By Nergis Demirkaya
The new civil constitution that the AKP has been calling for since the 2023 elections is set to become one of the key issues in the new year. Revising the presidential system, addressing the needs of a new peace process, and — inevitably — paving the way for President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s renewed candidacy are the main pillars of this process. But any such changes would first require consensus within the party, and then support from the opposition.
The first signal flare heralding the new constitution came from Erdoğan himself. Speaking on his return from Turkmenistan, Erdoğan said: “We are preparing a constitution that we will be able to call ‘my constitution’ in every respect. This will be the period in which this issue is completed.” Vice President Cevdet Yılmaz echoed this message twice during parliamentary budget talks, calling on the opposition to support a new constitution if they truly want revisions to a system they so harshly criticize.
SEEKING INTERNAL CONSENSUS FIRST
Although the opposition — led by the CHP — is currently keeping its distance from the idea of a new constitution, the AKP is preparing to complete its own work and present it to political parties. The 11-member commission chaired by Vice President Cevdet Yılmaz is nearing the end of a process that has stretched beyond six months. The commission, which includes the party’s most influential figures — from Deputy Chairs Efkan Ala and Mustafa Elitaş to Vice Chairs Hayati Yazıcı and Ali İhsan Yavuz, party spokesperson Ömer Çelik, parliamentary group chair Abdullah Güler, and his deputies — is drafting a “policy document.”
Representing both the party’s “reformist” and “traditionalist” wings, these figures are first seeking internal consensus. A commission member speaking to Turkey in Depth described the scope: “We are not drafting a clause-by-clause constitutional amendment. We are preparing a policy document that addresses the need for a new civilian constitution, public expectations, and possible changes. Within this framework, we are also taking into account the opposition’s criticisms of the system.”
Despite assurances that opposition critiques are being considered, the most pointed criticisms of the system come from within the party itself. Many AKP members agree with the opposition’s claim that the new system has rendered Parliament ineffective.
A lawyer-lawmaker serving on the AKP’s Constitutional Commission acknowledges these concerns, saying they could be addressed in a new constitution: “There is no return to the parliamentary system on our agenda, but steps could be taken to strengthen Parliament. A legal framework could be established for the Presidential Cabinet, and ministers could be involved in the legislative process.”
Noting that under the current system MPs appointed as ministers must resign and cannot return to Parliament, the politician also suggested that loosening rigid rules that block their return could open up more space for politics.
Under the existing system, ministers come to parliament only during budget negotiations and are invited to provide information only in exceptional cases. The same person suggests that, as part of a revision, ministers could appear before Parliament at regular intervals to answer oral questions and take part in legislative debates related to their portfolios. This, it is argued, could strengthen the relationship between the executive and the legislature.
OBJECTIONS TO CURBING ERDOĞAN’S POWER
These proposals, however, would entail sharing the powers of President Erdoğan, often described as a “one-man government.” Some party figures argue that transferring authority within the presidential system would not be easy, and that centralized, single-handed governance has proven highly effective in resolving crises — most notably during the pandemic and earthquake response efforts.
Another point of contention within the AKP is the 50%+1 rule required to elect a president. Former minister Faruk Çelik has been the only AKP figure to openly argue that the threshold should be lowered to 40%+1. MHP Chair Devlet Bahçeli, however, has signaled his opposition, famously saying, “We are not electing a neighborhood representative; we are electing a president.” Impressions gathered by Turkey in Depth from members of the AKP’s constitutional commission suggest no proposal will be made to change the 50%+1 rule — though many within the party favor lowering it. Party insiders say this issue must first be addressed between Erdoğan and Bahçeli.
Another inevitable dimension of the constitutional debate is Erdoğan’s potential re-election. Under the current constitution, a parliamentary decision to call early elections would allow Erdoğan to run for a third term. Still, some argue that enabling this through a constitutional amendment would be the more appropriate path.
INSERTING PEACE PROCESS
Alongside the new peace process, discussions are also underway on constitutional changes related to mother-tongue education, the definition of citizenship, and the powers of local governments. While these issues also divide opinion within the AKP, a former party minister notes that proposals had been developed on these topics in the past and could be reconsidered.
The AKP Constitutional Commission’s work will be submitted to President Erdoğan after parliamentary budget talks conclude, with the final decision resting with him. The document will then be presented first to the MHP and subsequently to opposition parties.
Given the current distribution of seats in parliament, the AKP–MHP People’s Alliance lacks the numbers to draft a new constitution on its own. This is why calls to revise the presidential system are seen as a potentially effective way to secure opposition support.
