After the presidential elections to the second round, there are lively hours on the political agenda.
Finally Ercüment Akdeniz, Chairman of the Labor Party (EMEP)In a statement on his Twitter account, he announced that he resigned both from his duties in the party and from his party membership.
“INTERNAL PARTY DEMOCRACY AGAINST…”
Stating that he is waiting for the elections to end to announce his decision to resign, Akdeniz said, “When it comes to the process of determining the parliamentary candidates, interventions against democracy within the party have emerged in different forms”made his statement.
Referring to the debates within the party about how to enter the parliamentary elections, Akdeniz said that after the decision of the EMEP candidates to enter the Green Left Party lists, “an accusation was brought forward by some Secretariat members that ‘this decision was organized’ despite the fact that it was a democratically taken decision.”
İstifa beyanımdır.
Demokratik kamuoyuna saygılarımla duyurulur. pic.twitter.com/rCcWvejbVo— Ercüment Akdeniz (@ErcmentAkdeniz) May 16, 2023
The full statement of the Mediterranean is as follows:
In the process leading up to the 14 May elections, some of the debates, attitudes and tendencies that emerged within the party headquarters caused me to resign from both my General Presidency and party duties as well as from my party membership.
I deliberately delayed announcing my resignation decision and waited until after the May 14 elections. Because in an election process where both President and parliamentary elections are held at the same time; It would not be possible to be mentioned with this agenda in the eyes of the party, the Labor Freedom alliance and the revolutionary democratic public opinion. As a matter of fact, we worked together with all our might during this process. I salute our working people and democracy forces who are fighting resolutely to end the one-man rule. I congratulate the deputies of the alliance sent by the people to the parliament and wish them success.
So, what kind of a problem could have arisen that required resignation? This will be the point everyone is wondering, rightly. Let me try to explain the subject without further ado;
GYK members who defended the decision of the Labor Party (EMEP) to participate in the elections from the Green Left Party lists at the General Executive Board meeting at the GYK meeting were put under excessive pressure on the podium. After the decision to enter the Green Left Party lists was taken, an accusation was brought forward by some Secretariat members that ‘this decision was organized’ despite the decision taken in a democratic way, and this accusation was also voiced at the MYK meeting. These accusations are the work of a triumvirate structure in the party that sees itself above the GYK and MYK, and it is not possible for me to walk with such a structure.
When it comes to the process of determining the parliamentary candidates, interventions against democracy within the party have emerged in different forms. This structure, which considers itself superior to the party when the principles regarding the nomination process at the party headquarters were not yet formed, presented to the base of the organization, under the name of ‘the activity of taking the organization/grassroots tendency’, some principles that have not yet been determined regarding the nomination of candidates, as if they were jointly determined by the party headquarters. According to this;
– It has been reported to some executives and members that there is a party decision by the Chairman not to be a candidate from another party. However, there is no party decision in this direction. No such decision was taken at the last party congress, and there is no such regulation in the party bylaws. Moreover, the person who is the subject of this decision, which does not exist in reality, namely the Chairman, is not aware of this decision. Worse still, the example of DİSK Chairpersons being generally nominated to the Parliament was cited as the reason for this unknown strange ‘decision’. Even the allegation that the comrades, who served as the former Chairman of the EMEP, ‘they show susceptibility’ on issues such as candidacy, deputyship, etc. has been cited as an example. Going even further, some members were grotesquely explained that ‘HDP will put this before us tomorrow, we have chosen the chairman of EMEP’.
– While receiving proposals for candidacy from provincial administrators and members, the formula ‘Successful Chairman + 2 MPs next to him’ was conveyed in many places as if it were a predetermined principle by the party headquarters, without the knowledge of the Chairman. It has been said that “The Chairman is already known, he works like a deputy”. With these discourses, which were made without the knowledge of the party headquarters and without a previously spoken agenda, the name suggestions of the members were indirectly influenced and directed in a way that did not comply with the reality. In the provinces where there is no such guidance, the majority suggested the Chairman. The Chairman was highly recommended in places where orientation and perception management was carried out, but when the formula “Successful Chairman + 2 deputies” was removed from the hat, the members and managers suggested two names other than the Chairman. This situation itself points to both a great contradiction and the gravity of the “triumvira”-like government. In addition, receiving suggestions from the entire provincial administration in some provinces, only from a responsible administrator in some provinces, and from members in some provinces shows that the principle of democratic centralism is violated.
– I have an “annotation decision” on the names discussed for the deputy candidate at the MYK meeting on April 15, in which I made a special note. This annotation is only about the fact that even one of the two deputies is not a worker. It is a pity that EMEP has not been able to appoint a worker-origin Chairman and a worker deputies in the history of the struggle for more than a quarter of a century and finally today, it is the responsibility of all of us. It is unacceptable from my point of view that EMEP, as a party with the identity of a revolutionary workers’ party towards the 14 May elections, still has the opportunity to elect two deputies, but still does not prefer one of them over a worker or a worker-based revolutionary. As a matter of fact, we have many fellow workers who have this characteristic. Unfortunately, this annotation decision was not delivered to the members of the GYK, provincial and district administrators and members, despite all my warnings.
