Başkanlık Sisteminde Yasama ve Yürütme Organları Arasındaki Karşılıklı Etkileşim Araçları Açısından Türkiye-ABD Hükümet Sistemlerinin Karşılaştırması

Comparison of Turkey-USA Government Systems in Terms of Interaction Between Legislation and Executive Bodies in the Presidential System

Hayri KESER

Türk Tipi Başkanlık sisteminin başarılı bir şekilde uygulanabilmesi için denge ve kontrol araçlarına ihtiyaç bulunmaktadır. Yazılı ve sert anayasa ile sınırlı devletin oluşturulması ve temel hak ve hürriyetlerin korunması için yasama, yürütme ve yargı organlarının görev ve yetkilerinin tanımlanması, dengelenmesi ve denetlenmesi gerekmektedir. Aynı zamanda temel hak ve hürriyetler tanınmalı ve korunmalıdır. Anayasal organların kuvvetler ayrılığı ilkesine uygun olarak demokratik şekilde oluşturulması esastır. Anayasal organlar arasında karşılıklı etkileşim araçlarına da ihtiyaç bulunmaktadır.

Kuvvetler Ayrılığı, Türk Tipi Başkanlık Sistemi, Yasama ve Yürütme, Fren ve Denge, Etkileşim Araçları.

Check and balance tools are needed for the successful implementation of the Turkish Type Presidential system. To create a limited state with a written and rigid constitution and to protect fundamental rights and freedoms, the duties and powers of the legislative, executive and judicial organs should be defined, balanced and supervised. At the same time, fundamental rights and freedoms should be recognized and protected. Constitutional bodies must be democratically established by the principle of separation of powers. There is also a need for means of interaction between constitutional bodies.

Separation of Powers, Turkish Type Presidential System, Legislative and Executive, Brake and Balance, Interaction Tools.

Extended Abstract

In the context of the conduct of international relations, the authority to conclude international agreements belongs to the president, and for some international agreements to become valid, the requirement of approval by the legislature is also stipulated. Regarding the exercise of the powers within the scope of the executive power, it is possible to conduct an informational inquiry by the legislature. On the other hand, even if the investigation by the legislature turns out to be negative, it is not possible to remove the president from office. A parliamentary investigation can be briefly described as a legislative investigation that may lead to criminal liability of the president. Although the president does not have the authority to propose laws, in the speeches he made in the legislature, he can suggest the laws he needs and want to be enacted to the legislature. The President may also request the amendment or repeal of the law in question, or the enactment of a new law, by making a statement or recommendation to Congress for laws that he cannot prevent with his veto power. Regulatory actions of the executive body, which is generally referred to as a decree in presidential systems, is a balance and control tool that allows presidents to implement their policies. The veto power is a tool that allows presidents to pass or return laws enacted by the legislature when necessary. In addition, it is aimed that the laws enacted by the legislature are audited by the executive branch.
Balance and control instruments are needed for the successful implementation of the Turkish Type Presidential system. In order to create a limited state with a written and rigid constitution and to protect fundamental rights and freedoms, the duties and powers of the legislative, executive and judicial organs should be defined, balanced and supervised. At the same time, fundamental rights and freedoms should be recognized and protected. It is essential that constitutional bodies be democratically established in accordance with the principle of separation of powers. There is also a need for means of interaction between constitutional bodies. As a result of the referendum on the constitutional amendment held on April 16, 2017, many articles of the constitution were changed and the Turkish Type Presidency system was introduced. Among the reasons why it is called the Turkish Type Presidential system, it comes to the fore that the bottlenecks in the political system are overcome through elections, the Parliament or the President can make an election decision, and the presidential and parliamentary elections are held at the same time. On the other hand, the characteristics of the presidential system have been adopted in that the executive body is composed of only one person, the President is elected by the people, and the executive body is not based on the trust of the parliament.
The theory of separation of powers in general terms; It is possible to describe it as the division of power into three as legislative, executive and judicial powers in order to protect human rights and freedoms by limiting the state power, and giving these three powers to three separate organs that are independent of each other. Thus, it was aimed to limit the state and protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals. In the doctrine, the presidential system is called the rigid or rigid separation of powers system. In this context, in the presidential system, legislative and executive powers are given to two separate organs separated by sharp and clear lines, and these two organs are formed and function independently of each other in terms of resources and maintaining their existence. In other words, the legislative and executive bodies are elected separately and cannot end each other’s legal existence after being elected. In the comparative analysis of Turkey and the USA systems in terms of the general characteristics of the presidential system; While in the USA the president cannot be appointed by the legislature and the president cannot dissolve the legislature, this is not the case in the current system in Turkey.
Despite the sharp separation of the legislative and executive organs expressed within the scope of the presidential system, the issue of brake-balance tools, which are tools of mutual interaction, forms the basis of this study. In this context, the comparative analysis of Turkey-US systems within the scope of brake-balance tools will be carried out in the next detail. In the presidential system, which is also known as the rigid separation of powers, there is a rigid separation of the legislative and executive organs. On the other hand, especially in order not to block the system, the means of interaction between the two bodies emerged in order to brake and balance each other, so to speak, the legislative and executive powers. In this context, the legislative body’s tools such as the budget, appointments and approval of international treaties, parliamentary investigation and parliamentary investigation, as well as the executive body’s tools in the form of messages, regulatory actions and veto, refer to the brake-balance tools of the presidential system. the budget; It is possible to define it as a one-year leave given by the legislature to the executive body in order to collect public revenues and make expenditures. In this context, the executive branch, that is, the president, has to agree with the legislature for the budget to be approved by the legislature. In a presidential system, appointments are generally held by the president, with some important appointments subject to legislative approval. In this context, the president has to take into account the views of the legislature in appointments and reach a compromise with the legislature.

GİRİŞ

16 Nisan 2017 tarihinde gerçekleştirilen anayasa değişikliğine ilişkin referandum neticesinde anayasanın bir çok maddesi değiştirilmiş ve Türk Tipi Başkanlık sistemine geçilmiştir.¹ Türk Tipi Başkanlık sistemi denmesinin sebepleri arasında siyasal sistemde meydana gelen tıkanıklıkların seçim yolu ile aşılması, Parlamento ya da Cumhurbaşkanının seçim kararı verebilmesi ve cumhurbaşkanlığı seçimi ile parlamento seçiminin aynı anda yapılması ön plana çıkmaktadır. Bununla birlikte yürütme organının tek kişiden oluşması, Cumhurbaşkanının halk tarafından seçilmesi ve yürütme organının parlamentonun güvenine dayanmaması açısından başkanlık sistemine özgü özellikler benimsenmiştir. Ayrıca yürütmenin parlamento çalışmalarına katılamaması, aynı kişinin aynı anda hem parlamenter hem de bakan olamaması ve yürütme organının sorumsuz kanadının yasama organını fesih edememesi sebepleri başkanlık sisteminin özellikleri olarak karşımıza çıkmaktadır.