![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
The aim of this article is to present a review of the discourses of public authorities and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) on civic and political participation of youth and women in Turkey. Drawing on policy documents and elite interviews, this article explores the role of civil society organizations in promoting civic and political organizations in traditionally marginal groups. The article is primarily concerned with unpacking dominant discourses, as produced by public documents and official statements by both civil society organizations and policy-makers. The analysis will produce an overview of their general discursive orientations and the related legal changes and policy implementations. The article then looks at the impact of these discursive formulations to the issue of participation. What is important to note is that action plans and strategies are not always implemented in a manner that is in keeping with the original intentions of policy-makers. The review of public and civil society documents highlights serious differences in focus and coverage between the groups. It also highlights limited engagement with the actual issues of civic and political participation. While youth participation is paid limited attention, women participation is mostly associated with political representation in national and local political bodies.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by a grant received from the European Commission seventh Framework Programme, FP7-SSH-2007-1, Grant Agreement no: 225282, Processes Influencing Democratic Ownership and Participation (PIDOP) awarded to the University of Surrey (UK), University of Liège (Belgium), Masaryk University (Czech Republic), University of Jena (Germany), University of Bologna (Italy), University of Porto (Portugal), Örebro University (Sweden), Ankara University (Turkey), and Queen's University Belfast (UK).
The work for this project was conducted as part of a team. The author would like to thank to her team members, namely Prof Figen Cok and and Sumercan Bozkurt, for their great contributions to this paper as well as their contributions throughout the project.
Notes
1 During the review process of this paper, a civil movement had begun in Turkey. The occupation of Taksim Gezi Park in İstanbul began on 28 May 2013. Following the police raid in the park area on 30 May, the occupation continued, and thousands of people gathered to resist the government's plans (to build a shopping centre and destroy the green area). It soon became one of the largest mobilizations for years, with various different participants (from radical activists to NGOs, etc.), resembling the worldwide Occupy movement. On 31 May, street clashes started from 5:00 am in İstanbul. The resistance grew wider, while the police fired an incredible amount of tear gas bombs. An environmental protest in Istanbul which then became an anti-government move is still continuing throughout the country.
2 Although the research realized by the Ankara team within the scope of the PIDOP Project encompassed two additional groups, i.e. Roma people and the Turkish Resettlers from Bulgaria under the category of minority/immigrant, they are not included in this article for three reasons. First is the fact that there are no public and NGO documents that are directly related to the civic and political participations of these groups. Second, the dynamics of immigration as well as the characteristics of immigrant populations imply important differences compared to the European cases which are included in the project. And finally, there is an ambiguity concerning the term ‘minority’ in Turkey. Since the foundation of the Turkish Republic, the only protection for minorities has been that set out in the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne. In the Treaty only the non-Muslim population (Armenians, Jews, and Christians with Greek origin) were defined as minority (Minority Rights Group International, Citation2007). There is also no legislative framework for other ethnic or religious groups in Turkey, either directly through laws granting minority rights or indirectly through an anti-discrimination law (Minority Rights Group International, Citation2007).
3 For the mentioned database see http://www.stgm.org.tr/en/stoveritabani.
4 Like its European counterparts, the Turkish National Agency is an organization responsible for organizing and coordinating the EU-based education and youth programmes in Turkey.
5 Interview made by the authors on 7 April 2010.
6 Interview made by the authors with the Head of Modern Women and Youth Foundation on 3 May 2010.
7 Interview made by the authors with the Head of Modern Women and Youth Foundation on 3 May 2010.
8 Interview made by the authors with the Head of Association of Business and Professional Women on 10 April 2010.
9 See the related news: ‘We will raise a faithful generation.’ Available at http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/19825231.asp, February 2, 2012 (accessed on 18 September 2012).
10 Interview made by the authors with a representative of Association for Support of Modern Life on 5 May 2010.
11 Interview made by the authors on 7 April 2010.
12 Interview made by the authors with a representative of Youth Association for Habitat (Youth for Habitat) on 4 April 2010.
13 The ‘house girl’ (Ev kızı in Turkish) refers to the young woman who is neither part of the formal education system nor the labour market (Çelik & Lüküslü, Citation2012, p. 29). This category is characterized with those who ‘do not get married immediately after leaving school (as it was the case traditionally) and do not get the “status” of a married woman and house wife’ (Çelik & Lüküslü, Citation2012, p. 29).
14 A detailed report of the policy recommendations of the PIDOP Project can be found at the links below: http://www.fahs.surrey.ac.uk/pidop/documents/PIDOP%20Policy%20Recommendations.pdf, http://www.fahs.surrey.ac.uk/pidop/documents/Briefings/PIDOP%20Policy%20Briefing%20Paper%20No.%201.pdf.