A Critical Analysis of the AKP-MHP Ruling Coalition in the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye
Since the transition to the Presidential System of Governance in July 2018, the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye (TBMM) has undergone a profound structural shift. Once the primary forum for democratic deliberation, legislative oversight, and consensus-building, the parliament has increasingly been reduced to a ratifying mechanism under the parliamentary majority of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) and its coalition partner, the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP). This paper analyzes how the AKP-MHP alliance has systematicized the use of "omnibus bills" (torba yasa) to bypass parliamentary debate, centralize economic and judicial power, enforce selective legal standards, and systematically block socio-economic relief proposals introduced by opposition parties. Through a critical examination of recent legislative developments, this study demonstrates how executive-driven legislation has undermined democratic checks and balances at the expense of public welfare, judicial impartiality, and environmental protection.
Legislative Disempowerment Under the Presidential System
The constitutional referendum of 2017 and its subsequent implementation in July 2018 fundamentally restructured the Turkish state architecture, concentrating unprecedented executive authority in the Presidency while stripping the Grand National Assembly of its historical oversight role. In a healthy constitutional democracy, parliament serves as a counterweight to executive power, ensuring that legislative proposals undergo rigorous committee scrutiny, public debate, and cross-party negotiation. However, during the 28th Legislative Term, the Turkish Parliament has increasingly functioned under the shadow of the ruling coalition’s mechanical majority.
Rather than acting as a representative body responsive to citizen demands, the Assembly has been characterized by a recurring parliamentary phrase: "Rejected by the votes of the AKP and MHP." This phrase encapsulates a broader systemic trend wherein legislative priorities are dictated top-down by the executive branch, while motions originating from opposition parties—even those addressing acute socio-economic crises—are dismissed without substantive debate.
Fast-Track Governance and the Abuse of "Omnibus Bills"
A central mechanism in weakening legislative scrutiny has been the widespread reliance on "omnibus bills" (torba yasa). Originally designed as exceptional measures to address urgent, technical administrative needs, omnibus bills under the AKP-MHP administration have become the primary method of lawmaking. These packages bundle dozens of unrelated statutory amendments—ranging from tax adjustments and real estate regulations to judicial procedures and executive appointments—into a single legislative vote.
The structural impact of this method is twofold:
- Suppression of Debate: By grouping disparate policies together, the ruling coalition prevents item-by-item parliamentary debate, forcing lawmakers to vote on complex, multi-sector reforms under compressed timelines.
- Obfuscation of Controversial Provisions: Highly controversial measures are routinely embedded within broader, seemingly neutral legislative packages to minimize public scrutiny and expedite passage without meaningful opposition input.
Consequently, parliament has been transformed from an arena of genuine policy deliberation into an administrative stamp of approval for executive decrees and alliance-driven legislation.
Economic Redistribution, Fiscal Burden, and Environmental Deregulation
The legislative priorities of the AKP-MHP coalition reflect a distinct pattern of fiscal centralization and burden-shifting onto working-class citizens, alongside regulatory rollbacks in environmental management:
- Centralization of Cultural Assets and Tax Hikes: Through revisions to the Foundations Law (Vakıflar Kanunu), legislative amendments facilitated the transfer of cultural and municipal assets from opposition-led local governments to central government authorities and affiliated foundations. Concurrently, tax packages imposed elevated license fees, duties, and financial surcharges across diverse occupational groups—including physicians, real estate agents, agricultural workers, and taxi drivers.
- Capital Protection and Wealth Amnesty: While ordinary wage earners face heightened indirect taxation, the ruling alliance enacted "Wealth Amnesty" (Varlık Barışı) legislation. By offering a 20-year tax exemption on capital brought from abroad without requiring proof of origin, the measure created legislative loopholes for unverified capital flows while privileging offshore wealth over domestic taxpaying citizens.
- Environmental Commodification: Legislative amendments opened finalized forest zones (orman statüsü kesinleşmiş alanlar) to private ownership and commercial transfer, prioritizing real estate expansion and capital accumulation over environmental conservation and public land preservation.
Selective Judicial Reforms and Administrative Control
The legislative agenda of the AKP-MHP coalition in the judiciary and administrative sectors further illustrates a pattern of legal double standards and regulatory expansion:
Selective Judicial Reforms: In the 11th Judicial Package, insult offenses were made eligible for pre-payment or out-of-court settlements, yet "insulting a public official" (kamu görevlisine hakaret) was deliberately excluded. This distinction shields public officials from public criticism while maintaining severe legal penalties for citizens. Similarly, initial drafts of the 12th Judicial Package contained restrictive measures targeting women's alimony rights and discriminatory clauses against LGBTQ+ individuals; these provisions were only withdrawn following widespread civic mobilization and public backlash.
Expansion of Executive Oversight and Digital Control: Through omnibus legislation, ex-officio authority to block online content and mandate internet access bans was transferred to executive bodies such as the Cyber Security Presidency (Siber Güvenlik Başkanlığı), increasing executive control over digital media. Furthermore, attempts were made to institute mandatory security investigations and archive checks for academic appointments at universities, reflecting an intent to deepen administrative control over higher education, though intense opposition resistance forced a last-minute withdrawal of the provision.
Systemic Rejection of Socio-Economic Relief Motions
While the ruling coalition utilizes its parliamentary majority to pass contested executive packages, it consistently blocks opposition-sponsored bills aimed at mitigating economic hardship. During the 28th Legislative Term, a series of social relief measures supported by civil society and opposition factions were summarily rejected by AKP and MHP votes prior to floor debate:
| Proposed Motion | Policy Objective | Alliance Legislative Outcome |
| Minimum Wage Adjustment | Elevating the minimum wage to a minimum threshold of 35,000 TL | Rejected by AKP-MHP votes |
| Child Nutrition in Schools | Providing one free meal daily to public school students | Rejected by AKP-MHP votes |
| Agricultural Debt Relief | Waiving interest on agricultural loans and providing interest-free credit | Rejected by AKP-MHP votes |
| Pensions Realignment | Raising minimum pension payouts to parity with the minimum wage | Rejected by AKP-MHP votes |
The systematic rejection of these measures underscores a legislative disconnect between parliamentary outcomes and the immediate socio-economic needs of the population.
Conclusion
The legislative record of the AKP-MHP coalition demonstrates a structural transformation in the function of the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye. Under the Presidential System of Governance, parliamentary processes have been increasingly reoriented toward executive convenience through the use of omnibus bills, fiscal centralization, selective legal norms, and the systematic dismissal of opposition initiatives. Restoring parliament to its constitutional role as an independent, deliberative, and representative institution remains essential for re-establishing democratic accountability and ensuring that legislation serves the broad public interest.
References
12punto News Report. (2025/2026). Halk için değil, halka karşı: TBMM nasıl etkisizleştirildi? 12punto Legislative Analysis Series, Slides 1–9.
Grand National Assembly of Türkiye (TBMM). (2024–2026). 28th Legislative Term Parliamentary Records, Voting Journals, and Committee Reports. Ankara: TBMM Official Gazette.
Official Gazette of the Republic of Türkiye (T.C. Resmi Gazete). Judicial Reform Packages (11th and 12th Packages) and Omnibus Law Proposals. Relevant legislative enactments and executive decrees.
Kalaycıoğlu, E. (2021). The Turkish Presidential System in Practice: Executive Dominance and the Erosion of Legislative Oversight. Turkish Studies, 22(4), 515–538.
Özbudun, E. (2020). Institutional Changes under the Presidential System in Turkey: Legislative-Executive Relations. South European Society and Politics, 25(2), 180–201.