Baykal: Include ‘none of the above’ choice in AKP’s presidential candidate list
Regarding Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s statements to seek a compromise on the presidential candidate, the Republican People’s Party (CHP) leader Deniz Baykal makes the following assessment, “He caused the crisis; now he confesses his regret.”On his way to the Bartın/Kastamonu campaign meeting, Baykal answered the questions we asked with Fikret Bila in the helicopter. According to Baykal, it is good to return from a mistake, but one should question why the mistake is made.
On Erdoğan’s offer to have more than one candidate for the presidential position, Baykal says the new president of Turkey cannot be determined by a multiple-choice test. In this case, he suggests to Erdoğan, he should include a “none of the above” choice and describe a president profile. “Right now, the presidential election rules the agenda in Turkey. The main issue is to elect a president. The Parliament elects its speaker first, and then we elect the president. To delay in the election process is against the Constitution.” To the question, “What happens if the new parliamentary speaker delays the presidential election,” Baykal replies: “Electing a president is the Parliament’s priority. To obstruct this election is a constitutional crime. Turkey is a state ruled by law”.
“A president outside the Parliament is our political preference. Why did Turkey fail in electing a president? Why did the country drag into an early election without electing a president first? For months, the Prime Minister employs this as an election tool. To say, ‘We will seek a compromise’ translates into ‘I have made a mistake.’ It is good to return from a mistake, but why did you do it? If you would have done it three months ago, Turkey had elected its president by now. Turkey is not a scratchboard. It is not a scrap paper of the Prime Minister either. He blocked Turkey.”
“Erdoğan was insisting on electing a president by the (previous) Parliament. And I was saying, “He should be elected by the new Parliament”. Now we have reached this point. Therefore, by the confession the Prime Minister made, it is proven which is the responsible party in the presidential election process. He created this crisis; now he is regretful and seeks a compromise.”
Baykal’s president profile
“Turkey as a whole should be in search of its president. Political parties and society should contribute to this process. The president must be an honest, distinguished and neutral person who matches the description stated in the Constitution and absorbs the Charter very well; obviously he should be someone who has no desire to change the pillars of the Constitution bluntly or secretly and no desire to tail a political party.”
“Compromise must be genuine. Unilateral imposition or quadruple-imposition makes no difference. Conciliation on a presidential candidate cannot be mandated by a multiple-choice test. If the Prime Minister pays visits to parties, I hope he will have a ‘none of the above’ choice among the options.”
Alternative candidate possible
“Conciliation should include all political parties having seats in the Parliament. If conciliation with the AKP is failed, together with the other parties we could present a name to the society. There is one more problem here; formation of a common stance between the AKP and the Democratic Society Party (DTP). Upon a question, ‘what happens if there is,’ he replies, “We will live and see.”
‘They are destined to compromise’
To the criticisms coming from the AKP such as “They don’t have a power perspective,” or “Why don’t they introduce their own candidates”, CHP leader Baykal retaliates: “Of course there are many distinguished people among 550 CHP candidates. However, we believe that Turkey could overcome the presidential election crisis by a neutral president. At this point, we are ready to sacrifice. We will not be in search of a president who is a pro-CHP whether we win the election or have 370 seats. What Turkey needs during such a period is a neutral president. The AKP’s quest for ‘conciliation’ originates from the conclusion they reached that they would fail to elect a president. The AKP prefers a compromise because they are destined to it. Though we don’t feel likewise, we sided with the conciliation yesterday and we do the same today. To reach conciliation is important not for the benefit of our party, but for the benefit of Turkey. With its 360 deputies, the AKP failed in electing one of its militants as president. After the July 22 elections, it will not succeed in this at all. Neither Abdullah Gül nor someone else… There is no way for the AKP to achieve it.”