2017 Turkish constitutional referendum

A constitutional referendum was held in Turkey on 16 April 2017 on whether to approve 18 proposed amendments to the Turkish constitution that were brought forward by the governing Justice and Development Party (AKP) and the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP). As a result of its approval, the office of Prime Minister was abolished and the existing parliamentary system of government was replaced with an executive presidency and a presidential system.^[1] The number of seats in Parliament was raised from 550 to 600, while, among a series of other proposals, the president was given more control over appointments to the Supreme Board of Judges and Prosecutors (HSYK).^[2][3] The referendum was held under a state of emergency that was declared following the failed military coup attempt in July 2016.

2017 Turkish constitutional referendum

16 April 2017
Vote on 18 proposed amendments to the constitution
Results
Choice Votes  % Yes 25,157,463 51.41% No 23,779,141 48.59% Valid votes 48,936,604 98.27% Invalid or blank votes 862,251 1.73% Total votes 49,798,855 100.00% Registered voters/turnout 58,291,898 85.43%
Results by province (Yes in blue)
Results by foreign nation (Yes in blue)

Early results indicated a 51–49% lead for the "Yes" vote. In an unprecedented move, the Supreme Electoral Council (YSK) allowed non-stamped ballots to be accepted as valid. Some critics of the reform decried this move to be illegal, claiming that as many as 1.5 million ballots were unstamped, and did not recognize the results.^[4] Large-scale protests erupted following the results in order to protest the YSK's decision.^[5] In subsequent reports, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) both criticized unfairness during the campaign and declared the YSK's decision to be illegal.^[6][7]

An executive presidency was a long-standing proposal of the governing AKP and its founder, the current President of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. In October 2016, the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) announced its co-operation for producing draft proposals with the government, with the combined support of both AKP and MHP MPs being sufficient to put forward the proposals to a referendum following a parliamentary vote in January. Those in favour of a "Yes" vote argued that the changes were necessary for a strong and stable Turkey, arguing that an executive presidency would bring about an end to unstable coalition governments that had dominated Turkish politics since the 1960s up until 2002. The "No" campaign have argued that the proposals would concentrate too much power in the hands of the President, effectively dismantling the separation of powers and taking legislative authority away from Parliament. Three days before the referendum, one of Erdoğan's aides called for a federal system should the "Yes" vote prevail, causing a backlash from the pro-Yes MHP.^[8] Both sides of the campaign have been accused of using divisive and extreme rhetoric, with Erdoğan accusing "No" voters of being terrorists siding with the plotters of the failed 2016 coup.^[9]

The campaign was marred by allegations of state suppression against "No" campaigners, while the "Yes" campaign was able to make use of state facilities and funding to organize rallies and campaign events.^[10] Leading members of the "No" campaign, which included many high-profile former members of the MHP such as Meral Akşener, Ümit Özdağ, Sinan Oğan, and Yusuf Halaçoğlu were all subject to both violence and campaign restrictions. The "Yes" campaign was faced with campaigning restrictions by several European countries, with the German, Dutch, Danish and Swiss governments all cancelling or requesting the suspension of "Yes" campaign events directed at Turkish voters living abroad. The restrictions caused a sharp deterioration in diplomatic relations and caused a diplomatic crisis between Turkey and the Netherlands. Concerns were also raised about voting irregularities, with "Yes" voters in Germany being caught attempting to vote more than once and also being found to have been in possession of ballot papers before the overseas voting process had started.^[11][12] European election monitors said the vote did not meet international standards.^[13]

A ballot paper and envelope used in the referendum. 'Evet' translates to Yes while 'Hayır' translates to No.

