On 22 July 2007, Turkey held its general elections. This election, being very critical for various reasons, was also very important for women’s political representation. KA-DER (The Association for Support and Training of Women Candidates) has run a wide public campaign, supported by more than hundred other NGOs, to raise awareness on this issue and to create pressure over the party leaders to put more women in their electorate lists. The quota demands of the women’s movement have not been taken seriously by the past governments and many people still think that quota practices lead unqualified people to unfairly be privilidged and thus that it is not only unjust but will also pull the standards down. Infact, most Turkish politicians, including the Prime Minister think the same way. However, quotas for women are actually tools to put an end to the exclusion of women from decision-making by helping them overcome the obstacles that prevent them from entering politics in the same way as their male colleagues. Moreover, in Turkey and in the world in general, more women joining politics has real effects on policymaking that cannot wait.

The result of the elections, although drastically successfull (thanks to the efforts of KA-DER and womens' organizations)at first glance, is indeed still a miserable result: 50 women parliamentarians among 550; 9,1 percent.

The candidate nomination process was truly a disaster for women candidates. Even the parties which has gender quota enforcements in their statutes, did not exercised these quotas during the nomination process. In Turkey, the leading government party, Justice and Development Party (AKP), has no quota at all in its statute, and openly states that they have no intention to enforce the quota with legislation. The main opposition party, the Republican People’s Party (CHP) has a 25 percent quota for all city, district coucils, as well as the highest Party Council, but no quota for electoral lists nor the Party board. Some relatively small political parties have voluntary party quotas for women. Small, left wing parties such as the Social Democratic People’s Party (SHP), has a 33 percent quota for all party organs and electoral lists; The Freedom and Solidarity Party (ÖDP), has a 50 percent quota for all party organs and electoral lists and the pro-Kurdish left wing party, the Democratic Turkey Party (DTP), has a 50 percent quota in its statute and following the European Greens they have elected two chairpersons (a woman and a man). The center right, Motherland Party (ANAP) has a gender quota of 33 percent and True Path Party (DYP) 10 percent, which are not reflected in their electoral lists in actuality.

Turkey, recognizing women’s right to vote and be elected as early as 1934, was ahead of a number of European countries. In 1935, there were 18 women MPs in the Turkish Parliament and the percentage was 4.5. This percentage was symbolically important since, at that time, no other European country, except Finland, had a higher percentage. During the single party rule in Turkey, although not openly put, women benefited from the exercise of somewhat of a “quota”. The percentage of women in the Parliament between 1935 and 1950 was maintained around 4.5.

With the transition to multiparty democracy, the “symbolic function” of women ended, and the percentage of women in the Turkish Parliament decreased to 0.62 percent in the 1950 elections. Between 1950 and 1977, the most “brilliant” result for women was 1.7 percent women in the National Aseembly in 1977. The percentage rose to two percent between the years 1983-1995, and doubled after KA-DER (The Association for Support and Training of Women Candidates) was established, in the 1999 and 2002 elections.

With the new election results, the percentage of women in Turkish Parliament increased to 9,1 from 4.36. Once (72 years ago) ranking within the top five in the world with 4.5 percent women MPs, Turkey today rose to 127th from 167th among 189 countries, and still ranking last among the European countries. The number of women in local governments is is an even more miserable picture. The percentage of women mayors is not even one percent, and in local municipal councils it is a little bit over one percent.

In terms of women’s social participation we have witnessed considerable progress, during the last 20 years. According to a report titled “Women in Politics” prepared by the Social Democracy Association (SDA), women are increasingly involved in many professions:

One third of all public servants are women
44 percent of teachers are women
One fifth of professors, one third of associate professors, 45 percent of all experts and research assistants and 60 percent of all instructors are women.
33.8 percent of all doctors are women
One third of lawyers are women
There is 27.2 percent women judges

Additionally,
31 percent of architects are women
Women university graduates constitute 4.3 percent of Turkish population and 70 percent of them are active in professional life.

Some of these percentages exceed those in many Western countries. The problem is not with women’s participation in social or professional realms but with their participation in decision making, crystalized in the Parliament.

Why?

Because in Turkey, the men dominated (patriarchial) society, seems to give the duty of representation to men, in an anthropological meaning. Women are expected to comply and be content with the traditional gender roles within the family, from their childhood onwards. Even when they work, their sphere of dominance is limited only with the borders of their homes. Even in the home, they are auxiliary and men are the chiefs. This social expectation is undeniable and was even engrained in law until 2002 when the Civil Code was revised as a result of the demands of more than 125 women’s organizations.

Of course, this mentality constitutes a detterent for women who want to become political candidates. Additionally, women’s traditional gender roles of taking care of the children, the house, and their husbands, leave no time and energy for politics, especially when the miserable condition of the social services in Turkey are taken into consideration: the lack of childcare facilities, the shortness of the paid maternity leave and etc.

But a more important problem lies within the political parties. The mechanism is simple: the division of labor in society, based on gender, is extended to political parties. Men are elected; women make them elected. In other words, women members are expected to use their highly valuable skills (organisation, house visits, propaganda, funds development, etc), not for themselves but for men candidates. Still in most parties, women branches cannot elect their own boards and they do not have a budget allocated that they can use without the permission of the party administration. In some party buildings in Anatolian villages, there are no toilets for women. The design in set up for men.

All these and the last election experience once more proved to us that Turkey needs constitutional and legislative quota enforcements.

Like the famous saying, “We do not need to discover America all over again”; the experience of most other countries and women provides us with the solution: we need a gender quota. But what kind of quota would be the most suitable in the Turkish context? Various women lawyers, academicians and experts, after years of study, demand that we need legislative quotas instead of political party quotas.

In advanced democracies where there are long-standing political parties, gender quotas are usually (except Belgium and France where gender quotas are exercised through laws) in the form of political party quotas. However, in the vast majority of countries in Latin America, Africa, Asia, which lack advanced democracy and long-standing political parties, quotas have been enforced by laws. In Turkey’s case, being closer to this second group of countries, political party quotas would not solve the problem. Thus, the women’s movement demands the following:

"Quota enforcement through political party and election laws of a minimum of 30 percent within all political party decision making bodies. 30 percent of the delegates should be women; the boards should include at least 30 percent women. The candidate lists should be prepared according to what is called the “zipper system”. According to this system, one of the first two candidates should be a woman and after that, one of the every three names should be a woman. The political parties which do not fulfill the 30 percent gender representation in their electoral lists should not be eligible to stand for elections."

Additional to the quota legislation, KA-DER, voicing the demands of the women’s movement, also requests that, political parties should not receive any application fees from female candidates; 30 percent of the state aid paid to political parties should be spared for the women’s branches; and the boards of the women’s branches should be elected by themselves, not appointed by the party general boards.

Looking back at the history of women’s representation in Turkey, it is quite obvious that if quotas are not implemented, it would take approximately five hundred years to reach parity, when we take into account the 4,6 percent increase within 42 years. Maybe the political parties have the patience to wait this long; but it is obvious that women do not! Like Hülya Gülbahar, chairwoman of KA-DER has correctly put it, “until we reach parity, the men sitting in the 175 seats (subtracting 50 seats held by women from 225-half of the Parliament) are occupiers.