“Terror-Free Türkiye” Report Voted On Amid Objections: Time to Act

Publicly referred to as the “Terror-Free Türkiye Commission,” the TBMM Commission on National Solidarity, Brotherhood and Democracy completed its work on February 18 — the 198th day since its establishment on August 5, 2025 — by compiling its findings into a report. The report was adopted in a session lasting more than three hours with 47 votes in favor, 2 against, and 1 abstention, despite sharp criticism from opposition parties.

Although the full text will be disclosed after the General Assembly vote, the CHP and the DEM Party — both of which voiced strong criticism of the report — nevertheless voted “yes” in order to seize what they described as a historic opportunity. The two “no” votes came from TİP’s Ahmet Şık and EMEP’s İskender Bayhan, who protested the report’s failure to explicitly define the process as a “Kurdish issue” and the TBMM’s previous non-compliance with Constitutional Court and European Court of Human Rights rulings (citing the Can Atalay case).

Although Parliament Speaker Numan Kurtulmuş recorded the outcome as including one abstention, CHP member Türkân Elçi did not cast a vote, protesting the report’s failure to address unsolved murders. Her husband, Tahir Elçi, then head of the Diyarbakır Bar Association, was killed in 2015 in a murder that remains unsolved.

CHP’s Democracy Objection

CHP’s Sezgin Tanrıkulu proposed at least lifting the statute of limitations so that the issue of unsolved killings, raised by Elçi, could be included in the report, even if only in a single sentence.

Shortly afterward, AK Party Commission Spokesperson and Deputy Group Chair Abdulhamit Gül informed Kurtulmuş and approached CHP Group Spokesperson and Deputy Chair Murat Emir. While journalists speculated about the possibility of adding the sentence, it was understood that Gül told Emir that no additions could be made at this stage and asked whether Elçi would cast a “no” vote.

Emir, who also served on the drafting committee, stated that the language used in the first five of the report’s seven articles — allegedly containing excessive praise of the government — was problematic. Nevertheless, he said the CHP would not escalate the issue given the importance of the legislative proposals contained in Articles 6 and 7 for both the party and Türkiye’s 86 million citizens.

Emir further underlined that while “an attempt is being made to nurture hope” within the Commission, Türkiye continues to face democratic challenges, including constitutional violations, the pre-trial detention of politicians, the appointment of trustees to municipalities, and the non-implementation of Constitutional Court (AYM) and ECHR rulings — without directly referencing Ekrem İmamoğlu or CHP-run municipalities.

“The question is this: Will this report be implemented?It Must Not Remain Mere Words,” Emir said.

DEM Party: Terror and Öcalan

DEM Party Commission Spokesperson and Deputy Group Chair Gülistan Kılıç Koçyiğit stated that her party would approve the report despite its objections. DEM Party member Cengiz Çiçek, who also served on the drafting committee, articulated the party’s reservations:

• The report was written from a perspective that frames the Kurdish issue as a terrorism issue.

• While commemorating martyrs and veterans, it fails to describe the suffering of the Kurdish people.

• The period referred to as terrorism was in fact a “conflict process” stemming from the denial of Kurdish rights.

• Kurdish should not remain merely a language of communication.

• He objected to referring to PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan as a “terrorist organization leader,” arguing that Öcalan played a role in initiating the current process.

AK Party and MHP: Best Wishes

Speaking on behalf of the AK Party, Abdulhamit Gül, and on behalf of the MHP, Deputy Chair Feti Yıldız, announced their approval of the report and expressed their hope that it would benefit the country. Notably, Yıldız emphasized that the Commission’s mandate does not include constitutional amendments or changes to the unitary structure of the state.

Articles 6 and 7 of the report, read out in the Commission, contain legislative proposals.

The “critical threshold” of the process is the PKK’s disarmament, the verification of which will be conducted by state security forces. In parallel, legislative work will begin:

• A “separate and temporary” law will be enacted for militants who lay down arms. It will cover not only disarmament but also their reintegration into society.

• To avoid impunity or amnesty in nature, the status of organization members will be assessed individually.

• Regional social and economic efforts will be intensified to support social integration.

• A mechanism attached to the executive branch will be established to monitor and report on the process, submitting reports to the TBMM.

• Legal protection will be provided to those contributing to the process.

The “Right to Hope”

• Freedom of expression, including controversial opinions, will be expanded in line with political competition and pluralism.

• New mechanisms will be established to ensure full implementation of Constitutional Court and ECHR rulings.

• Trial and enforcement procedures will be aligned with AYM and ECHR jurisprudence. This article is interpretted as to comply with the EHCR “right to hope”, without saying it. Sentence deferrals and non-custodial trials for elderly and ill prisoners will be strengthened; and this one could help temporary release of inmates like Tayfun Kahraman or Memmet Murat Çalık,

• Within the framework of expanding rights and freedoms, the laws on public assemblies and demonstrations, as well as the press law, will be reviewed to ensure that all non-violent views can be expressed within the boundaries of law.

• Political party and election laws will be revised to enhance transparency and internal party democracy.

• The law on local administrations will be reviewed — a provision linked to the practice of appointing trustees.

The report is expected to be formalized through a vote in the TBMM General Assembly and subsequently referred to the Justice Commission.