Recent government actions, particularly those targeting Istanbul Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu, signify a dangerous erosion of legitimacy that extends far beyond partisan politics, impacting rights, justice, democracy, and the economy for all citizens, argues analyst Ümit Kardaş in an article for ArtiGercek titled "Meşruiyet'in Kaybı" (Loss of Legitimacy), published March 28, 2025. Kardaş contends that the ruling power, embodied increasingly in a single figure, has pushed past acceptable boundaries, raising fundamental questions about its right to govern.
Kardaş points to two recent pivotal moves against İmamoğlu as evidence of the government's overstepping. The first was the highly unusual cancellation of İmamoğlu's university diploma by Istanbul University, 31 years after it was issued, alongside those of 27 others. Kardaş dismisses this as political maneuvering, describing it as an act of "naked violence" to eliminate a rival. He argues that if administrative errors allowed these individuals to enroll and build careers based on their diplomas, it constitutes an apparent "service fault" of the administration, not the graduates' fault. Furthermore, any investigation into potential forgery after 31 years would likely face statute of limitation issues, suggesting the administration acted improperly under pressure.
The second move involved detention İmamoğlu and associated bureaucrats shortly after the diploma issue arose. Kardaş criticizes the manner of these detentions and the investigation, which reportedly relied heavily on secret witnesses, calling it another stark display of "naked violence" within a lawless space. He suggests the ultimate goal might have been to justify appointing a government trustee (kayyum) to replace the elected mayor, a move seemingly thwarted, for now, by public outcry.
The analysis delves into the crucial difference between "legality" (legality) – adherence to existing laws – and "legitimacy" (meşruiyet), which requires alignment with universal principles of justice, fairness, and fundamental rights. Kardaş posits that while a government might initially gain power legally (e.g., through elections), it can lose legitimacy through its subsequent actions, mainly if it violates natural law principles – individuals' inherent, inalienable rights and freedoms. He references John Locke, emphasizing that legitimate governance derives from protecting these individual rights, viewing the state as a tool for citizens, not the other way around.
Kardaş argues that governments lacking legitimacy often resort to force, repression, and threats to maintain control. This, however, is not a sign of strength but an indication of a weak foundation necessitated by the absence of genuine popular consent. He links this to the concept of "fundamental consensus," suggesting Turkey is currently experiencing a crisis born from its absence ("dissensus"). When belief in the ruling power's legitimacy fractures, social peace erodes, potentially leading to conflict.
The article places these recent events within a broader context of ongoing human rights concerns, mentioning the cases of figures like Osman Kavala, Selahattin Demirtaş, and thousands of other political prisoners, portraying a pattern of violations.
In conclusion, Kardaş asserts that the government's latest actions demonstrate contempt for the electorate's will and have pushed it beyond the bounds of legitimacy, causing significant societal and economic harm. He stresses that the situation is no longer just about the opposition CHP party or İmamoğlu but has become a critical issue of justice, rights, democracy, and economic stability for everyone in Turkey. While highlighting the severity of the situation, Kardaş also assigns the CHP responsible for navigating this tense period carefully, avoiding any provocations.