good governance, democracy and rule of law in turkey - ersin kalaycioglu
DESCRIPTION
Good Governance, Democracy and Rule of Law in Turkey Prof. Dr. Ersin Kalaycıoğlu Sabanci University Science Academy, TurkeyTRANSCRIPT
Good Governance, Good Governance, Democracy and Rule of Democracy and Rule of
Law in TurkeyLaw in Turkey
Ersin KalaycıoğluSabancı Üniversitesi,
Science Academy, Turkey
Good Governance: DefinitionGood Governance: Definition “Good governance promotes equity (hakkaniyet), participation
(katılma), pluralism (çoğulculuk), transparency (saydamlık), accountability (hesap verilebilirlik) and the rule of law (hukukun üstünlüğü), in a manner that is effective, efficient and enduring. In translating these principles into practice, we see the holding of free, fair and frequent elections, representative legislatures that make laws and provides oversight, and an independent judiciary to interpret those laws. ” (UN, Global Issues: Governance Report 2012: (https://www.un.org/en/globalissues/governance): 1).
Rule of law is defined by the UN Secretary – General as “a principle of governance in which all persons, institutions and entities, public and private, including the State itself are accountable to laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforces and independently adjudicated, and which are consistent with international human rights norms and standards.” (http://issuu.com/undp/docs/issue_brief_-_rule_of_law_and_the_post-2015_develop) .
In the Declaration of the 2012 High Level Meeting on the Rule of Law, UN General Assembly stated that “all persons, institutions and entities, public and private, including the State itself are accountable to just (adil), fair (hakça), and equitable (yansız) laws and are entitled without discrimination to equal protection of the law.” (http://issuu.com/undp/docs/issue_brief_-_rule_of_law_and_the_post-2015_develop)
Turkish Performance at ECHR 1959 - 2008
ECHR Judgments
1959-1998
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Judgments 34 19 39 229 105 123 171 290 334 331 264
Applicationsinadmissible or struck out
538 153 394 385 1638 1636 1818 1366 3169 1573 1475
Source: European Court of Human Rights (AIHM), Country Statistics, (1 January 2009): page 136. (2).
Moral of the Story: Turkish Judge Işıl Karakaş argued that there was “a drastic (unbelievable) increase in the Turkish applications to the ECHR in 2011. Last year there were 6000 – 6500 applications, and this year applications have already reached 9000.” She further argued that there are severe problems with the application of the habeas corpus principle by the Turkish courts. (NTV interview, at http://www.imc-tv.com/haber-aihme-basvurularda-yuzde-50-artis-1023.html).
Turkey and the European Court of Human Rights (2010 – 2013) Applications pending before the ECHR on 23/01/2013 (TURKEY)* Total pending Applications 18774 Applications pending before a judicial formation: 16798 Single Judge 3296 Committee (3 Judges) 3976 Chamber (7 Judges) 9525 Grand Chamber (17 Judges) 1 *including applications for which completed application forms have not yet been received.
Applications Processed in 2010 2011 2012 Applications allocated to a judicial formation 5800 8662 9092
Communicated to the Government 1308 458 422
Applications decided 3789 7755 8048
Declared inadmissible or struck out (Single Judge)
2421 6489 7273
Declared inadmissible or struck out (Committee)
576 247 216
Declared inadmissible or struck out (Chamber) 290 790 425
Decided by judgment 502 229 134
Interim measures 55 73 66 Granted 7 3 2 Refused 48 70 64 Source: ECHR Country Profile (Turkey). Applications High case-count States (more than 3,000 applications pending before a judicial formation, ECHR, 2012)
Russia 28600 22,3% Turkey 16900 13,2% Italy 14200 11,1% Ukraine 10450 8,2% Serbia 10050 7,8% Romania 8700 6,8% Bulgaria 3850 3,0% United Kingdom 3300 2,6% Poland 3100 2,4% Republic of Moldova 3250 2,5% Remaining 37 States 25700 20,1% Total number of pending applications: 128,100
Source: ECHR Statistical Analysis.
