"In ultimate analysis, the technique of democracy is the wise and skillful articulation of collective and individual freedoms. Democracy is the right and reason for each and all of us to live and grow together."
Antonio La Pergola
İstanbul - Oct '92***
"(...) the constitution not only rationalises, but its rationalisation of the political existence of a historical community can only be completed through its political integration.
Correct understanding of this concept requires a brief explanation. The State exists and evolves in a continuous vital process by which its plural elements - individuals, collectivities, segments, social classes - are reconducted to unity. Such a "combination of all forces and ideas of unification" was called integration by an outstanding German scholar, Rudolf Smend, and he identified it with the "plebiscite de tous les jours" that, according to Ernest Renan, constitutes the Nation. "
-
(...) That is why, historically, all successful constitutional processes were born from a passionate desire of the problem, not only to have a Constitution, but to be constituted. Examples include France (1789) and Spain (1978).-
...constitutionalism is a consequence both of the rationalisation of political existence or, in other words, its modernisation, and the simultaneous conscience of being a different country. Modern constitutionalism is a function of national self-assertion of the State in front of imperial domination or antidemocratic autocracy.
Miguel Herrero de Minon
İstanbul - Oct. '92
***
In a sense, democracy is the system in which, in the absence of unanimity, collective decisions fall to the majority.
But as many authors have observed, this function of the majority implies a consensus on the coexistence of the majority and the minority. Those in the minority in a democracy disagree with the majority, except on one point: that all must continue to live together, with the risk for one camp, and the chance for the other, that the minority will become the majority.
In addition, the minority, as a group or as individuals, have "reserves" defined principally by human rights.
Democracy is therefore at once a system in which the majority decides and an "anti-totalitarianism", opposed to the totality of the rules applicable to social life being monopolised by the same man or group of men.
But as many authors have observed, this function of the majority implies a consensus on the coexistence of the majority and the minority. Those in the minority in a democracy disagree with the majority, except on one point: that all must continue to live together, with the risk for one camp, and the chance for the other, that the minority will become the majority.
In addition, the minority, as a group or as individuals, have "reserves" defined principally by human rights.
Democracy is therefore at once a system in which the majority decides and an "anti-totalitarianism", opposed to the totality of the rules applicable to social life being monopolised by the same man or group of men.
Georges Vedel
Istanbul Oct. '92
Istanbul Oct. '92
Furthermore, totalitarianism does not consist only in the concentration of all political power (directly or indirectly) in the same hands (man or party), but also in the fact that the political authorities claim to control all aspects of the individual's life: his upbringing, his intellectual training, his beliefs, his work, his leisure, his private life, etc.
The struggle against totalitarianism therefore implies another series of "separations": separation of State and private life; separation of State and religion or beliefs in the broadest sense; separation of State and work.
Should one speak of a separation of State and economy? Democracy allows great variation in the relation between the political authorities and the economy: history proves that the democratic State can be more or less active in economic and social matters as a comparison between the United States and Sweden or Norway, for example, would show.
The struggle against totalitarianism therefore implies another series of "separations": separation of State and private life; separation of State and religion or beliefs in the broadest sense; separation of State and work.
Should one speak of a separation of State and economy? Democracy allows great variation in the relation between the political authorities and the economy: history proves that the democratic State can be more or less active in economic and social matters as a comparison between the United States and Sweden or Norway, for example, would show.
-
"Hukuk yoluyla demokrasi" için sadece siyasi bir "işaret" taşıyan yasa değişikliği olan referandum (2010) HYSK'nın yapısı ile ilgili değişiklikleri de kapsıyordu ve hemen akabindeki Venedik komisyonu raporunda bu atılımın iyi ve umut verici olduğu ancak eksikliklerin olduğu hatta bunun da normal olduğu asıl meselenin devamlılık ve çaba olduğunu (Venedik komisyonunun da yardımı alınması imkanıyla) belirtiyordu.
-
15 Nisan 2011 tarihli Cengiz Çandar yazısından:
"Anayasa değişikliklerine destek, Venedik Komisyonu üzerinden Avrupa Konseyi’nden gelmişti. Venedik Komisyonu Başkanı, Adalet Bakanı Sadullah Ergin, “20 yıldır ilk kez Türkiye’den bir bakan geldi, gözlerimiz yollarda kalmıştı” sözleriyle destek vermişti."
"Anayasa değişikliklerine destek, Venedik Komisyonu üzerinden Avrupa Konseyi’nden gelmişti. Venedik Komisyonu Başkanı, Adalet Bakanı Sadullah Ergin, “20 yıldır ilk kez Türkiye’den bir bakan geldi, gözlerimiz yollarda kalmıştı” sözleriyle destek vermişti."
No comments:
Post a Comment