At the end of May, the Ankara Court of Appeal decided to invalidate the results of the leadership elections of Turkey’s main opposition party, the People’s Republic Party (PRP). That decision led to the dismissal of its current leader, Ozgur Özel, and the return of its past leader, Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu.

It is noteworthy that in one of his speeches, after regaining his position, the latter did not undertake to immediately hold an extraordinary congress, which would allow its members to re-elect their leadership. Instead, he spoke of the need to “cleanse the ranks” of corruption, a formulation that suggests he may be seeking to consolidate his position before returning the leadership question to party delegates.

The Turkish public, which does not share the sympathy for Erdogan’s team, was particularly angered by the fact that Kılıçdaroğlu’s first visit plan after his return included the headquarters of the ruling “Justice and Development” party, which contradicts the logic of consolidation in the systemic opposition camp, where the PKK has traditionally played the role of first violin. It should be especially emphasized that in all these years, despite his respectable age (77 years), Kılıchdaroğlu was not going to leave the party race, appearing in the public arena with enviable stability and trying to influence the domestic political agenda in one way or another. However the sympathy and support of a significant part of the electorate is not on his side. Rather, on the contrary, a politician who has spent most of his career criticizing Erdogan’s crackdown on the legal system has defended a court decision that is quite in line with his own ambitions, creating the image of him as a “wolf in sheep’s clothing.”

The President of Turkey, for his part, insists that the government has nothing to do with the trial, noting that during the trial the plaintiffs were the members of the party themselves. Erdogan emphasized that internal reprisals in the opposition party do not interest him at all, and the main and only problem of the country’s leadership is Turkey itself and the construction of the “Turkey Century” concept. At the same time, it should not be mentioned that the prospect of removing the team, which raised the rating of the People’s Democratic Party by about 35 percent and won a resounding victory in local government elections, seems too comfortable for the current leadership of the country on the eve of the national referendum (elections) expected in 2028.

At the same time, it is necessary to take into account the already existing factor of division within the opposition, which did not arise due to the actions of the Turkish judicial system, but appeared to many earlier, significantly affecting the unity of the opposition camp during the previous presidential election campaign.. To remind: 2023 of the People’s Party of Ukraine immediately after the convention, Hatta’s former mayor Lutfu Savas, who was formerly a member of Recep Erdogan’s AKP and later defected to the PAP, stated that some delegates had been bribed with promises of financial incentives, favors, or political appointments. On that basis, he filed a civil lawsuit to annul the voting results, claiming that the voting process was subjected to “unlawful influence”, therefore the election of the party’s leadership was invalid. Moreover, there have been many speculations in the Turkish press that E. Imamoglu’s arrest was no less helped by his party members, who generously provided information to the investigation.

The state apparatus actively uses the factor of division of the opposition for its own purposes. Turkey’s pro-Kurdish parties have long been the target of state efforts to marginalize the ethnic group’s political demands and limit influence.. Thousands of party officials were arrested, dozens of elected mayors were dismissed and replaced by state-appointed trustees, party co-chairmen were jailed. Since 2024, the opposition People’s Party has been facing unprecedented legal prosecutions. In June, the Ankara court also invalidated the 2023 Hayrenik Party Congress (Anavatan Partisi).․ the official reason is the same: forged signatures and invalid delegate votes.

However, not everything is so monolithic within management. Individual Turkish experts do not rule out that this year the reshuffle of the Turkish cabinet (new ministers of justice and internal affairs) took place: Erdogan’s son, N.B. In order to prepare the ground for “smooth transfer of power” to Erdogan.  It is noted that, judging by the professional experience and high degree of loyalty of the newly appointed persons, they were chosen not for their competence in management matters, but for their “proven willingness to use state institutions against political opponents, first of all, the People’s Party of Ukraine”. By strengthening the control over these ministries, the President of Turkey thereby strengthens his power over the mechanisms that control the electoral process, law enforcement agencies and the judicial process. So, according to some commentators, R․ Erdoğan not only leads the country with an almost unlimited toolkit of power, but also shapes in advance the conditions in which his successor will be decided.

Ankara has not officially commented on the reason for the replacement of the two current ministers, but it should be noted that these changes took place at a time when the issue of the presidential race is becoming increasingly relevant. Although the elections are scheduled for 2028, the election campaign seems to promise to be a long jump, as the turmoil over potential candidates and the arguments over the favorable situation for one or another political force are already heating up. Some predict that the son of the leader of Turkey may take the position of AKP leader already this year. In this case, depending on the effectiveness of institutional pressure on the opposition, R. T. Erdogan has a chance to create conditions for a controlled transfer of power. However, such an outcome ultimately depends on the date of the elections.

Currently, it appears that neither the current president nor his ruling coalition is inclined towards an emergency option. Popular discontent, largely due to the worsening economic situation in Turkey, compounded by regional geopolitical turmoil, is reducing AKP’s popularity and turning early election campaigning into a politically risky option. At the same time, the ongoing “cleansing” of the opposition is heating up the election race, which can become a landmark for the modern history of the Republic of Turkey.

MARIA KOLESNIKOVA

Candidate of Political Sciences, Associate Professor of Moscow State University

interaffairs.ru

Translation by Zhanna Avetisyan

—