One of the trials concerned the closure of the incumbent Justice and Development Party
(AK Party) and has finally been concluded, with a narrow victory for the ruling party
and democratic governance. The other is the Ergenekon case, which may unravel the
illegal nationalist organization intent on overthrowing the government and bringing an
isolationist dictatorial regime under the guise of national sovereignty.
The attempt to close the AK Party—deemed the center of anti-secular activities threatening
the state—began with a Constitutional Court verdict annulling a newly enacted
law that lifted a headscarf ban at universities. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s
reply was to accuse the Court of overriding Parliament and threatening national stability—
its headscarf policy is part of democratic reforms to advance free speech and minority
rights and has the support of the EU, which Turkey seeks to join. This is true, however
much the party lost enthusiasm for liberalizing and democratizing Turkey’s system
as part of its EU bid.
In its late July decision, the judiciary narrowly allowed the AK Party to survive—and,
with other political and civic organizations, to broaden the base of political participation
and public discourse. This is all to the good, though the fact that the case was brought
to begin with remain troubling.
The question is whether or not Turkey will be able to expose its alternative history,
bludgeoned by human rights violations, thousands of unsolved assassinations, restrictions
put on liberties, and military interventions in the political process and start a new
age marked with liberal ideals.
