Ali Bozan said that arms are a result, and the parliamentary commission should focus on eliminating the causes of the Kurdish queston.
Shortly before parliament went into recess, Speaker of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, Numan Kurtulmuş, met with parties represented in parliament to discuss the formation of a new commission. In a letter recently sent by Kurtulmuş to all parliamentary groups and other political parties, each was asked to submit the names of their deputies who would participate in the commission by 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, July 31.
According to the letter, the commission is to include 21 deputies from the Justice and Development Party (AKP), 10 from the Republican People’s Party (CHP), 4 each from the Peoples’ Equality and Democracy Party (DEM Party) and the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), 3 each from the Good Party (İYİ Party) and the New Path Party (Yeni Yol Partisi), and 1 deputy each from the Free Cause Party (HÜDA PAR), the Re-Welfare Party (Yeniden Refah Partisi), the Workers’ Party of Turkey (TİP), the Labour Party (EMEP), the Democratic Left Party (DSP), and the Democrat Party (DP).
While some technical details regarding the commission’s content have been made public, the specific procedures of how it will operate remain unclear. What, then, are the people’s expectations?
Ali Bozan, DEM Party MP for Mersin, who has been holding “Peace and Democratic Society Meetings” in the city, conveyed the public’s views on the commission and shared the expectations he has heard.
This must be a commission that addresses the root causes of the issue
Ali Bozan noted that the government seems to be framing the commission primarily as a body to oversee a disarmament process, but emphasized that its true focus should be on the root causes of the Kurdish question: “Because parliament is in recess until October 1, people’s concerns about the commission are growing. They are expecting immediate steps toward a legal and political resolution of the issue. But since the legislature is not in session, this won’t be possible, so the commission is being given more weight. In that sense, its work is important.
However, if we look at what has emerged so far from the government’s side, we see a narrow and limited perspective. There is a view that reduces the issue solely to weapons and violence, envisioning a commission that simply monitors whether the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) lays down arms. This is the impression the government has conveyed so far. But in all public meetings we have held, this is not something people support.
As Mr. Öcalan has often stated, weapons are not the cause of this issue, they are the result. Therefore, the commission must engage in work that targets the root causes of the Kurdish question. Because unless those causes are addressed, no matter how much we talk about or try to eliminate the consequences, it will ultimately be meaningless. That is why we must focus on removing the underlying causes.”
The people expect legal and political recognition
Ali Bozan added that during their public meetings, people have consistently expressed the need for the Kurdish issue to be acknowledged within a legal and political framework: “There is a conclusion we’ve drawn both from our public meetings and from the discussions that have taken place with Mr. Öcalan on Imralı Island over the years: up until now, the existence of Kurds, their language, history, identity, and geography, has been denied.
Yes, that phase of denial has ended. But now, the next step must be taken: that existence must be recognized. The Kurdish language, identity, history, and geography must be acknowledged. And this recognition must happen through legal and political means.
In all the public meetings we have held, we have witnessed this clearly, not only among those who support the DEM Party. A very large segment of citizens, unfortunately, do not trust the current political power. This mistrust stems from past experiences, and not only from the present government.
The current ruling bloc, the AKP and the People’s Alliance, has been in power for 23 years. But even before that, there was a state tradition, a tradition that denied the existence of Kurds. There have been some initiatives in the past, some superficial acknowledgments, but nothing substantive.
That is why people are now saying in our meetings: there must be recognition on a legal and political level. And that can only be achieved through legislative and constitutional reforms. It is precisely at this point that the commission’s work becomes truly significant.”
The commission is important, but it certainly has shortcomings
Ali Bozan emphasized that the commission should have been established through legislation and drew attention to the structural deficiencies of the current model. He added that the commission must use the time until parliament reopens to address these shortcomings: “As I mentioned before, if the commission is limited to monitoring the disarmament process of the PKK, then it will remain extremely narrow in scope. There is also a limited legal perspective circulating in the public sphere, focused mostly on prison regulations or the removal of government-appointed trustees, because those issues have gained attention. But that is a very narrow and restricted view.
It is said that there are currently around six to seven thousand political prisoners in Turkish prisons. Even if the state were to announce tomorrow, ‘We have released all 6,000 to 7,000 political prisoners and returned the 10 municipalities we seized from the DEM Party would that solve the issue? No. Similarly, if the PKK were to destroy 6,000 to 7,000 weapons, would the issue be resolved? Again, no. Because all of these are outcomes. What must be addressed are the root causes.
In the public meetings we hold, even if only raised by a few, people ask important questions: ‘What will happen to Kurds in exile? What will become of the Maxmur Camp? Will we ever learn where Şêx Said or Seyit Rıza are buried? Will their dignity be restored? What about the thousands of villages, towns, and districts whose names were changed, will they be allowed to return to their original names? Will Kurds be able to receive education in their mother tongue as they wish? Will Kurdish be freely used in the public sphere?’
That is exactly why we say: this issue is about eliminating its causes. Disarmament, political prisoners, and appointed trustees, these are the results of the deeper issue. We must discuss the causes.
Our original demand was for the commission to be established through a legal act. Unfortunately, that did not happen. Instead, it was initiated solely at the discretion of the Speaker of the Parliament. Naturally, this means the commission’s powers and scope of debate will be limited. However, the fact that it was not created by law does not mean we dismiss its importance.
On the contrary, the establishment of this commission is incredibly valuable. For the first time in the hundred-year history of the Republic, a commission is being formed in parliament to discuss the resolution of the Kurdish question. In this respect, it is an important step, but one that undoubtedly has deficiencies. We believe those shortcomings can be addressed over time, especially during this two-month period while parliament is in recess. That is where our effort and focus will be directed