Rule of Law (Turkey versus the World 2011)
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
0,8
Ltd.
Gov
t. Pow
ers
Absen
ce C
orru
ption
Order
and
Sec
urity
Funda
men
tal R
ights
Open
Gover
nmen
t
Effect.
Reg
ul. E
nfor
cem
ent
Acces
s to
Civil J
ustic
e
Effecti
ve C
rimina
l Jus
tice
Type of Rule of Law Measure
Fac
tor
Sco
re
Turkey
World
Rule of Law and Democracy Rule of Law and Democracy
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011/12
Ra
nk
in S
core
an
d p
er c
en
t
Years
Freedom of the Press ( Reporters without Borders, Turkey in the World; 2002 -2011)
Rank
Percent
Good Governance: TIGood Governance: TI
Turkey in Transparency International Indeces (2011 - 2012):
Judicial Independence Index (2012): Rank: 88 / 142; score 3,3 / 7.
Rule of Law Index (2010) Rank: 58%, score: 0,104.
Freedom of the Press Index (2011 – 12) Rank: 146 / 179, Score: 70.
Voice and Accountability Index (2010) Rank: 43%, Score: -0.159.
Corruption Perception Index (2012): Rank: 54/176; Score: 0,49.
Bribe Payers Index (2011): Rank: 19/28, Score: 7,5 / 10.
Control of Corruption (2012): Rank: 56%, Score: 0.009. (Source: http://www.transparency.org/country#TUR_DataResearch_SurveysIndices.)
Category / COUNTRY Rank Overall ScoreElectoral Process
and PluralismFunctioning of Government
Political participation Political Culture Civil Liberties
FULL DEMOCRACYNorway 1 9,93 10 9,64 10 10 10Sweden 2 9,73 9,58 9,64 9,44 10 10
U.S.A 21 8,11 9,17 7,5 7,22 8,13 8,53Japan 23 8,08 9,17 8,21 6,11 7,5 9,41
Belgium 24 8,05 9,58 8,21 5,56 7,5 9,41Spain 25 8,02 9,58 7,5 6,11 7,5 9,41
FLAWED DEMOCRACIES
Cape Verde 26 7,92 9,17 7,86 7,22 6,25 9,12Portugal 26 7,92 9,58 6,43 6,67 7,5 9,41Fransa 26 7,88 9,58 7,14 6,67 7,5 8,53Italya 32 7,74 9,58 6,43 6,67 7,5 8,53India 38 7,52 9,58 7,5 6,11 5 9,41
Bulgaria 54 6,72 9,17 5,71 6,11 4,38 8,24
HYBRIDUkraine 80 5,91 7,92 4,64 5,56 4,38 7,06
Bangladesh 84 5,86 7,42 5,43 5 4,38 7,06Bolivia 85 5,84 7 5 6,11 3,75 7,35
TURKEY 88 5,76 7,6 7,92 6,79 5 4,12Tunusia 90 5,67 5,75 5 6,67 6,25 4,71Albania 90 5,67 7 4 5 5 7,35Georgia 93 5,53 8,25 3,21 5 5 6,18
Egypt 109 4,56 3,42 4,64 5 5,63 4,12Source: The Economist Intelligence Unit, Democracy Index 2012Performance over the years
2012 2011 2010 2008 2006Turkey 5,76 5,73 5,73 5,69 5,7
Democratic GovernanceDemocratic Governance1. Elections: Fair and Free (more or less in
effect), 2. Inclusive Suffrage (In Effect, except for 10%
national threshold),3. The right to run for office (In Effect with
some restrictions),4. Freedom of Expression (Restricted),5. Freedom of the Press / Media and Alternative
Sources of Information (Restricted),6. Freedom of Association (Association
Autonomy) (Restricted for the Opponents),7. Civil – Military Relations, Civilian control of
the Military (In Effect). Moral of the Story: Delegative Democracy /
Illiberal Democracy versus the Hybrid Regime.