The Council of Europe between democracy and populism

Last week the January plenary sessions of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) were held in Strasbourg. After it was decided at last April's sessions that Turkey would be placed back under the monitoring procedure in the PACE General Assembly, Turkey's relations with PACE had entered a new phase. The general indifference Europe displayed toward the coup processes and wide-ranging terror attacks that Turkish democracy experienced in succession had, as it were, become official with this decision taken by PACE. PACE kept very far from understanding the state of emergency decision that Turkey took to protect its democracy and country both against the PKK terrorist organization and against FETÖ's coup attempt.

In a way, the general negligence in European countries was reflected in PACE as well. In fact this situation was one that should have required Europe to question its own reason for existence. Because PACE is a formation which came together after the Second World War for human rights and freedoms, in which 47 countries, with those who joined later, seek to turn togetherness on the common denominator of human rights, freedoms, and democracy into a force.

The Union's most basic priority must be to take a stand against developments that threaten democracy and even to dwell on measures against these threats. Considered within this scope, the 15 July coup attempt constituted a very dangerous attack not only on Turkey but also on these common values.

On the evening of 15 July, Turkey, with its people and its state, thwarted not only an attempt against the country but also one that was about to pour matchwater on the very root of democracy in a European country.

It must be appreciated that this coup attempt was not something thought out and carried out for a short time by a limited junta within the military, like the previous ones. It was an attempt well planned and carried out by a secret organization that had been organized to the utmost in all units of the country for nearly half a century. The measures to be taken against it also required much more than against a one-off terror attack. These measures are measures taken to protect and develop Turkey's democracy, human rights, and freedoms. Despite this, the Council of Europe, instead of trying to understand it this way, put its own reason for existence in great danger by displaying, as it were, an example of solidarity with the coup plotters.

As if that were not enough, the Vaclav Havel Human Rights Prize, awarded within PACE, was last year given to Murat Arslan, former president of YARSAV, who is being tried on the grounds of membership in the FETÖ structure. No one of course could ever understand by which human rights struggle or which activity Arslan had distinguished himself and been deemed worthy of this prize. That such a prize was deemed worthy of someone whom nobody knows, nobody recognizes, who has no distinct activity, whose only distinct activity or characteristic is bearing the accusation of membership in the coup-plotting, human-rights-hostile FETÖ, was a scandal in the full sense of the word. First of all, the fact that this scandal took place in this way is a situation that requires Europe in general and especially the AKP to question itself.

In fact, when one takes a look at how decision-making, negotiation, debate, and session processes are carried out in PACE, it is immediately seen how open and defenseless the institution is to such accidents or scandalous developments. Apart from the first session, there is very little attendance at subsequent sessions. Decisions can be taken with very few people. The Council's rules of procedure are not like the TBMM's rules of procedure. There is no quorum, either for decisions or for sessions. The subjects discussed are not subjects on which members could be very expert. It cannot be said that the subjects are sufficiently debated. But votes are cast very easily. A process operates in which whoever does good propaganda, even whoever does the first propaganda, can be effective and determine the decision. Of course the prevailing ideological mentality within Europe is quite effective in this sense. Despite all the security measures in the Council building, it is possible for someone like Arslan, being tried on a terror accusation, to be passed through the Assembly's procedures and receive a prize. Then what is PACE for?

PACE Secretary General Thorbjørn Jaglan listed very well the existential threats facing the council in his opening speech to the General Assembly. Of course, among these threats, anyone who wishes can easily read between the lines his concerns especially about the ideological influences to which the body is exposed.

"We all know today that the threats to our values, which make Europe Europe, are real. In some of our member states nationalist and populist policies are on a dangerous rise. Populism is an emotional attraction that uses public grievances against institutions. Populists claim a very special moral and spiritual mandate to implement the will of the people. Polemics of the 'us against them' kind delegitimize opposition, threaten the people, and, among other things, undermine our basic institutions designed to protect minority groups. This is taking place in today's Europe, in which we are living through a period of significant migration and economic turbulence."

Following these observations, Jaglan warned that a perfect storm is at the door in 2018. He pointed out that European values and the authority of the ECtHR are under threat, and that therefore European leadership, strength, and activities are urgently needed, but that this is largely due to failure of political ambition and that citizens therefore pay a very high price, and invited reflection on this.

Reflecting on oneself is a good thing, a great virtue. It cannot unfortunately be said that this view of Jagland, who stands out with his common sense and balanced and empathetic approach, is fully reflected in PACE's decisions.