– At the same meeting, my suggestion and warning that “If the current Chairman is not going to the Assembly, one of the two deputies who will go on behalf of EMEP must be the Chairman. If necessary, an extraordinary general congress should be convened quickly” was also not taken into account. Because, what is important is the representation of the Presidency in the Assembly, rather than the name that will go to the parliament. This preference is also essential for a party that does not have a group in the parliament to be effective in the parliament. In addition, it is absolutely beneficial for the chairman, co-chairman and spokespersons of alliance component parties and organizations to have one of the deputies as the President in the Parliament. Therefore, introducing a formula such as “General Chairman + 2 deputies” is of no use or function. The rostrum and representation are important for the party, not the names. However, despite my written warning to our VQA members; There have been many instances where I did not say “I do not find the formula for the President + 2 deputy correct, it should not be explained to the organization like that”, and the opposite was done.
– Discourses such as “The Chairman is known, he is like a deputy” was also used to abuse the innocent feelings of the members. As a matter of fact, the triumvirate structure I mentioned traveled through “problematic” cities, without my knowledge, while I was visiting provincial rallies within the election campaign, and its members and administrators, who reacted because I was not made a candidate, went on a “convincing” tour. Neither before nor after this interesting activity, the Chairman, who was a member of the secretariat, was not given any information. Worse, in these meetings, words were uttered that “The Chairman is actually very successful in his duty, but we have suggested friends who are more suitable for collective work and who will not be affected by the parliamentary environment”. In other words, it has been implicitly implied that as a “successful” (!) Chairman, I am more distant to collective work and that I may have negative deviations or tendencies when I enter the parliamentary environment. This is an insult to both myself and the Presidency of EMEP. In this case, my decision to resign is not only an expression of respect for my personal honor, but also for the office of the Chairman.
– One of the interesting justifications given to objections from some executives and member comrades to the candidacy debate is the sentence “The Presidency is actually a legal obligation for us, therefore it is symbolic”. Of course, this determination is not within the knowledge of the Chairman. All the completely contradictory statements and explanations show how the nomination process is intended to be a fait accompli. Of course, it was out of the question for me to allow the messy situation that was wanted to be hastily covered with this haste and inexperience. I just waited for the election process in the country to pass and May 15th. Examples can be extended, but it is not necessary.
This picture, which I am trying to outline briefly, is a typical photograph of how “party decisions” are actually “made” regarding the process. Also, this picture shows the dramatic transition from a revolutionary socialist party tradition where “the comrade is ready to give his life for the comrade” to a party where “the comrade starts doing business behind the comrade”. “Lobbying, lobbying cannot find a place in a socialist party, if it finds it, that party will not be revolutionary. Thinned lobbying organizations that open the door to relations of interest are the greatest danger of the recent past and future. The collapse of the Soviet party and the Soviet administration is full of countless examples. I will never compromise with that, never a I will not be a part of EMEP. Since the establishment of EMEP, I have taken part in many levels of both the Labor Youth and party organizations. I have never had an office or a seat in my mind. I did not participate in this struggle to become a parliamentarian. Such an enthusiasm is, above all, the best gift to the comrades who lost their lives and their families. It would be very disrespectful and I would never be able to look into their faces. Yes, I am writing this resignation statement to look at the faces of those grieving families and to hold their hands. Hundreds, thousands of my friends in struggle, people from the public who know me will surrender my sincerity. With this statement of resignation, I reveal myself. The choice of the party and the power of change are no longer in my hands. My decision to resign should not be seen as a harm done to the party, but as a contribution to the contrary. Of course, the appreciation belongs to the party’s congress delegates, GYK, MYK, MDK, its organs, members and youth. I can’t say anything, I won’t say it after this time.
So how will the process work after that, what will happen?
Article 32 of the EMEP Party Statutes is as follows: “In case the chairmanship becomes vacant for any reason, the GYK entrusts the authority to represent the Party to a member it will choose from among itself until the general congress convenes. It calls the general congress for a meeting within 45 days at the latest.” After my resignation, the process will proceed in this way. Therefore, the extraordinary party congress will be long after the second round of the presidential elections to be held on 28 May and will not tire the party between the two elections. Since I resigned from the party membership, it is out of the question for me to attend the extraordinary congress.
The main unity in the parties is the unity of the program. But this is not enough. Because it is clear to me that if the practice, which has lost its revolutionary essence, takes over the revolutionary theory and program and empties it, there will be no voluntary unity there. The bar of “the arm breaks, the yen stays in” has long been exceeded. We have lost the unity of feeling, heart, conscience, will and trust in the party central administration. Of course, I exclude hundreds of young and old friends who have been my comrades until today and who are still fighting sincerely in the party today, and I offer my love and respect to each of them.
I’m not touchy, I didn’t take the decision to resign out of anger. I worked with all my strength until May 15th. But under the shadow of such a triumvirate, which has begun to take root in the party centre, attending another board meeting is both useless and intolerable for me. Therefore, as a conscious choice, I present my reason for resignation to the knowledge of both the party public and the democratic public.
As always, I will value the unity of labor, democracy, freedom and popular forces in Turkey’s future. If I become a grain of sand in your mortar, I will be happy. Socialism is our sun that always shines in our hearts. There is no room for despair, the one-man order will come to an end. I greet the working class, our working people, all revolutionary, democratic parties and organizations.
