Photo: Sivas Congress (1919)
This photo is the beginning of a legal struggle, not a resistance.
The CHP's political roots are not a rebellion movement, but a legal struggle. The strongest ground of a party born out of the Law of Mudafaa-i Hukuk should be the law itself.
The Legacy of the Mudafa-i Hukuk
One of the most deeply rooted institutional veins of political life in Turkey Republican People's Party, directly trace their historical roots Anatolian and Rumelia Mudafaa-i Hukuk Cemiyeti tradition. This movement is not only a resistance organization; it is the is the political expression of the will to defend its rights and law.
In 1919, the Erzurum Congress and Sivas Congress, laid the foundation for this understanding. The struggle was waged not by personal will, but by decisions taken on behalf of the nation. Therefore, the most critical step of the War of Independence was not only armed resistance, but also was to establish legal legitimacy.
Parliament and Legal Legitimacy
The institutional expression of this legitimacy is the Constitutional Court, which was inaugurated on April 23, 1920. Grand National Assembly of Turkey’is. All the decisions taken during the National Struggle came into force with the will of the Parliament. Even the authority of the Commander-in-Chief Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’by the Parliament, and that this struggle on the basis of law that it is being carried out.
The proclamation of the Republic is a continuation of the same line. The new order of the state was established by a parliamentary decision and within a constitutional framework. In short, the Republic was built on the rule of law.
Party of the People and the Republic
There is another important fact that should not be forgotten: CHP is not a party of individuals, cliques or a single leader. Especially as its chosen name suggests It is the People's Party.
With the proclamation of the Republic, he added to his name “Republic” is that this party is also That it is the party of the Republic declares. In this respect, the CHP claims to be the political representation not only of a political cadre but also of the idea of the Republic and the will of the people.
Criticism is one thing, legitimacy is another
In a democratic system, criticizing judicial decisions is natural and legitimate. A political party can debate court decisions, find them wrong or demand reforms. However, with criticism a language that rejects the legitimacy of law altogether there is a significant difference.
It is possible to criticize the practices of the Turkish judicial system. However, labeling it with phrases such as “the judiciary of the palace” or “His Majesty's judiciary” goes beyond criticizing a decision and may render the entire legal order of the state questionable.
However, the strongest political ground for a political movement born out of the tradition of Müdafaa-i Hukuk is the law itself.
Responsibility and Line of Defense
Today, CHP cadres have to read the historical process correctly. No matter what accusation is leveled against the party cadres or the institutional identity, the strongest answer to this is is not to reject the law, but to defend the law.
CHP cadres have the competence to fight the political struggle in the squares and the legal struggle in the courts. As long as the grounds are chosen correctly. Because the right to defense is sacred. The office of defense is the office of refuting the allegations, eliminating the accusations and revealing the truth.
This is what is expected and desired: That every allegation or slander, no matter what it is called, is debunked on the grounds of law and buried in the pages of history.
Because justice;
not in the squares,
not on bus roofs,
in courtrooms.