Necip F. Bahadir
Today, the most frequently asked question is, “Is a general amnesty coming? Will there be a general amnesty that also includes political crimes?”
This is a question that never truly disappears from the agenda. After all, lawlessness and injustice are at their peak in the country. Prisons are full of innocent and oppressed people. Only “criminal offenders” benefited from AKP’s sentence reduction regulations, leaving political prisoners in despair.
The recent spark for this question is Devlet Bahçeli’s initiation of the “Öcalan opening.” There’s noticeable activity between Imralı and Ankara. Following Bahçeli’s call, the DEM delegation went to Imralı. Afterward, the delegation began a series of meetings in Ankara. Two visits, in particular, stood out, and Ahmet Türk was added to the delegation.
The first visit was to Parliament Speaker Numan Kurtulmuş. It’s evident that Parliament will serve as an important platform for the process, as legislative changes occur there. But does Parliament have an independent will separate from political parties? My answer would be “no.” The majority is held by AKP and MHP, and Parliament’s powers have already been severely limited under the new system. Individual MPs have little room to act independently. Parliament has long been under the control of the AKP, much like other state institutions.
As a political scientist once said, “In countries without developed democracies, governments occupy their institutions.” The AKP has proven this point. Today, the AKP and Erdoğan’s authority far exceeds that of Parliament, reducing it to little more than a rubber-stamp body. Decisions are made by the AKP, and Parliament simply formalizes them. You wouldn’t need to ask for an example; the entire system operates this way.
Given this situation, the practical significance of the DEM delegation’s meeting with Kurtulmuş is negligible, though it might have symbolic importance. What could Kurtulmuş achieve on his own? Amend the Constitution? Pass laws? Perhaps Kurtulmuş isn’t even aware that by engaging with the DEM delegation, he has effectively acknowledged Imralı as a counterpart. And this has now been recorded in history.
Erdoğan Seems Unwilling
From the beginning, peculiarities in the “Öcalan opening” have been hard to miss. There is no synchronization. And I’m not talking about harmony between the government and opposition but within the governing coalition itself. MHP is singing one tune, and AKP another. Erdoğan appears to be reluctantly dragged into this, unwilling and hesitant.
A week has passed since Öcalan declared, “I’m ready!” Yet Erdoğan hasn’t made any substantive statements, repeating his usual rhetoric instead. “We won’t abandon our goal of a terror-free Turkey,” he said, and then repeated, “Either the weapons will be buried, or those holding them will…” The real issue is how those weapons will be buried. Öcalan’s “I’m ready” declaration cannot be answered with this. The process cannot move forward unilaterally.
So far, there’s been no indication that Erdoğan will meet with the DEM delegation. Instead, the delegation is set to meet with AKP’s parliamentary group. But isn’t Erdoğan the real recipient of Imralı’s messages? Why is he staying in the background? Why does the AKP receive the DEM delegation with a “low profile,” while other parties engage at the leadership level? Erdoğan doesn’t seem willing to step up, let alone take responsibility.
A Process Lacking Clarity
The process doesn’t even have a clear name. While Bahçeli describes it as a “promising beginning,” he also says, “There’s no new solution or opening process at hand.” So, what exactly is this “promising beginning?” The question remains unanswered. Bahçeli’s statements are akin to the poet’s line, “I loved women who didn’t exist.” While this sounds poetic in literature, in politics, it only reflects confusion.
Currently, Erdoğan is in the Black Sea region for provincial congresses, speaking from Samsun and Trabzon. It’s natural for his messages to reflect the regional dynamics. But even the messages he delivers from Ankara fail to bring clarity.
Bahçeli Welcomes the DEM Delegation
As mentioned earlier, one of the noteworthy meetings was between the DEM delegation and the MHP. Bahçeli was the first to offer an appointment, and his actions seemed to indicate a desire to both initiate and sustain the process. He greeted his guests at the door and hosted them with great respect. Ahmet Türk was impressed by Bahçeli’s attitude: “You’re genuinely shocked when you see Bahçeli’s behavior, and it’s immediately clear he is sincere.”
Ahmet Türk is a seasoned politician with extensive experience in interpersonal and political relationships. However, it’s worth noting that Bahçeli’s personal and political conduct can be very different. While personally courteous, he can be politically aggressive. Still, Bahçeli’s meeting with the DEM delegation can be described as historic—an unimaginable scenario just three months ago. Its political significance cannot be ignored.
Is Ahmet Türk No Longer “Problematic?”
Another oddity is Ahmet Türk’s inclusion in the delegation. Just two months ago, Türk was the elected mayor of Mardin, removed by the AKP government on allegations of ties to terrorism and replaced by a trustee. He was a “problematic” figure for Ankara. So how did he suddenly become acceptable? Was removing him from office the right move, or is his inclusion in the delegation correct? Both cannot be true. It wouldn’t be surprising if Türk were part of another visit to Imralı in the near future. Ahmet Türk symbolizes the disorganized, inconsistent, and strategy-lacking nature of AKP politics. This is the failure of a government unable to foresee even two months ahead.
The only AKP figure questioning this inconsistency is Şamil Tayyar: “If he’s an honorable figure, why did we appoint a trustee?”
In a functioning democracy, even the Ahmet Türk incident would be enough to topple a government. But in Turkey, both opposition and media are largely absent. All of AKP’s peculiarities and absurdities can be overlooked. Thankfully, archives and history exist… All of this will someday come back to haunt the AKP.
Does This Lead to a General Amnesty?
When evaluating all these oddities and contradictions, it’s essential to consider the political context. In a normal political environment, answering this question would be straightforward. If we were dealing with a healthy AKP government, predictions would not be difficult.
If the process progresses, a general amnesty that includes political crimes becomes inevitable. Selahattin Demirtaş, imprisoned solely to satisfy Erdoğan’s whims, cannot be kept in prison much longer. Demirtaş is as influential and decisive a figure in the Kurdish issue as Öcalan. It’s also worth remembering that the delegation is expected to meet with Demirtaş as well.
What will be exchanged for the disarmament of weapons? Surely not for nothing. All these meetings and negotiations signal that something significant is underway. By the end, a “democratization package” may become unavoidable. A general amnesty would be an indispensable part of such a package. While I’m not as optimistic as Mümtazer Türköne, I remain cautiously optimistic.
I cannot categorically say, “There is no general amnesty on the horizon!” If the path Bahçeli has paved is followed, it will inevitably lead to a general amnesty. It seems 2025 is poised to be a year of many significant developments.
