What does the March for Defence to Ankara tell us?

The AKP government has a three ways of reacting to structures that it sees as problematic. First, to take control over it; in cases when this is not possible they resort to hindering its influence or liquidating it by applying pressure. Members of the Turkey Journalists' Society (TGC) remembers this well. I think it was 3-4 congresses before. Just before the TGC’s general assembly, the society had a large growth in membership – mostly media outlets close to the government. The directors of the government’s media, who before hardly passed by the TGC’s building, were all there in the TGC’s building in Cağaloğlu on the day of the congress. But they did not succeed. After that they stopped coming and continued targeting the TGC in their newspapers.
Another AKP operation was directed to the Turkey Journalists' Union (TGS). The Media Workers Union (Medya-İş) was established on March 9, 2012 to eliminate the majority of the Anadolu Agency, ^[1] among the members of TGS.
Power control in the Press Announcement Institution (BİK); it started with the move to break the influence of the professional organizations, the ones it could not take control of, by including the associations close to it, under the name of “increasing the initiative of the locals.” SETA's^[2] seizing the management was the last move.
The preparations of the government regarding professional organizations, chambers and bar associations are a continuation of the same tactic. However, by changing the Law of Attorneys, the defence has been tight and stands against the move to neutralize the bar associations that the government has not been able to control.
The march, which was initiated by the bar presidents of nearly 60 provinces under the name of "Defence is walking," reached Ankara on the 4th day. On the Monday night, when this article was written, the bar presidents, who were prevented from entering the city and were harassed by the police are still resolutely waiting. In many provinces lawyers carried out actions in front of the courthouses or bar associations to support the bar presidents.
The resistance and struggle of every social group creates its own specific effects. A walk opens roads that cannot be predicted before. Everyone, including those who shut the capital's gate in front of the bar associations, will see in time what path this walk will open.
Some remember the Zonguldak miners’ march towards Ankara by the obstacles they have encountered and how they were stopped. However, together with the 1989 Spring Protests, this march formed a vein in terms of the growth of a struggling unionist generation, and had serious consequences in politics. During the 1989 Spring Protests the Motherland Party (ANAP), the party in in power during local elections held on March 26, 1989, suffered a huge loss of votes. ANAP, which came to power with 36.3 percent of the votes in the 1987 general elections, fell to 21.8 percent in the 1989 local elections. In these elections, the vote of Social Democratic People’s Party (SHP) increased to 28.7 percent.
In the elections held after the Great Miner’s March 1991 ANAP fell out of government and the SHP-DYP coalition was established. Later, the president of ANAP, Mesut Yılmaz, at the Turkish-Business Congress in 1992, openly acknowledged the influence of workers' actions had in their fall from power.
Of course, we are talking about different historical processes and powers. The dimension of the bar associations, along with the Ankara march and the actions of lawyers, is also very commendable in its own way.
Hoping to protect his own position very close the government, making Turkey Bar Association President Metin Feyzioğlu ‘void’ is just one point.
In cases opened as part of the political operation of the government, we have repeatedly witnessed that judges violated their right to defence and removed lawyers from the courtroom.
It may be more appropriate to explain with an anecdote what the bar presidents’ march and the attitude of the lawyers mean in this respect. John Berger conveys a speech that impresses him very much in his book called "The Phone from Istanbul", which is composed of the thoughts he told Yücel Göktürk and was published by Metis Yayınları. A Czech student said to Berger in Prague during the events of '68: “Our issue is to live the next 24 hours with maximum self-esteem and dignity and minimum compromise. Our only concern is to live without losing our self-esteem and dignity”.
John Berger expresses the effect of these words on himself: “These words shook me. Since then, the notion of 'maximum self-esteem - living with minimum compromise' is like an earring to my ear. I never forgot the words of that Czech student. Everything I write is related to it in a way.”.
Now this march of defence reminds once again the importance of living with "maximum self-esteem" and "minimum compromise" for all of us who in actual need of justice and democracy. It reminds us very strongly. Is that insignificant?
 

[1] An international news agency that is state-run.

[2] The Foundation for Political, Economic and Social Research – a policy think tank established in 2006. Claiming to be independent but is considered to have close relations with the AKP government.

(Translated by Dilan SEÇGİN)