Introducing a presidential system was proposed by then-Minister of Justice Cemil Çiçek and backed by then-Prime Minister Erdoğan in 2005.^[14] Since then, the current presidential system has been openly supported by Justice and Development Party leaders several times, along with a "new constitution". Justice and Development Party vice-president Hayati Yazıcı proposed April 2017 as a date for the referendum.^[15]

The parliamentary system formally began transforming into a centralised presidential system after President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan won the July 2018 elections. Since its inception, there have been competing arguments for and against this transformation.^[16]

Initial proposals

On 10 December 2016, the AKP and MHP brought forward a total of 21 proposed amendments to the constitution and began collecting signatures from MPs in order to begin the parliamentary procedures for initiating a referendum. After Assembly Commission talks, 3 proposals were withdrawn, leaving 18 amendments remaining. The full-text proposal in Turkish and the present Turkish constitution are found at the following links.^[17][18] The most important changes have been highlighted by the Union of Turkish Bar Associations.^[19]

An English-language summary and interpretation of the 18 amendments is listed in the table below.^[20][21]

Description of proposed amendments
Proposal #	Article	Description of change
1	Article 9	The judiciary is required to act on condition of impartiality.
2	Article 75	The number of seats in the Parliament is raised from 550 to 600.
3	Article 76	The age requirement to stand as a candidate in an election is lowered from 25 to 18, while the condition of having to complete compulsory military service is removed. Individuals with relations to the military are ineligible to run for election.
4	Article 77	Parliamentary terms are extended from four to five years. Parliamentary and presidential elections will be held on the same day every five years.
5	Article 87	The functions of Parliament are Making, changing, removing laws. Accepting international contracts. Discuss, increase or decrease budget (in the Budget Commission) and accept or reject the budget in the General Assembly. Appoint 7 members of HSYK And using other powers written in the constitution
6	Article 89	To overcome a presidential veto, the Parliament needs to adopt the same bill with an absolute majority (301).
7	Article 98	Parliament now detects cabinet and Vice President with Parliamentary Research, Parliamentary Investigation, General Discussion and Written Question. Interpellation is abolished and replaced with Parliamentary Investigation. Vice President needs to answer Written Questions within 15 days.
8	Article 101	In order to stand as a presidential candidate, an individual requires the endorsement of one or more parties that won 5% or more in the preceding parliamentary elections and 100,000 voters. The elected president no longer needs to terminate their party membership if they have one.
9	Article 104	The President becomes both the head of state and head of government, with the power to appoint and sack ministers and Vice President. The president can issue executive decrees. If the Parliament makes a law about a topic where the President has issued an executive order, parliamentary law overrides the decree.
10	Article 105	Parliament can open parliamentary investigation with an absolute majority (301). Parliament discusses proposal in 1 month. Following the completion of Discussion, Parliamentary investigation can begin in Parliament with a secret three-fifths (360) vote in favor. Following the completion of investigations, the parliament can vote to indict the President with a secret two-thirds (400) vote in favor.
11	Article 106	The President can appoint one or more Vice Presidents. If the Presidency falls vacant, then fresh presidential elections must be held within 45 days. If parliamentary elections are due within less than a year, then they too are held on the same day as early presidential elections. If the parliament has over a year left before its term expires, then the newly elected president serves until the end of the parliamentary term, after which both presidential and parliamentary elections are held. This does not count towards the President's two-term limit. Parliamentary investigations into possible crimes committed by Vice Presidents and ministers can begin in Parliament with a three-fifths vote in favor. Following the completion of investigations, the parliament can vote to indict Vice Presidents or ministers with a two-thirds vote in favor. If found guilty, the Vice President or minister in question is only removed from office if their crime is one that bars them from running for election. If a sitting MP is appointed as a minister or Vice President, their parliamentary membership will be terminated.
12	Article 116	The President and three-fifths of the Parliament can decide to hold snap elections. In this case, the enactor also dissolves itself until elections.
13	Article 119	The President's ability to declare a state of emergency is now subject to parliamentary approval before it can take effect. The Parliament can extend, remove or shorten it. A state of emergency can be extended for up to four months at a time, except during war where there is no limitation. Every presidential decree issued during a state of emergency will need approval from Parliament.
14	Article 125	The acts of the President are now subject to judicial review.
15	Article 142	Military courts are abolished unless they are erected to investigate actions of soldiers under conditions of war.
16	Article 146	The President used to appoint one Justice from High Military Court of Appeals, and one from the High Military Administrative Court. As military courts would be abolished, the number of Justices in the Constitutional Court would be reduced from 17 to 15. Consequently, presidential appointees would be reduced from 14 to 12, while the Parliament would continue to appoint three.
17	Article 159	Supreme Board of Judges and Prosecutors is renamed to "Board of Judges and Prosecutors", members are reduced from 22 to 13, departments are reduced from 3 to 2. 4 members are appointed by President, 7 will be appointed by the Grand Assembly. Supreme Board of Judges and Prosecutors (HSYK) candidates will need to get 2/3 (400) votes to pass first round and will need 3/5 (360) votes in second round to be a member of HSYK. (The Justice Minister and Ministry of Justice Undersecretary are ex officio members, which is unchanged).
18	Article 161	The President proposes fiscal budget to the Grand Assembly 75 days prior to the fiscal new year. Budget Commission members can make changes to the budget but Parliamentary members cannot make proposals to change public expenditures. If the budget is not approved, then a temporary budget will be proposed. If the temporary budget is also not approved, the previous year's budget would be used with the previous year's increment ratio.[note 1]
19	Several articles	Adaptation of several articles of the constitution with other changes, mainly transferring executive powers of cabinet to the President
20	Temporary Article 21	The next presidential and next general elections will be held on 3 November 2019. If the Grand Assembly decides early elections, both will be held on the same day. Board of Judges and Prosecutors elections will be held within 30 days of approval of this law. Military courts will be abolished once the law comes into force.
21	Applicability of amendments 1-17	The amendments (2, 4, and 7) will come into force after new elections, other amendments (except temporary article) will come into force once a newly elected president is sworn in. Annuls the article which required elected Presidents to forfeit membership in a political party. This constitutional amendment will be voted in a referendum as a whole.

Notes

1. This increment ratio is defined by Ministry of Finance and determines changes on absolute-valued taxes and fines.

Parliamentary Constitutional Commission

The AKP presenting their constitutional proposals to Parliament Speaker İsmail Kahraman, December 2016

The Parliamentary Constitutional Commission scrutinising the proposed changes

After being signed by the AKP's 316 MPs, the 21 proposed changes were submitted to the Speaker of the Grand National Assembly and were then referred to the Parliamentary Constitutional Commission.^[22] The Parliamentary Constitutional Commission, headed by AKP MP Mustafa Şentop, began scrutinizing the proposals in December 2016, earlier than the planned date of January 2017. The Constitutional Commission is formed of 25 Members of which 15 are from the AKP, 5 are from the CHP, 3 are from the HDP and 2 are from the MHP, as per the composition of parliament. Since the AKP held a large majority of the commission's seats, it was expected by media commentators that there would be minimal surprise developments at the scrutiny stage.^[23] Debates in the commission were heated, with occasional fights being observed between MPs.^[24]

The Constitutional Commission has the power to amend or reject the proposed changes before they are put to a vote for all MPs. The Commission made minor changes to numerous proposals, such as raising the number of members of the Supreme Board of Judges and Prosecutors from 12 to 13.^[25] The commission rejected three of the 21 proposed changes, reducing the constitutional package from 21 proposals to 18. The 5th proposal, which created 'reserve MPs' to take the parliamentary seats that fall vacant between elections, was controversially rejected with just three signatures, well short of the support of 25 commission members or 184 total MPs necessary.^[26] It was reported that AKP MPs opposed the creation of 'reserve MPs' on the grounds that it threatened the security of sitting MPs by incentivizing reserves to incapacitate them in order to take their seat.^[27] The 15th proposal, giving the President the right to structure the civil service and state institutions through executive decrees, was rejected.^[28] A day later on 29 December, the 14th proposal, which gave the right for the President to appoint senior bureaucratic officials, was also rejected.

