Book review: 'Who offered you this profit?' critiques referendum and judiciary's power

The author delves into Orhan Şaik Gökyay's book, "Kim etti sana bu kârı teklif?" (Who offered you this profit?), a title that resonated due to its striking similarity to a 1991 Cumhuriyet newspaper article by İlhan Selçuk. This literary exploration becomes a lens through which to examine political and social commentary, particularly concerning a 2010 referendum.

“

What fruit, however sweet and adorned, can be rotten with a single apple, throwing the whole basket into the trash. There is a purpose in the package. To seize the judiciary.

Within the novel, the protagonist Fazıl offers a stark warning during the referendum process. He cautions against the deceptive allure of superficial benefits, emphasizing that a single flawed element can spoil the entire endeavor. Fazıl's critique is particularly sharp regarding the judiciary, stating, "The goal is to seize the judiciary." He challenges the notion that adherence to external criteria, like those from the Venice Commission, is the primary concern, asserting instead that the critical issue is "who will implement the new articles."

“

The problem is not what those criteria are, but who will implement the new articles... Democracy is safe in the hands of democrats. If the changes are approved, only the naive will not see into whose hands the control of the judiciary will pass.

Fazıl's perspective is further elaborated as he confronts those who align with a certain political faction. He argues that their inability to see the "danger right before their eyes" stems from being consumed by "resentment" and "anger towards soldiers," leading them to cooperate with an administration that postpones strikes. The author finds a personal connection with Fazıl's reflections, seeing echoes of "No" voters and lamenting the transformation "from a constitutional state to a state governed by a constitution."

“

Do you know why they cannot see the danger right before their eyes? Because they are defeated by their resentment, and they cooperate with an administration that postpones all strikes, captive to their anger towards soldiers.

The piece concludes by referencing the historical context of Cumhuriyet newspaper and the author's own return to reading it after a period of boycott. This personal narrative underscores the enduring impact of political shifts on media and public discourse, linking the book's themes to ongoing debates about justice, power, and national identity.

“

Justice is no longer a valued concept, nor is being just...