In April, Turkish citizens will vote on what may be the most important change to the nation's constitution in a century, moving the government away from an often deadlocked Parliamentary system to a Presidential one, albeit with some features that will distinguish it from other such systems in the world today. While much criticism has been leveled that the proposed changes will hand too much power to the President, the fact remains the amendments are supported by what may be a majority of Turkish voters. So what accounts for this dissonance?
Belkıs Kılıçkaya explains how critics of Turkey's proposed Presidential system miss the fact that France already has had one for decades. Cem Duran Uzun unravels the reasons behind the proposed changes to the Judiciary in Turkey, which are an attempt to make the institution more impartial, and end its historic politicization. In two articles, Ali Aslan retraces the historic anti-democratic role Turkey's main opposition party, the CHP, has played, and how the new Presidential system is meant to force the country's political blocks to think outside outdated notions of secular and religious identity groups. And Serdar Gülener takes a look at the criticism that the new system will do away with checks and balances between the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches.