Under the pretext of “state security” and “strategic interests,” the newly proposed draft law risks weakening the constitutional foundations and democracy of the Republic of Türkiye. This regulation, which can override the definition of a democratic, social rule of law, represents a serious threat to the sovereignty of the people and freedom of expression.

As Türkiye celebrates the 101st anniversary of its republic, the definition of a “democratic, social state based on the rule of law” enshrined in the first three articles of the Constitution remains fundamental to its founding principles. These three articles form the cornerstone of the constitutional order and are protected from any proposed amendment. However, the article “Influence Espionage” in the amendment to the “Notarial Law and Certain Laws” submitted to Parliament on October 18 directly threatens the fundamental characteristics of Türkiye. Article 16 of this omnibus proposal poses significant risks that could undermine Türkiye’s character as a democratic constitutional state and fundamental rights such as freedom of expression.

This proposed law introduced a new crime called “influence espionage.” This regulation uses abstract concepts such as “state security” and “political interests” to suppress constitutional rights and democratic control. It is noteworthy that the term “political interest” has no clear legal definition and represents an effort to protect government interests under the guise of “government benefit.” Thus, this regulation becomes a step to make the government power immune from criticism.

Would you like me to explain certain aspects of this translation or provide context to the political situation described in it?

Basic principles threatened by “influence espionage”.

The new proposed law threatens Türkiye’s definition as a “democratic, social state based on the rule of law,” which is protected by the first three articles of the constitution. The proposed regulation could lead to deviations from a democratic structure that is based on popular sovereignty and cites the “political interests” of the state as justification. As the Constitutional Court has emphasized in previous rulings, the principles of legal certainty and legality are essential for democratic societies. These principles ensure that citizens feel secure in their relationship with the state and that their rights are protected.

However, this proposed law restricts individual freedoms under vague concepts such as state security and political interest and weakens the principle of governance based on the will of the people. The concept of political interest hidden under the label “state security” is not aimed at protecting the state, but at protecting the political interests of the current government. This move contradicts a governance approach based on popular sovereignty and violates the fundamental principle of a democratic rule of law.

A violation of the principle of legality of crimes and punishments

The proposed regulation of “influence espionage” also contradicts one of the most fundamental legal principles: the legality of crimes and punishments. The Constitutional Court has repeatedly pointed out that criminal offenses and punishments must be clearly regulated by law. But abstract terms like “state security” and “strategic interests” in this proposal make it difficult for individuals to predict what actions might be considered criminal.

This lack of clarity opens the door to arbitrary applications and significantly undermines the rule of law. Such vague wording of crimes and punishments undermines citizens’ trust in the state and affects freedom of expression and the right to information. Individuals may refrain from researching or sharing information in the public interest for fear that their actions could be criminalized based on such abstract justifications. This scenario creates a “chilling effect,” as the European Court of Human Rights states.

From popular sovereignty to state strategic interests

Another worrying aspect of the proposed law is the wording “in accordance with the strategic interests of the state”. This sentence paves the way for prioritizing the strategic interests of the state over the sovereignty of the people. However, it remains unclear how these strategic interests are defined. Giving judicial authorities wide discretion in determining what constitutes a threat to state strategic interests could, in practice, lead to arbitrary decisions.

This ambiguity is aimed directly at the press. Journalists who want to publish information in the public interest may censor themselves because they fear that their reporting could be seen as contradicting “strategic interests of the state.” This undermines the public’s right to access information. When freedom of expression comes under pressure, the pillars of democracy are weakened and a model of government based on popular sovereignty begins to falter.

Interference with democracy and erosion of public trust

This proposed law, which endangers Türkiye’s status as a democratic constitutional state, will also affect the relationship of trust between the people and the state. The February 6 earthquake highlighted the shortcomings of state institutions. Civil society organizations and individuals mobilizing on social media stepped in where official institutions failed. This process revealed a decline in public trust and a lack of democratic accountability. But regulations like “influence spying” weaken democratic control and further undermine public trust.

Democratic societies function on the basis of people’s trust in the state. However, this law seems to protect the political interests of those in power and not the public’s trust in the state itself. This situation leads to a further loss of trust and weakens the foundations of democracy.

Türkiye’s duty to maintain its democratic structure

According to Atatürk’s definition of “liberal political democracy,” the Republic of Türkiye should be based on a people-centered administration and a freedom-based democracy. This proposed law represents an intervention against this model of government based on popular sovereignty. In order to maintain Turkey’s status as a constitutional state, regulations that restrict individual freedoms must be combated and the principles of the rule of law, democratic values ​​and constitutional rights must be upheld .

The principle of the democratic, social constitutional state, which forms the basis of the constitutional order, cannot be overridden by such regulations. The Republic of Türkiye should not be distanced from being a liberal democracy; It should be advanced with a governance approach based on popular sovereignty and freedom of expression.

Defense of democracy and the constitution

Regrettably, it must be noted that this “influence espionage” regulation represents a blow to the constitutional order enacted by a parliamentary majority with a majoritarian mentality. The definition of a democratic rule of law, which is enshrined in the first three articles of the Constitution, is undermined and rendered ineffective by this proposed law. Türkiye faces the danger of distancing itself from a constitutional state based on the will of the people and transforming itself into a state that is oriented towards the political interests of those in power.

This proposed law is a direct and destructive intervention in Türkiye’s democratic foundations. Regardless of ideology, all political parties, civil society organizations and citizens must defend their democratic rights and freedoms, uphold the rule of law and constitutional order and demand the withdrawal of this proposal.