Headscarves, Judicial Activism, and Democracy: The 2007-8 Constitutional Crisis in Turkey

• Published in: The European legacy, toward new paradigms Vol. 15; no. 4; pp. 467 - 482
• Main Author: Hojelid, Stefan
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Routledge 01.07.2010
• Subjects: Activism; Constitutionalism; Democracy; Judiciary power; Political crises; Political influences; Relations between the powers; Turkey; Veils
• ISSN: 1084-8770; 1470-1316
• DOI: 10.1080/10848770.2010.489321

How are we to understand and analyse the constitutional tension in Turkey between the judiciary and the political sphere? In this article the issue is mirrored in the political crisis which started in April 2007 with the nomination of Abdullah Gül as presidential candidate by the moderate Islamist Justice and Development Party (AKP). The more detailed empirical background consists primarily of the dress code problematics including the matter of party closure. Theoretically, the "hegemonic preservation" thesis elaborated by Ran Hirschl turned out to be a useful instrument when it comes to explaining this political crisis as well as the origin of the so-called new constitutionalism. This is illustrated by the judicial activism in the headscarf affair as well as by the eagerness of the Republican People's Party (CHP), as the political representative of the secular establishment, to play the 'Atatürk card' and to submit the protection of their interest to an independent judiciary and not to the uncertainties of the mechanisms of majoritarian democracy. However, with regard to the current Turkish case my analysis also shows that Hirschl's thesis is too static and should be complemented with a more dynamic perspective of constitutional politics as a repeated game. One example of this is that even if the Turkish Constitutional Court (TCC) had declared the constitutional amendment on the headscarf invalid and voted for economic sanctions against the AKP, it did not close the party down.