Namik Kemal's famous play about the sacrifice in the Crimean War, “Vatan Yahut Silistre” many of us remember. After authoritarian regimes that threaten democracies on a global scale have largely lost their legitimacy, the most powerful threat to the will of the people is capital.
Capital expresses a power that can replace everything and take over everything. The history of the world is shaped by the relationship between these two elements of power, where, according to some, arms rule money, and according to another point of view, money rules arms. Morality, knowledge and merit are extremely insignificant in this race for power, just like love for one's homeland!
In this sense, the homeland is almost capital. Protecting and defending capital is not, of course, to make the homeland and its inhabitants more prosperous and more humane, but to seize the resources of the homeland, to manipulate state power and to establish a mortgage over the will of the nation. Instead of reading this situation as a hostility to capital, it is necessary to boldly put the magnitude of the danger on the table.
The process of manipulating elections and turning democracy into a mere formal representative ceremony has long been questioned around the world. It seems that it will take time for us to recognize the danger and take the necessary measures.
Especially within the CHP, the power consolidation of municipalities over the party center is a case in point. Erdoğan's winning the Istanbul municipality and then having the opportunity to shape the political center is also seen as an example for the CHP.
However, the internal relations, functioning and balance dynamics of each tradition and each party may be different, and the mechanisms of supervision and control of each period are also different.
When the relationship between power and decay relegates society and politics to a secondary position, politics falls under the control of capital. After a while, social conscience and political perspectives become instrumentalized and become the apparatus of the perception constructed by capital.
The most widespread propaganda about the CHP congress case is the claim that a nullity verdict would undermine the ruling party. If interference in the judiciary is bad, it must be opposed, no matter who does it and on what grounds.
It is not the job of the judiciary to make decisions based on political and economic analysis. It is politics and bureaucracy that should think about those risks. Decision of nullity, “what will it do to the stock market, what kind of a picture will it create in international markets and how much will it erode the government in the electorate?” judges should not be the addressees of these questions.
Therefore, if there is a nullity decision, this situation, “it would put the government in a difficult situation, public perception would hold the government responsible and guilty, the decision should be reversed” approach is not an acceptable attitude.
The court must act according to the concrete evidence before it, the principles of law and its own conscience. If the concrete testimonies and the evidence gathered raise a suspicion, this must of course be dealt with accordingly.
In a moral society, what really calls into question the government and its relationship with justice is to cover up an injustice, to sweep a contamination under the carpet through the judiciary. In other words, even though there are concrete conditions for a nullity, if creating public pressure and attempting to take initiative over the court in order to prevent a ruling in this direction does not erode the government, this is what should be looked at.
Just like Namik Kemal's “Silistre is the homeland” approach, “political ethics and human values are the homeland” If we don't, capital will occupy the homeland.
If Ramadan is to truly symbolize a moral purification, a turning away from evil, we must start with the political pollution that surrounds our social life.