The age of consensus; a pipe dream.

Grey skies linger over a pro-Kurdish demonstration in Istanbul. Police used pepper gas and water cannons against the peaceful protestors.

Just two weeks after parliamentary elections were held, Turkey finds itself more divided than ever. Will this sentiment play into the hands of the ruling conservatives who are looking more decisively ready to go it alone on ushering in a new constitution? And what does this say about the state of democracy in this burned out EU candidate member state?

The prime minister has ignored the calls of the opposition to find a way out of the current stalemate brought about because independently elected MPs were not freed from prison to take their oath in parliament on Tuesday.

"Whether the opposition comes to parliament or not, there is no legal obstacle preventing parliament from functioning. They will see how parliamentary commissions work," Erdogan is quoted as saying in Today's Zaman newspaper.

The prime minister it seems has no intention in solving the current stand off with the main opposition party and the pro-Kurdish bloc, both of whom boycotted the oath taking ceremony in protest that their deputies are still behind bars.

Has the opposition miscalculated their political power again? Supporters of the CHP were almost ecstatic when the party leader announced, he and his party, would not take the oath on Tuesday. The decision was hailed as a courageous principaled step. However, on reflection these same supporters now question whether it was a bold move or just plain stupidity.

"They didn't take the oath, but they were in parliament on that day. So there was enough quorum. If they really wanted to protest what were they doing in the parliament? That would have been a much bolder protest that would have held more meaning," one supporter told me.

While confusion reigns over whether the independently elected MPs should have been released from prison in time to take the oath, as was, Sebahat Tuncel in the 2007 elections - she was elected from prison. The so-called consensus that Prime Minister Erdogan offered on election night seems further away than ever.

The question over whether convicted MPs such as Hatip Dicle should have been released apparently pertains to their sentence time. Dicle recieved a one-year eight-months sentence for making propaganda for a terrorist organisation. The labyrinth of Turkish law, which no one seems able to make any sense of, as is usually the case in Turkey, I believe, states that candidates serving more than a one-year prison sentence do not qualify to run in the elections. So why did Dicle apply for candidacy? And why did the Supreme Election Board permit him to run?

In contrast, Sebahat Tuncel, an independent MP, who was convicted of belonging to a terrorist group - a much more serious crime in the judicial sense - was able to seek re-election, after her 18-month sentence was reduced to six months by an Istanbul court, two months ahead of the elections.

Confused? The Turkish judicial system is clearly disfunctional. But this disfunctionality it seems could play further into the hands of the ruling conservatives, who are looking more and more likely to go it alone on rewriting the consitution.

"They may be looking to strike while the iron is hot," a Turkish journalist told me.

Although AKP lost seats in the June parliamentary election, the prime minister's party recieved 50 percent of the popular vote. In the eyes of the ruling party, this may be all the validation they need to hold a public referendum on Turkey's long awaited constitution. It clearly signals a YES vote at the ballot boxes.

But could they? And would they go it alone? The AKP only need to rally an extra four MPs in the legislature to vote on taking the new consitution to a public referendum. Hatip Dicle's seat has already been given to an AKP candidate, so now they need three. The MHP took their oath on Tuesday and have promised to back AKP's consitution. And, the markets have shown no reaction to the current political stand off in Ankara, which pretty much paves the way for AKP to confidentally get on with the job at hand.

A draft constitution has been knocking around for a few years, so why not just get on with it? Do AKP supporters care whether there is consensus?

What does this mean for the future of Turkey? The prime minister wants to bring in a presidential system that would seal his ultimate grip on power. Are we watching an autocratic regime in the making, as others in the region fall? Does Europe understand what's at stake here? Do Turks understand what this means in the long-term? Are fears that the secular state will be undermined legitimate in this context? Is the prime minister sincere in his claims of wanting to solve the Kurdish issue?

"I will seek consensus with all parties. The nation has spoken and called for a negotiated constitution. I am the negotiator of the new consitution," the prime minister said on election night in his victory speech. We the foreign press reported it, hoping that finally Turkish democracy would be propelled forward and that real negotiations would start.

"Both the main opposition CHP and AKP don't want to take responsibility for making amendments to the law now that would free these MPs. Because these changes may, later down the road, pave the way for the likes of Abdullah Ocalan (the imprisoned leader of the PKK) to stand in parliamentary elections, and no one wants to take responsible for that," a friend commented.

So where do we go from here? The parliament will elect a speaker of the house on Monday. How will the CHP act? The parliament will then go to summer recess, probably at the end of this month. This will provide Prime Minister Erdogan a couple months to plot his next move. Will he seek consensus and deliver an inclusive consitution? Or will he as many opposition supporters now fear, go it alone?

