ACTIVE OR TOKEN PARTICIPATION?: HOPES AND HINDERANCES BEFORE ROMA FACE POLITICAL AMBITIONS (AKTİF YA DA SEMBOLİK KATILIM?: ROMANLARIN SİYASAL İSTEKLERİNE YÖNELİK UMUTLAR VE ENGELLER)

Yıl 2016, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 8, 97 - 114, 09.11.2016

Deniz Eroğlu Utku , Pınar Yazgan

https://doi.org/10.20304/humanitas.277539

Cited By: 1

Öz

Abstract: Until recently, Roma people in Turkey and their political demands have been largely neglected. This group of people did not have any political representation through which to raise their voices or any kind of political will to change the discriminative clauses in Turkish legislations. However, since the accession negotiation process to the EU started, there has been a limited but important awakening in the consideration of Roma people in Turkey. In this regard, the most important step was the election of the first ever Roma MP in the history of the Turkish Republic. However, it is still possible to see limited political participation by the Roma in Turkey. Based on interview data in a qualitative framework, this paper will question the background of the limited political participation of Roma people. The interviews are conducted in one of the Turkish cities which is populated by a significant number of Roma: Edirne. This paper will address the hindrances to their active political participation, the sources of these hindrances and how Roma people have perceived recent developments. Drawing on the literature on political participation by minority groups, this study argues that although there has been visible political engagement by Roma groups, two important barriers affect their active participation. The joint effects of discriminative attitudes and internal dividedness weaken the Roma people’s power to influence politics. All in all, participation by Roma people remains limited and is symbolic rather than being influential and active.

Öz: Çok yakın bir zamana kadar, Türkiye’de yaşayan Romanların istekleri büyük ölçüde görmezden gelinmekteydi. Türkiye’de Roman gruplar seslerini yükseltebilecekleri bir partiye ya da mevzuatta yer alan ayrımcı ifadeleri kaldıracak siyasi iradeye sahip değillerdi. Ancak, AB müzakere sürecinin başlaması ile beraber bu alanda önemli bir uyanış yaşandı. Konuyla ilgili en büyük gelişme ise Türkiye Cumhuriyeti tarihinde ilk defa bir Roman milletvekilinin meclise seçilmesi oldu. Ancak, hala Türkiye’de kısıtlı bir Roman siyasi katılımı söz konusudur. Niteliksel analizi yapılan mülakat verilerine dayanan bu çalışma, Romanların kısıtlı siyasi katılımının arka planını incelemektedir. Mülakatlar Roman nüfusunun yoğun olduğu Edirne ilinde gerçekleşmiştir. Çalışma, siyasi katılım önündeki engelleri, bu engellerin kaynaklarını ve alandaki güncel gelişmelerin Romanlarca nasıl algılandığını incelemektedir. Azınlık grupların siyasi katılımları alan yazınına dayanan bu çalışmada, Romanların siyasi katılımlarında gözle görünür artış yaşanmasına rağmen, iki büyük engelin katılımı etkilediği iddia edilmektedir. Romanların hem maruz kaldıkları ayrımcılık ve hem de grup içi bölünmüşlük Roman gruplarının siyaseti etkileme güçlerini azaltmaktadır. Sonuç olarak Roman siyasi katılımı etkili ve aktif olmaktan çok kısıtlı ve sembolik kalmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Roma Groups, Political Participation, Edirne. (Siyasi Katılım, Roman, Edirne)

