housing department is not that helpfull for short term scholars unfortunately... Thank you I will be waiting for good news...

By-elections can only be hold if 28 deputies or 5 percent of the total number of seats holders would resignate.

Absent and the most important detail is that Parliament should have concent on the resignations. Without concent from the Parliament resignation wouldn't be valid and there wont be no by-elections.

Its not about East - West - South or North its about the human being itself. Whoever has the power in hand attempts to abuse it. 

A true democracy and rule of law is possible in Turkey as much as it is possible anywhere in the world.

In public spheres some freedoms can be disqualified in the name of public benefits.

Most of the members who commented here used the word ¨provocateurs¨.

I am afraid that the word ¨provocation¨ is quite subjective. I don't see no provocation, no violence no insult in here.

To see the matter in a new light, if freedoms are going to be disqualified in the name of public benefits it should be appropriate to proportionality principle. Arresting someone for such an act doesn't seem to my legal mind fair.

By the way just to inform: A flashmob action also happened in Istanbul last year in Taksim Square in front of Republic Memorial. Hundreds of people were hitting each other with pillows. Guess how many arrested ? None.

Your welcome.

Mernis used also in 2007 elections. 

Of course last thing but not least is legitimacy problem. Between 2007 and 2011 electors increased 10million. This doesn't look real. Neither Turkey's Statistic Organization nor General Directorate of the Cencus proved 10 million difference.

Also Supreme Committee of Elections haven't made any explanation till now.

If it was a calculation error in 2007 than power in party at the moment does not have legitimacy if it is a calculation error now than this elections will not be legitimate.

It would be a little bit hard to explain but i will try... As we know in last election only 3 Parties were able to pass the undemocratic %10 threshold. AKP, CHP, MHP and independent candidates group DTP. AKP had enough majority to make Constitutional amendments alone. 

Due to polls now AKP is behind in votes compare to last elections and CHP has more votes than previous elections. MHP seems like loosing a small percentage too.

Due to most of the polls AKP won't be able to make Constitutional amendments alone which is i think a big handicap for AKP because they mostly dont like consensus based decision making. 

These 10 million extra voters means 1 million more votes to pass threshold. If somehow MHP would stay under threshold, due to our electoral system AKP would again have enough majority to make amendments alone. 

Maybe i really should not comment on this article, as a part of it. 

Being casuistic doesn't mean that the Constutiton is easy to change it only means that it is deeply detailed.

US Constitution is really hard to change as we all know.

But what if people doesn't know what Apple means ? Or what if after taking the apple he eats it?  We just said take it. We didn't say eat it. Thats why we can need a little bit more explanation.

US Constitution is not casuistics as we all know, which means not detailed. If we search the countries which made their constitution in last decade or twenty years we would see that its more popular to make casuistics constitutions.

With detailed and long Constitutions mostly you dont need to make interpretations too much because its all written there word by word trying to explain what it is.

But in short Constutitons like US has. Its the interpretations what makes law, which is i think more enjoyable for us constitutional lawyers to solve... 

So we are talking of a Party which hold the legislative and executive power in hand.

One last think with 2010 Constitutional changings more than half of our Constitutional Courts judges are nominated by legislative and executive branch. So we can easly say Judicial power is under attack too.

For Turkish Constitution we can not say that it has all the checks and balances of the US Cons.

Our government system is parliamentary which means soft seperation of powers. Also i should add that our system is not pure parliamentary because president of our republic does have a lot of  authority with 82 Constitution. This is not the only drift from pure parliamentarism but also Republicpresident is going to be elected by citizens with 2005 constitutional  changes  which means he will be a political character and will make propaganda to be elected.

So at the moment our system can work because its like a single party era. AKP holds  big majorty in the Parliament. Current President of our Republic was also elected by the Parliamentbefore amendments. 

...... Maybe thats why we are coming to negative government theory of Taft and positive government from Roosevelt...

Probably another similar question would be: Are Presidents authorizations enumerated in Article 2 so that they are only allowed to do what in Constitution writes or Presidents can do whatever they want only if it is not restrained by the Constitutions. These two types of interpretations would make huge limit difference...

Thanks for the pdf... I just red it and actually i feel like i am also in Epstein side of view... Also ill be reading http://review.law.umn.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2011/04/Levinson_Balkin_MLR.pdf

Constitutional Dictatorship, Its Dangers and Its Design from Sanford Levinson and Jack M. Balkin and see if it would make my point of view stronger...

I do believe that Constitution is not limiting the President. Of course i dont mean that there is no limitations at all. I.E. ¨advise and concent of Senate¨ etc Maybe thats why we are coming to negative government theory of Taft,

Thanks a lot Patrick, ill be checking that.