"HUMAN RIGHTS" AGAINST "THE TENETS OF ATATURK"

The ban on the wearing of burkhas by Muslim women has been the "banner" of the supporters of secularism as the foundation of the Turkish state for decades. And, suddenly, the seemingly impossible has happened: the country's Parliament has lifted the ban on wearing burkhas in universities which has been in force since 1925. The entire secular elite and, first and foremost, the military leadership and judicial institutions have religiously observed the ban since the time of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, founder of the Republic of Turkey.

However, having significantly strengthened its position after its latest victory in the 2007 parliamentary elections, the Justice and Development Party (AKP), headed by Recep Tayyip Erdogan, mounted an open offensive on the positions of the leftist political forces which had declared themselves the guarantors of Ataturk's legacy, including upon the issue of the ban on the burkha. In this context, it is significant that, in its first four years in power, the AKP bided its time and never raised the issue of the burkha. But now the time has come. In January 2008, Erdogan's statement on the need to lift the ban on wearing burkha, even if it is worn to convey political affiliation, triggered off a campaign for a partial lifting of the ban at government institutions and universities.  To many people's surprise, Erdogan's statement received support from the ultra-right Nationalist Action Party (MHP) and this enabled the prime minister's supporters to clear the 367 vote barrier and change the country's constitution.

The toughening of Erdogan's attitude toward the left-wing parties can be accounted for in four different ways. The first reason is the election of new President Abdullah Gul, whose wife sued Turkey at the European Court for Human Rights back in 2002 for refusing to admit her to Ankara University because she wore a burkha (although she later withdrew her action). Secondly, the appointment of a new head of the Supreme Council for Education, Yusuf Ziya Ozcan, who, in contrast to his predecessor Erdogan Tezic (an ardent supporter of maintaining the ban) has a more liberal attitude. Erdogan's party knew well that while former President Ahmet Necdet Sezer and former head of the Supreme Council for Education, Erdogan Tezic, were in power, it did not make sense to try to lift the ban. Any attempt by AKP would have been thwarted by President Sezer's veto. The third, and quite important, reason was the support of 47% of the voters in the 22 July 2007 elections, which won Erdogan's party a majority in Parliament and, most importantly, caused a rift within the opposition by weakening AKP's main rival, the Republican People's Party (CHP) and making the third-largest MHP a faction in parliament.

And finally, the last, but not least important, factor was the fact that municipal elections were drawing near in Turkey: they are scheduled for the spring of 2009.

Because the barriers in the persons of former President Sezer and former head of the Supreme Council for Education Tezic did not exist any more, holding a public debate on the burkha became unnecessary, and the draft law on the amendment to the constitution was created in a very short time by Turkish standards.

In the mean time, many of Erdogan's opponents voice their concerns that the ruling party will go beyond lifting the ban on wearing the burkha at universities and that, in the near future, women in Muslim head covers will freely enter government institutions, too.

However, in this case, when the head of state himself supports the lifting of the ban, complaints against Parliament's decision by the opposition CHP make no difference whatsoever. Especially as the ban on wearing the burkha does not rest on the constitution, but on rulings by the Constitutional Court.

Arguments which the prime minister cites when commenting on this issue are simple and clear. First, the ban on burkhas violates the fundamental principles of human rights. Second, because of the ban, some young women cannot receive a university education and only a small proportion of them go abroad to study.

The results of a study which was published by the Milliyet newspaper on 3 December 2007 show the huge extent of the problem. Its authors say that in the four years of AKP rule, the popularity of headscarves among Turkish women rose by 5%. "While in 2003, Islamic headgear was worn by 64% of Turkish women, today it is worn by 69% of them," the paper notes. According to the periodical, the majority of Turkish women wear the burkha "out of religious considerations" -- 73%, which is 9.6% more than in 2003.

This explains the heated political debate on the problem, which many foreign politicians do not understand and which the authorities preferred to ignore for decades.

Finding a solution to this issue would yield major political dividends to a political party, especially in the run-up to the municipal elections next year. This is why the decision of MHP, headed by Devlet Bahceli, to support Prime Minister Erdogan's initiative to allow burkhas at universities is understandable. Let us note that, precisely thanks to Devlet Bahceli, yet another wave of the crisis that surrounded the presidential election was prevented last year.

As expected, the draft law to change Article 10 (equality before the law) and Article 42 (the right to receive education), as well as article 17 of the Law on the Supreme Council for Education (a phrase is to be added: "No one can be denied the right to education because of their headgear") was approved by Parliament and sent for approval to the head of state. And everyone knows President Abdullah Gul's position.

At the same time, it has to be said here that the statements of opponents of lifting the ban and chiefly, of the country's leading opposition party, the CHP, also sound reasonable. They talk about the incompatibility of traditional Islamic headscarves with the principle of secularism and argue that this step will give rise to a "confrontation" among university students and create tension in society.

Initially the division of students into two groups is expected to manifest itself in the universities of large cities like Istanbul, Ankara and Izmir. The majority of university heads subscribe to this point of view; in particular, Istanbul University President Mesut Parlak criticized the Government harshly, saying that he would not allow religious accessories within the walls of the university. However, little depends on him in the situation that has developed. Everyone must respect and abide by the law. The heads of the Turkish universities have only three choices: to reconcile themselves to the constitutional provisions, step down, or allow their students to attend classes in headscarves and to challenge the government in the courts. At present, the university heads demand that changes be made to the already amended Law on the Supreme Council for Education to clearly define what part of the face the headgear should cover because the most radical section of the population prefers to cover the face of young women, whereas the majority of wearers tie them under their chins.

There are many different ways of wearing a burkha in Turkey, and most do not fit into the Parliament-approved rewording of the law: "it is permitted to attend classes in headgear as long as the face remains open." So it remains unclear how the universities are supposed to monitor whether the burkha is worn in the right way. At the same time, the ban on the burkha in government institutions will raise the issue of internship in those institutions for female students who wear headscarves.

As for the mass protest actions of "supporters of the secular state" which were organized in a number of large cities in Turkey, the crisis during the 2007 presidential election showed that they did not have the desired effect on the ruling party. The statements that lifting the ban would lead to future pressure on citizens who did not wear burkhas and, as a result, a major blow would be dealt to the principle of the secularity of the Turkish state, did not win popular support.

The only political force in Turkey today which can alter the balance of power on the issue of burkhas is the army, which is regarded as the traditional defender of the "legacy of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk." However, Turkish Chief of the General Staff, Chief Yasar Buyukanit prefers to keep his distance from Erdogan's for now, although he did hint that a major confrontation between the Army and the Government was possible.

In principle, the new constitutional changes will remain "unnoticed" until 1 October, when the new academic year begins.  However, in the mean time, the left-wing parties in the form of the CHP and Democratic Left Party (DSP) will keep trying to contest Parliament's decision in the courts.

The threat also persists that certain circles will try to take advantage of Parliament's decision to lower the age of school attendance in a burkha to elementary schools, that is, to the age of 7 years.

In summary, it is worth noting that the changes which were introduced to the Turkish Constitution are no solution to the problem of the burkha and only create an uncertain situation, of which both the radical Islamic circles and the right-wing opposition might take advantage. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan will have to walk a tightrope and his mistakes will be immediately checked by the General Staff. October will show how right the ruling party's decision was and whether Erdogan will be able to remain prime minister for his entire term.