Esenyurt, Mardin, Batman, Halfeti, Hakkari, Tunceli, Ovacik...
For now, the trustee coups against local governments are limited to these municipalities, but it doesn't take a clairvoyant to predict that trustee appointments will continue!
Moreover, this time it will not be limited to DEM Party-controlled municipalities in Southeastern Anatolia and Eastern Anatolia. We are also likely to see plots and coups against CHP municipalities in metropolitan cities.
It is rumored in political circles that there are many dirty plans in the works. All opposition forces need to be prepared to act together to frustrate these dirty games... We will see what will happen soon.
The practice of trusteeship is not unique to Turkey, but there is hardly any other country where it is practiced in such an illegal and politically motivated manner. Throughout the world, trusteeship can be used as a management and control mechanism for various reasons.
The justifications and forms of these practices vary significantly depending on the social, political and legal conditions of each country. In this context, trustee practices in Turkey differ markedly from other countries.
In Turkey, trustee appointments are frequently used as a means of political and administrative intervention in line with the central government's policies. It has been a long time since the appointment of trustees to municipalities, especially in local governments, has become a habit as a way for the central government to control local governments. This is reinforced by the fact that administrative authorities can also appoint trustees within the legal framework.
For this reason, it causes social and political debates and sometimes stands out as an anti-democratic exercise of tutelage by the central government over local governments.
Trustee practices in Western democracies
Trustee practices are not unique to countries with semi-authoritarian or authoritarian governments where democracy is underdeveloped. In various countries, different practices can be observed in the dismissal or suspension of local government bodies.
Administrative tutelage exists in one form or another in all democratic states in Europe. Although the supervision of municipalities by the central government is practiced differently in various EU countries, it serves a similar purpose: the continuity of public services...
However, it has little to do with the way it is practiced in Turkey today. Guardianship is generally applied in relation to how public services are provided and financial matters. In France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Italy and other European countries, administrative tutelage and removal from office are practiced in line with their administrative systems, traditions and political developments.
Regional governors oversee mayors in France
Article 72 of the French Constitution on regional governments was amended on March 28, 2003 to specify that the representatives of the state representing each minister of the government, a kind of regional governor, are responsible for the public interest, administrative tutelage and compliance with the law. French legislation allows for the suspension for a certain period of time of mayors who ‘fail to fulfill their duties’.
Let's take an example: He was arrested near Bordeaux for officiating at the marriage of two people of the same sex. Begles the mayor of the town was suspended for a month. The incident took place in 2004. Probably the mayor would not be suspended today on such grounds.
In fact, it should be recalled that the dismissal of mayors was also practiced by France for many mayors and councilors in Algeria when it was still a colony. When it comes to Algeria, France's history of anti-democratic practices is already endless.
Germany has ‘municipal watchdogs’
In Germany, there are ‘municipal watchdogs’ that monitor the activities of municipalities. These institutions can replace local governments and take corrective measures. In Germany, which has a federal system of government, the powers of the supervisory authorities are comprehensively defined in the state constitutions.
These practices are implemented in line with the principle of proportionality as stipulated by the European Charter of Local Self-Government (ECHR). In Germany, administrative tutelage includes the right to give instructions, the right to object and repeal in cases of infringement of rights, the right to order the performance of work defined within the framework of a legal obligation, and substitution (the performance of an ordered measure by the supervisory authority in the name and on behalf of the municipality).
When these measures are insufficient, the appointment of a competent person, the dissolution of the local council and the premature termination of the mayor's mandate are only possible in some states. Since the monitoring body, which is similar to the administrative tutelage exercised by prefectures in France, has clearly defined options for interfering with local autonomy, there are no other legal actions beyond these powers.
Among these actions, the ‘appointment of an authorized person’ is similar to the trustee practice in Turkey. However, there is an important difference: it is usually not shaped in line with a political interest of the government.
‘Substitution’ as a functional practice’
The Greater London Authority Act of 1999 in the United Kingdom lists as grounds for the vacancy of the mayor's office in Articles 12 and 13, resignation, non-attendance at meetings, and in Article 14, loss of eligibility for election as mayor, as well as opposition to the Audit of Accounts Act, conviction and breach of any article of Part II of the Representation of the People Act. It is also the first time in the UK that a mayor has been elected separately from the city council.