The Istanbul Roma that once were...... Sulukule

What started out as a peaceful demonstration beneath the Ottoman minarets of Sisli mosque quickly spun into a day of anger and frustration for Istanbul's Kurdish residents. The contrast between young Kurds dancing for peace and police regiments putting on their gas masks was a stark reminder that Turkey has a long way to go in resolving the Kurdish issue.




Having reported from hundreds of protests in central Istanbul over the past four years, both I and my cameraman, watched knowingly as the police decisively put on their gas masks in preparation of the end game. Even we were surprised by the sheer force that was used against the demonstrators.

What had started out as a sunny Sunday of peaceful protest ended in tears and fear. A five-year old boy, who lost his parents in the pepper gas panic, was scooped up off the street and carried to safety by a policeman. The limp body of the boy was snatched back from the strong arms by a demonstrator and passed from one person to another until he reached the safety of a cafe. The policeman was verbally ridiculed for his actions that had led to the child trauma. One woman even dared to hit him with her handbag, she was so enraged. An angry group of elderly people protectively pushed the police back away from the cafe.

Forty minutes before the brutal "clearance strategy" was unleashed, we were in a different world, smiling and enjoying the carnival atmosphere - weaving in and out of lines of young and old Kurds holding hands and dancing to traditional folk songs. We asked people how they felt. One after another they lined up to talk to us.

"We came here for peace, but there is a lot of pressure everywhere. We don't want to feel under pressure. Our elected representatives got thousands of votes, but he's not free. We want peace, democracy and our own language rights."

The elected MP this woman was talking about is Hatip Dicle, who ran as an independent candidate backed by the pro-Kurdish Labour, Democracy and Freedom Bloc. Hatip Dicle is serving a prison sentence. He is charged with supporting a terrorist group. However, in Turkey, parliamentary candidates can run from prison in general elections. And, if elected, they are granted parliamentary immunity, which effectively postpones the charges until they are no longer an MP. Dicle was not granted this immunity, and has not been released from prison. He has instead been disbarred and stripped of his deputyship. His seat has been given to a member of the ruling party AKP, a move that has further angered the Kurdish community.

"We are here for our representative Hatip Dicle. We support his freedom and rights. The prime minister has stolen our 80,000 votes. It's shameful that AK party gave Hatip's seat to a member of their party."

While there has been a lot of commentary over an apparent YSK "decision" that disqualified Dicle from entering the election race. Ertugrul Kurkcu, a newly elected independent MP, refuted these claims. Kurkcu pointed out that Dicle's name was on the ballot papers, which facilitated his candidacy. Kurkcu was also at the demonstration.

"The Supreme Election Board accepted his candidacy. So for this reason, the responsibility belongs to the the board not Hatip Dicle. He entered the election, and won the votes. They didn't say anything. Now they've disbarred him."

The pro-Kurdish bloc has taken a collective position by refusing to enter the parliament. Sebahat Tuncel, an independent MP, who ran from prison in the 2007 elections and was re-elected on June 12th, explained the delicate position the block now finds themselves in.

"We got a good result in the election, but the decision of the YSK has put pressure on the Kurdish people. The reason we are in parliament is to solve the Kurdish issue, to promote democracy and contribute to the new constitution. But if we enter under these circumstance it won't be valid."

Tuncel's comments some up the intricate politiking that Kurdish politicians must tread. She knows that parliament is the platform where the Kurdish issue can be solved. But at the same time, she also knows that she can not ignore the feelings of those who elected her. There has also been rumours that the Kurdish block plan to veto parliament until bi-elections are held, effectively creating a political crisis for Turkey. Tuncel rejected these claims.

"We are not going to resign. There is no bi-elections. Our people gave us this duty. Only, we will not go to the parliament. If we resign at this time there could be a bi-election. But it's not useful to us. There would be no benefit for Turkey or for us. We don't want to create a larger political crisis."

The government must act swiflty to resolve the stand off. If it doesn't, the state will have won. It's no coincidence that the YSK allowed Dicle to run and then disbarred him after thousands of people cast their votes. This incident shows the cracks in Turkish democracy, where the militarised state is still grasping for control. The agenda is to protect the status quo.

Kurdish politicians must be supported in their political endeavours or there will be a return to violence, which no one wants. AKP have a historic chance in this term to fight back and resolve this chronic problem through democractic moves. Images of a five-year-old boy being gassed will not help.

Standing along side the demonstrators, we too felt the powerful effects of pepper gas. Our eyes were stinging, our throats contracted. We were gagged and blinded by the state.