The Commission completed the approval process on 30 December, rejecting 3 of the 21 proposals in total.^[29]

Parliamentary Constitutional Commission scrutiny process results
Proposal	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17	18	19	20	21
Result	Y	Y	Y	Y	N	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	N	N	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y

Parliamentary voting

MPs voting on the proposed amendments, January 2017

Following the completion of the Constitutional Commission hearings, the 18 proposals were presented to parliament for ratification. Constitutional amendments need a three fifths majority (330 votes) to be put forward to a referendum and a two-thirds majority (367 votes) to be ratified directly. Justice and Development Party (AK Party) officials claimed before the vote that even if the 367-threshold was reached, the government would not ratify the changes without a referendum.^[30]

Parliament voted on each of the 18 proposals separately in two rounds. The first round served as an indicator of whether the amendments would gather sufficient support, with amendments being proposed by all parties present in the chamber. In the second round, parties are no longer permitted to propose changes to the proposals. The results of the second round are taken into account, with 330 votes needed to send them to a referendum or 367 for direct implementation. A final vote on all of the approved proposals at large, with the same thresholds, was undertaken at the end of the second round, with the entire process being disbanded if votes in favour fell below 330.^[31]

Of the total 550 Members of Parliament, 537 were entitled to a vote. 11 MPs from the Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP) were under arrest for terrorism charges and were unable to partake in the vote, with the remaining 48 HDP MPs boycotting the vote after their motion calling for the arrested MPs to be brought to parliament to vote was rejected.^[32] The Parliamentary Speaker İsmail Kahraman, who is unable to take part in the vote by virtue of being the Speaker, was hospitalized during the vote, meaning that AK Party deputy speaker Ahmet Aydın presided over the proceedings and was therefore unable to cast a vote.^[33]

Of the 537 MPs eligible to vote, the AK Party held 315, the CHP 133, the MHP 39, the HDP 48 and 2 were independent. Out of the MHP's 39 MPs, 6 had openly stated that they would vote against the amendments, leaving the total number of MPs expected to vote "Yes" at 348. The CHP's 133 MPs and the two independents, which consisted of Aylin Nazlıaka and Ümit Özdağ, voted "No" while the HDP boycotted the votes.^{[citation needed]}

Theoretical distribution of votes according to party lines
Party			Leader	Party position	Total MPs	Eligible to vote	Voting yes	Voting no	Graphical representation
	AK Party	Justice and Development Party	Binali Yıldırım	Y Yes	317	315	315	0
	CHP	Republican People's Party	Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu	N No	133	133	0	133
	MHP	Nationalist Movement Party	Devlet Bahçeli	Y Yes	39	39	33	6
	HDP	Peoples' Democratic Party	Selahattin Demirtaş / Serpil Kemalbay	N No	59	48	Boycotting
		Independents		N No (both)	2	2	0	2	MPs ordered by party line. Black denotes MPs ineligible to vote
Total					550	537	348	141	Y Referendum

Parliamentary voting began on 9 January, with the first round of voting being completed on 15 January. Opposition politicians criticized the rushed way in which the votes were conducted, with four to five votes taking place in a day with no adjournments.^[34] The votes were marred by numerous irregularities, with CHP Members of Parliament filming AK Party MPs openly casting their vote or intimidating uncertain MPs to vote "Yes".^[35] The Minister of Health, Recep Akdağ, was filmed casting an open vote, which is disallowed by the constitution, and openly admitting that he had committed a crime afterwards.^[36] AKP MPs responded to attempts to film them with hostility, with fights occasionally breaking out between government and opposition MPs.^[37] CHP MP Fatma Kaplan Hürriyet was allegedly strangled by AKP Parliamentary Group Leader Mustafa Elitaş after she filmed Elitaş and Prime Minister Binali Yıldırım casting open votes.^[38] Several MPs were hospitalized, while the podium where MPs rose to make speeches was dislocated with one of its €15,000 microphones being reported as missing.^[39] The second round of voting was completed on 20 January, with all of the proposed amendments being approved. A final motion to enact the approved amendments was approved by 339 votes, surpassing the 330-vote threshold to hold a referendum but falling short of the 367-vote threshold needed to enact the amendments directly.