In the United Kingdom, in cases where local governments are ‘inadequate’ in their functions, the central government can transfer these functions to another local government unit or other public organizations without the need for any legal regulation. This regulation, together with the German example, is similar to the paragraph added to Article 45 of Law No. 5393 as a method of ‘substitution’.
Italy has opted for a more lenient approach with regard to the regions. According to Article 127 of the Italian Constitution, the central government can sue the Constitutional Court for unconstitutionality within 60 days of the publication of a law adopted by the regions if it exceeds its authority.
Although Spain does not recognize administrative tutelage over local governments, it has developed a system that requires autonomous local governments to refer their decisions to a supervisory body, the government commissioner's office, which can only review their legality. During the independence referendum in Catalonia, the central government did not hesitate to exercise this power to the limit.
Oversight and control mechanisms in Europe
Many countries in the EU, such as Spain, the Czech Republic and Bulgaria, have a monitoring mechanism run by the interior or finance ministries, often supported by reports from the Court of Auditors.
In Finland, there is a more indirect way of nominating an evaluation committee for the job.
In Poland, municipal oversight is carried out by ‘regional chambers of accountability’, while in Romania and Lithuania municipal oversight is carried out by special boards of public officials appointed by the central government.
In the UK, mayors can be suspended for financial and terrorism-related matters as well as criminal matters. In Northern Ireland, the grounds of ‘links to terrorism’ have been used frequently.
Another example is from Moldova... The mayor of Moldova's capital, Chisinau, was suspended from office in 2017 for criminal offenses.
As seen in world examples, while the central government exercises varying degrees of tutelage over local governments, it can dissolve municipal bodies, replace them, or replace the municipality and perform public services in certain circumstances, depending on the country's history, culture, social structure and other factors. Each country determines the scope and degree of administrative tutelage based on its own historical reality and experiences.
While international texts such as the ECHR provide the general framework for administrative tutelage, they do not impose an absolute ban on practices such as the dismissal of mayors within the framework of states' sovereign rights.
Root causes in Latin America: Collaboration with cartels and corruption
Mexico has a federal system of government, Guerrero and Michoacán states, mayors were removed and replaced by trustees on allegations of corruption and organized crime. In both states, drug cartel links to local government officials have been one of the main reasons for the appointments.
In Brazil, too, mayors are sometimes dismissed and replaced by trustees due to corruption scandals.
In Argentina, the central government can appoint trustees to local governments on similar grounds. In Italy, especially in the southern regions where the mafia remains active, central government-appointed trustees serve as representatives of justice in municipalities linked to organized crime.
In this country, trustees are seen as brave warriors in the fight against organized crime and trusteeship is perceived as a prestigious office.
The trustee practices in Iraq are somewhat similar to those in Turkey... On the grounds of security and the fight against terrorism, local administrators are dismissed and trustees are appointed in their place.
One of the main reasons is financial problems
In countries such as the USA, Germany, Italy, Italy, India and Greece, trustee practices are usually implemented to ensure financial discipline, fight corruption or manage bankruptcy processes.
Trustee appointments are usually based on a court order and are handled within a legal framework. Ensuring financial discipline is a sine qua non condition for protecting the economic welfare of society...
Arbitrariness, double standards and unlimited tutelage
Let's talk about Turkey...
Trustee practices differ significantly from other countries. Their use as a tool of political and administrative intervention in line with the central government's policies aims to put local governments under control. This is reinforced by the fact that administrative authorities can also appoint trustees within the legal framework.
Trustee practices in Turkey differ from other countries in terms of political intervention, which has led to serious debates. An analysis of trustee practices around the world reveals that they are implemented for reasons such as ensuring fiscal discipline, fighting corruption and managing bankruptcy processes.
Turkey's trustee practices stand out beyond these generalizations as a reflection of political dynamics and the central government's influence on local governments. Officials of municipalities in Turkey where trustees are appointed are charged with serious crimes. Of course, accusations such as ‘links to terrorism’, which are not based on concrete evidence, come first. Corruption and bribery, arbitrary dismissals, lack of financial discipline and neglect of infrastructure investments follow...
If these are the grounds, the first municipality to be appointed a trustee should have been the Ankara Metropolitan Municipality headed by Melih Gökçek, right?
However, for the government in Turkey, trusteeship is a very useful political tool and is only applied to municipalities controlled by the opposition. In other words, it is not possible to talk about the continuity of public services in general!
While there are dozens of examples of how the trustees squandered the municipal budgets...