The Constitution is the body of law that guarantees certain rights and freedoms to citizens and also regulates the main structure, powers and duties of the state. The Constitution creates a framework for a state but also limits the exercise of state authority by relying on the essential principles such as the rule of law, human rights and freedoms, the supremacy of constitution and the separation of powers.

The Republic of Turkey has made four constitutions (those of 1921, 1924, 1961, 1982) and there is still a strong political and social desire to adopt a new democratic constitution.

There were some important developments that have had a significant impact on the Turkish experience of constitution-making; The Deed of Alliance (Sened-i İttifak 1808), The Edict of Tanzimat (Tanzimat Fermanı 1839), the Edict of Islahat (Islahat Fermanı 1856), The Constitution of 1876 (Kanun-i Esasi 1876).

The Deed of Alliance was regarded as the starting point of Turkey’s step towards creating a constitutional government. The deed was signed in October 1808 between the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire, Sultan Mahmud II and the representatives of provincial notables (Ayan). Alemdar Mustafa Pasha invited all leading notables to attend a conference in Istanbul and all parts agreed on the Deed of Alliance. The deed consisted of an introduction, seven articles and an appendix

Magna Carta is a legal document issued in 1215 by the king of the British Empire which granted certain human rights.

The edict of Tanzimat and Islahat are considered the outset of the constitutionalist reforms to prevent the dissolution of the Empire. The edicts were different from the deed of Alliance because the edicts were unilateral and both were declared by the Sultan. Therefore, it can be said that Ottoman’s subjects didn’t struggle for rights and liberties in the edict of Tanzimat and Islahat because the rights and liberties in the edicts were granted by the Sultan (Karatepe, 2015, p. 13).

The Edict of Tanzimat was a statement of desire on behalf of the Sultan, promising four basic reforms (Zürcher, 2004, p. 51):
• The installation of guarantees for the life, honor and property of all Ottoman’s subjects
• A fair system of taxation and the abolition of tax farming (iltizam)
• A system of conscription for the military
• Equality before the law of all subjects, irrespective of religion

The characteristics of the constitution of 1876 are as below (Gözübüyük, 2013, p. 114-117):

• The monarchic and theocratic aspect of the political system of the empire was preserved
• The Executive branch consisted of the Sultan and the Cabinet (Heyet-i Vükela).
• The Ottoman Legislature body was composed of two chambers: the Senate (Heyet-i Ayan) and the Chamber of Deputies (Heyet-i Mebusan).
• The constitution recognized the independence of the judiciary and certain basic rights and liberties such as theequality before the law for all, property rights, right to education, liberty of trade, freedom of press, right of petition, prohibition of torture and forced labor.

After restoring the constitution, the elections were held in November-December 1908. The Young Turks won the majority in the chamber in the elections. The Young Turks united under the name of the Society of Union and Progress (İttihat ve Terakki Cemiyeti-İTC) and they controlled the parliament. İTC started to rule the country and created its own opposition. There are two reasons that could explain why İTC had problems. First, the Union didn’t have a political agenda to solve the main problems of the empire. Second, the Union didn’t have enough experience in power (Karpat, 2010, p. 111-112).

The constitution of 1921 was a short constitution including 23 articles but it was an important document. This constitution did not contain any articles regarding the character of the political system. There was no article regarding the future of the sultanate and the caliphate. However, for the first time the constitution regarded the first general assembly as single political actor that possessed sovereign right in the country. This feature implicitly emphasized the impotent position of the sultan in politics. Therefore, it is fair to say that recognizing the grand assembly as the sole representative of the nation doesn’t reconcile with the idea of a monarchial system.

The assembly government model is the political model that the Assembly controls the power of legislature and the power of executive.

The constitution of 1924 can be regarded as a hard constitutional document. In order to enact a constitutional law, a legislative proposal had to be offered by one-third of the assembly and had to be adopted by two-thirds of the majority. There were some articles of the Constitution of 1924 that didn’t allow the Assembly to make changes. The supremacy of the constitution over ordinary laws was recognized as well and other ordinary laws were supposed to be compatible with the constitution articles. These features were a sign to regard the constitution of 1924 as a hard document.

The constitution of 1924 granted the following human rights and freedoms: personal rights and security, equality, the prohibition of torture, confiscation and forced labor, the freedom of conscience, the right to private property, the freedom of the press, the right to form association, the right to petition, the right to an education, the right to vote and to be elected and a legal judicial process

One of the most distinctive features of the constitution as to human rights and freedoms was to recognize the principle of secularity. Although the constitution did not include this principle in its initial document, the amendments made in 1928 removed the article declaring the acceptance of Islam as an official religion of the state and the article stating that the government had to force the principles and provision of the sharia law. The amendment in 1937 included the principle of secularity.

It is said that the factors that led the DP to victory were related to the political promises the party made, like the sensitivity to the demands of the rural areas, the promise to reduce bureaucracy and the promise to expand the religious liberty (Mardin, 2007, p. 71).

The Constitution of 1961 is distinctive from the previous constitutions with regard to the separation of powers.

The separation of powers refers to dividing the political authority of the state into legislative, executive and judicial powers. The purpose is to prevent the concentration of power.

The idea of negative rights and freedoms were acknowledged by the constitution such as equality, right to physical integrity, right to privacy, property rights, freedom of press, freedom of movement, liberty of conscience, the right to assembly and demonstration, right to legal remedies and the principle of individual crime responsibility

The idea of making of a new constitution in order to solve the political crisis implies that the constitution of 1961 had some weaknesses that led to the political crisis. It was believed that rigid separation of powers in the constitution of 1961 caused a gridlock in the political system and produced constant political instability. Another criticism was related to the role of political party given by the constitution. It was stated that the understanding of political parties in the constitution played an important role in deepening the political polarization and the detrimental political polarization caused extensive political violence across the country.

It was obvious that the whole process of making a new constitution wasn’t democratic. On the one hand, political parties were shut down by MGK. On the other hand, there was a ban on criticizing the new constitution draft. In addition, there was another ban on criticizing the talks given by the head of the councils, Kenan Evren, with regard to the new constitution draft. As a result of these restrictions, the constitution was adopted by the 91.7% of the popular vote.