The result of the elections is obvious, the problem is afterwards…

The result of the elections on August 10 is already obvious. The only unknown is whether Erdogan will be chosen on the first round or on August 24.

Actually, even the arguments related with post-elections are already obvious.

These arguments will concentrate on Erdogan"s "Presidency practice". No matter what this practice will be, Erdogan"s opponents are preparing themselves to talk about the "constitutional breach and becoming authoritative". In a similar way, the ones who have sided with AK Party, are now ready to say that this practice is natural and inside the constitutional borders.

Yes, it"s obvious that under Erdogan"s presidency a new route will be taken.

Along with his statements and given definitions, being elected by the public is pointing towards this…

There are two possibilities in front of us.

The first one is a good one and is as follows:

The constitutional structure might politically allow a new route related with his presidency in terms of political interpretation and activity. Erdogan, without getting under the executive responsibility and acting as the authority in this topic, might develop an intense and directive political relationship with the Prime Minister, and even with the Ministers. He might be a strategic molder in the general politic direction and in the foreign policy priorities. This situation, which will force the neutrality principle, might be regarded as irritating by some.

However, this situation won"t cause a breach in the constitution.

Coming to the worst possibility:

In practice, naturally the border between an "active president" and an "executive president" will be complicated. Tayyip Erdogan"s personality, phraseology, political allegation and weight might pave the way for the creation of a de facto presidential government system that is unrequited in the constitution and thus cause a drift.

This would cause an intense political depression and state crisis, which we are underlining for a long time and worried about, and is the worst possibility that harbors all types of risks.

In this sense, when we are looking at the future, its best to underline this:

A new route in the Presidency is not only the issue of Erdogan and AK Party. Where Turkey is standing now, and will also be standing post-elections, is a point. This middle point points to a tight and slippery corporate platform, which requires movement.

A president who has the authority to mold the state structure and continue the state ideology without carrying any political or judicial responsibility, in brief, who owns the "guardianship power", and who also carries the legitimacy of being directly chosen by the public on top of this power, is free of executive authorities contrary to the definition of legitimacy…

Someone becoming a president from a party holding the parliamentary majority, in these conditions, signals a potential for a great and uncontrolled power, while becoming a president from an opponent party hints at a system blockage.

If Turkey doesn"t want to experience problems in terms of corporate and democratic equilibriums and desires to move forward, then they have to change the structure of the Presidency.

The country should either really pass into a symbolic presidency system of the parliamentary layout or should move towards the presidential government layout.

No matter whichever is targeted, what is important here is establishing the corporate equilibrium and audit system according to democratic constitutional state"s values.

In a sense, the period ahead of us will be the discussion of this.

In terms of the constitutional regime, the country is on the verge of a transitional stage…

Today, political and social opposition had shut their eyes and ears to this transitional state with their "politics without politics strategy", which is identified as pure struggle in order to block Erdogan. The September 12 work of art is defending a dangerous presidency status, which had transformed into a freak of nature following their final touches. On top of that, they are doing this with a completely wrong claim, with the claims of preserving a neutral and symbolic presidency.

We hope that in the post-elections period they will come down to earth and present the constitutional regime, which they requested with all its requirements and defend it.

Also, hope that they will not lock the politics with constitutional violation expression and the act of overthrowing AK Party via these expressions.

Again, we also hope that they wouldn"t replace AK Party"s ballot box legitimacy and constitutional rules" legitimacy with one another and wander away from a legalist line…