Article voting

Proposal	Issue	First round				Second round				Results
		MP turnout	Yes	No	Other	MP turnout	Yes	No	Other
	Motion to begin the voting process	480	338	134	3
1	Neutrality of the judiciary	484	347	132	5	486	345	140	1	Y
2	Increasing the number of MPs to 600 from 550	480	343	133	3	485	342	139	4	Y
3	Eligibility for parliamentary candidacy	485	341	139	5	486	342	137	6	Y
4	Elections every five years for both Parliament and Presidency	486	343	139	4	486	342	138	6	Y
5	Powers and responsibilities of Parliament	354	343	7	4	486	342	140	4	Y
6	Audit authorities of Parliament	483	343	137	3	485	342	138	5	Y
7	Election of the President	482	340	136	6	484	340	136	8	Y
8	Duties of the President	481	340	135	6	483	339	138	6	Y
9	Penal responsibility of the President	485	343	137	5	483	341	137	5	Y
10	Vice-presidency and ministries	483	343	135	5	481	340	136	5	Y
11	Renewal of elections	483	341	134	8	481	342	135	4	Y
12	State of Emergency	482	344	133	5	484	342	138	4	Y
13	Abolition of military courts	482	343	133	6	484	343	136	5	Y
14	High council of judges and prosecutors	483	341	133	9	487	342	139	6	Y
15	Budget regulation	483	341	134	8	486	342	141	3	Y
16	Adaptation of other articles	482	341	134	7	486	342	141	3	Y
17	Temporary article for transition to new system	484	342	135	7	485	341	139	5	Y
18	President can be party member & when changes would be effective	481	344	131	6	488	343	142	3	Y
Motion to enact the approved changes (330 for referendum, 367 for direct implementation)						488	339	142	7	Y

Several^{[clarification needed]} AKP MPs voted openly for the changes, violating the constitutional requirement of a secret vote.^[40]

MHP MPs Özcan Yeniçeri, Ümit Özdağ and Yusuf Halaçoğlu announcing their opposition to the proposed constitutional changes

The amendments were received with heavy criticism from opposition parties and non-governmental organisations, with criticism focusing particularly on the erosion of the separation of powers and the abolition of parliamentary accountability. Constitutional legal experts such as Kemal Gözler and İbrahim Kaboğlu claimed that the changes would result in the Parliament becoming effectively powerless, while the executive president would have controls over the executive, legislative, and judiciary.^[41] On 4 December, the Atatürkist Thought Association (ADD), Association for the Support of Contemporary Living (ÇYDD) and the Trade Union Confederation held a rally in Ankara despite having their permissions revoked by the Governor of Ankara, calling for a rejection of the executive presidential system on the grounds that it threatened judicial independence and secular democratic values.^[42]

The amendments were initially received with mixed responses from the opposition CHP, which have long been critical of the AKP's constitutional plans. Shortly after the proposals were made public and submitted to Parliament on 10 December, Prime Minister Binali Yıldırım reported that the CHP was in agreement with 5 of the proposed changes.^[43] However, reception by the CHP was negative, with the party's deputy leader Selin Sayek Böke claiming that the proposals essentially created a "sultanate".^[44] Parliamentary group leader Levent Gök, one of the first to comment on the released proposals, claimed that the changes would revert 140 years of Turkish parliamentary democracy, calling on all parties to reject the proposals.^[45] Another of the CHP's parliamentary group leaders, Özgür Özel, called the proposals a "regime change", with the parliament being left essentially powerless in scrutinising ministers and holding them to account.^[46] Özel claimed that the AKP were unlikely to obtain the 330 votes necessar