently faced the hardships
and started the task of national reconstruction with a missionary zeal. In his drive for Secularism
and Modernism, Ataturk used all tools of oppression and coercion at his disposal to the extent of
eliminating all symbols of historical past of Turkish Society. Orientation of military training
depicted the same trend. Imprints of Western Civilization and culture became more and deeper
on the army after Turkey became member of NATO. The new socio political order did not remain
merely secular, rather became clearly anti-Islamic.

The newly developed system remained stable and government’s control over the society was
firm and tight during the lifetime of Ataturk. But things changed after his death and natural urge
for participation in the statecraft on the part of people grew stronger gradually. As a reaction to
the secular and anti-Islamic policies of the military regimes, the Pro-Islamic elements gained
momentum. Condemnation of military rule was the natural result which found its exposition in
various directions. Lifting the ban on the political parties was an event which gave fillip to the
lust for democratic system among the masses.

The newly elected government perceiving the popular will, adopted moderate policies and lifted
excessive restrictions on the religious activities. The new policies indicated soft corner for
religious elements and relaxation on religious activities, which was a clear deviation from the
Kamalate legacy.
The liberal policy introduced by the Democratic Party’s government of Adnan Mendris, stands a
clear testimony to this. This party was formed in 1946 with Jalal Bayar and Adnan Mendris as its
founders. Democrats got victory in the election held in 1950 and formed the government to the
dislikeness of the army. Intervention of military in politics at intervals blocked the way of the
growth of democratic institutions. Acute polarization and perpetual conflict based on violence
among political parties paved the way for army’s involvement in political life.

An analysis of the political role of army would reveal that out of eighty years of its history after
World War I, Turkey remained under the rule of a civilian president for not more than a period of
a decade only. All the constitutions of modern Turkey were framed under military rule. The
underlying factors that account for military’s intervention in civil life are classified below:

1. Political Instability:

Such a strong leadership could not emerge after the death of Ataturk in 1938, as could tackle
and face extra-ordinary difficult problems generated by war. The successor government was not
strong enough to have a firm hold over public affairs, while demands for popular participation in
decision-making gained momentum. Mostly civilian governments were formed, which were not
stable hence unable to implement public policies in an effective manner. Consequently, it would
directly or indirectly intervene in the political affairs during political chaos and unrest.

2. Lust for Power:

The temperament of the military became more and more political due to its excessive
involvement in civil affairs at intervals, implicating factional tussles within the army ranks. If one
group of army officials supported Democrats, the other developed a leaning towards
Republicans. Another reason responsible fro intervention of military in political life was inspired
by vested interests and getting more and more benefits for the army.

3. Role as Agent of Modernization:

The positive role of the army with regard to modernization and national reconstruction has also
supported the claim of the army to act as arbiter during political crisis. During a period of
military rule, political stability can be attained which is considered, of course, indispensable for
national progress. In contrast to this, the civilian period in Turkey has been generally marked by
political strife, violence and polarization. Some civil governments had invariably accepted the
role of army and depended on its support. Civil administration, under such conditions, became
loose, paving the way for direct control of political life by the army.

Conclusion:

The military regime performed, no doubt positive role in national reconstruction and
development. But Turkish political system was no exception to save itself from injurious effects
of military’s involvement in civil affairs. Hence the main beneficiary of the fruits of so called
economic development and political stability was the military which exhausted a large part of
the national wealth and its resources even at the cost of economic needs of other classes
especially those of the rural areas. The military monopolized even civil offices where military
personnel were deputed frequently, giving civilian affairs an outlook of military’s professional
values. Polarization, party politics and factionalism penetrated within the army ranks.

The attitude of the army hindered the growth of healthy democratic atmosphere. Instead of
performing the role of arbiters and mediators, the army chiefs generally got involved in party
politics, supporting a particular party and denouncing the other. The policies adopted by the
military regime during post World War I period proved, no doubt, positively fruitful but under
the changed scenario, the defence forces are well advised to limit their sphere of action to
defence affairs only and improve their professional competence.