İYİ Party Chair Müsavat Dervişoğlu and Zafer Party Chair Ümit Özdağ directed sharp criticism at the MHP as political tension rose over whether a parliamentary commission should visit İmralı Island.
Speaking at his party’s group meeting, Dervişoğlu accused MHP Chair Devlet Bahçeli of seeking approval for such a visit. “It seems he couldn’t get permission from the president. He tried to ask the group. Their longing won’t end without an embrace — let them go,” he said.
Dervişoğlu noted that Justice Ministry authorization is sufficient for any prison visit and warned that Parliament cannot be used as a channel to “bring the state to İmralı’s doorstep.”
Recalling the meaning of “Devlet,” which means “state,” Dervişoğlu said, “Remember, your name is only Devlet; you are not the state,” he added.
The debate intensified after Bahçeli said at his Nov. 18 group meeting that he was ready to go to İmralı Island himself if the parliamentary commission failed to make a decision.
Bahçeli said he would “take three colleagues” with him and use his own means if necessary. Following his remarks, MHP Deputy Chair Feti Yıldız announced that the “Terror-Free Turkey” commission would meet on Nov. 21, to decide on visiting Öcalan.
Another nationalist party head, Zafer Party Chair Özdağ, also directed harsh words at the MHP.
He said MHP Deputy Chair Feti Yıldız’s recent statements revealed why the party referred to Öcalan as a “founding figure.”
According to Özdağ, the government is pursuing efforts to reshape the Republic through contacts with a convicted PKK figure on İmralı, while “Atatürk established the Republic in Ankara.”
Özdağ called on citizens to join the Zafer Party to safeguard the Republic.
LETTER TO ERDOĞAN ON SHIFTING PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM
Dervişoğlu also sent a public letter to President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, warning that leaving the debate over a possible İmralı visit to Parliament undermines the logic of the presidential system and reopening the door to a parliamentary model.
Dervişoğlu reminded Erdoğan that he had asked voters in 2023 for broad executive authority to serve as the country’s final decision-maker on national security. He said Erdoğan frequently invoked these powers when shaping economic or foreign policy and should do the same on the İmralı issue.
“If matters of national security are to be settled through de facto coalitions in Parliament, then there is no need for the presidential system or the powers you hold,” he wrote.
He said Erdoğan must either take responsibility and close the İmralı debate himself or acknowledge that issues of this scale should be handled within a parliamentary framework.
“Either call this what it is and return to the parliamentary system, or use the authority you received from the people,” he said.
Dervişoğlu added that the current process risks reshaping not only the Republic’s character but also the presidential system Erdoğan has strongly defended.