Kaynakça

• Akgül, B. (2010). Türkiye Çingenelerinin Politikleşmesi ve Örgütlenme Deneyimleri. Marmara Üniversitesi Öneri Dergisi, 9 (34).
• Arayici, A. (2008). Gypsies: the Forgotten People of Turkey. International Social Science Journal, 59 (193‐194), 527-538.
• Barany, Z. (2001). Romani electoral politics and behaviour. JEMIE, 1.
• Bird, K., Saalfeld, T., & Wüst, A. M. (2011). The political representation of immigrants and minorities: Voters, parties and parliaments in liberal democracies: Routledge.
• Brady, H. E. (1999). Political Participation (Vol. 2).
• Brown, M. G., Denton, J., Farnworth, M., Russinov, R., & Tashev, T. (2003). Roma Political Participation in Bulgaria. National Democratic Institute for International Affairs.
• Deth, J. W. v. (2001). Studying Political Participation: Towards a Theory of Everything? Introductory paper prepared for delivery at the Joint Sessions of Workshops of the European Consortium for Political Research Workshop “Electronic Democracy: Mobilisation, Organisation and Participation via new ICTs” Grenoble, 6-11 April 2001.
• Dingeç, E. (2009). XVI. Yüzyılda Osmanlı Ordusunda Çingeneler. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, (20).
• European Union Agency for Fundemental Rights. (2012). The Situations of Roma in 11 EU Member States: Survey results at a glance Retrieved 09.10.2016, from http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/2099-FRA-2012-Roma-at-a-glance_EN.pdf
• Gazetevatan. (2011). Kılıçdaroglu'ndan Roman Açılımı. Vatan.
• Ginio, E. (2004). Neither Muslims nor Zimmis: the gypsies (Roma) in the Ottoman State. Romani studies, 14 (2), 117-144.
• http://www.ccbh.ba/public/down/USTAV_BOSNE_I_HERCEGOVINE_engl.pdf. Consititution of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
• Huitt, R. K., & Peabody, R. L. (1969). Congress; Two Decades of Analysis: Harper & Row.
• Imbrasaitė, J. (2010). What types of participants?: patterns of political participation in lithuania. Kultūra ir visuomenė: socialinių tyrimų žurnalas (1 (I)), 43-61.
• Kaase, M., & Marsh, A. (1979). Political action repertory: Changes over time and a new typology.
• Kenrick, D. (2007). Historical Dictionary of the Gypsies (Romanies): Scarecrow Press.
• Kolukirik, S., & Toktaş, Ş. (2007). Turkey's Roma: Political Participation and Organization. Middle Eastern Studies, 43 (5), 761-777.
• Kovats, M. (2000). The Political Significance of the First National Gypsy Minority Self-government in Hungary. Contemporary Politics, 6 (3), 247-262.
• Kursar, V. (2013). Non-Muslim Communal Divisions and Identities in the Early Modern Ottoman Balkans and the Millet System Theory. In M. Baramova, P. Mitev, I. Parvev & V. Racheva (Eds.), Power and Influence in South-Eastern Europe, 16-19th century: LIT Verlag.
• Law on Settlement No.2510. (21.06.1934). The Official Gazette of the Republic of Turkey NO. 2733.
• Leal, D. L. (2002). Political participation by Latino non-citizens in the United States. British Journal of Political Science, 32 (02), 353-370.
• Lowry, H. W. (1981). The Journal of Ottoman Studies.
• Marsh, A. (2008). A brief history of gypsies in Turkey. In E. Uzpeder, S. Danova, Roussinova, S. Özçelik & S. Gökçen (Eds.), We Are Here! Discriminatory Exclusion and Struggle for Rights of Roma in Turkey (pp. 5-20). İstanbul: Edirne Roma Association European Roma Rights Centre Helsinli Citizens' Assembly.
• Martiniello, M. (2005). Political Participation, Mobilisation and Representation of Immigrants and Their Offspring in Europe. Willy Brandt Series of Working Papers in International Migration and Ethnic Relations 1/05.
• Marushiakova, E., & Popov, V. (2001). Gypsies in the Ottoman Empire: A Contribution to the History of the Balkans (Vol. 22): Univ of Hertfordshire Press.
• Matras, Y. (2014). I met Lucky People: The Story of the Romani Gypsies Penguin Books.
• McGarry, A. (2010). Who Speaks for Roma:Political Representation of a Transnational Minority Community. London: Continuum. London and New York: Continuum,.
• Milliyet. (2015a). Cumhurbaşkanı Erdoğan Romanlar gününde konuştu. Milliyet Gazetesi , 14.03.2015. Retrieved 18.09.2016, from http://www.milliyet.com.tr/cumhurbaskani-erdogan-romanlar/siyaset/detay/2028275/default.htm
• Milliyet. (2015b). Edirne'de Romanlar Konuşuldu. Retrieved 15.10.2016, from http://www.milliyet.com.tr/edirne-de-romanlar-konusuldu-edirne-yerelhaber-633457/
• Mollenkopf, J., Olson, D., & Ross, T. (2001). Immigrant Political Participation in New York and Los Angeles.
• Oprisan, A. (2006). An overview of the Romanlar in Turkey (Vol. 17).
• OSCE. (2014). Best Practices for Roma Integration : Regional Report on Housing Legalization, Settlement Upgrading and Social Housing for Roma in the Western Balkans Retrieved 12.10.2016, from http://www.osce.org/odihr/115737?download=true
• Parry, G., Moyser, G., & Day, N. (1992). Political participation and democracy in Britain: Cambridge University Press.
• Paspati, A. G. (1888). Turkish Gypsies. Journal of the Gypsy Lore Society, 1 (1).
• Revenga, A., Ringold, Dena, Tracy, William Martin. (2002). Poverty and ethnicity: A cross-country study of Roma poverty in Central Europe (Vol. 531): World Bank Publications.
• Ringold, D., Orenstein, M. A., & Wilkens, E. (2005). Roma in an Expanding Europe: Breaking the Poverty Cycle: World Bank Publications.
• Roma Workshop Report. (2010). Çeşitli Yasal Düzenlemeler ve Uygulamalar.
• Şanlıer, S. (2013). Hukuki Düzenlemeler Işığında Osmanlı Çingeneleri.
• Tağ, M. (2015). Temettuat Defterlerine Göre Edirne'de Romanlar. (Master), Trakya University.
• Teorell, J., Torcal, M., & Montero, J. R. (2007). Political Participation: Routledge
• Tongco, M. D. C. (2007). Purposive Sampling as a Tool for Informant Selection. Ethnobotany Research & Application, 5, 147-158.
• Topuz, S. K. (2011). Gypsies and Citizenship in Turkey. In R. Ö. Dönmez & P. Enneli (Eds.), Societal Peace and Ideal Citizenship for Turkey: Lexington Books.
• TÜİK (2016). [Edirne Mahalle Bilgileri].
• Uhlaner, C. J., Cain, B. E., & Kiewiet, D. R. (1989). Political Participation of Ethnic Minorities in the 1980s. Political Behavior, 11 (3), 195-231.
• UN. (2005). Woman & Elections : Guide to promot woman in elections
• Verba, S. (2001). Political Equality What is it? Why do we want it? Review Paper for Russell Sage Foundation, 2001.
• Verba, S., Nie, N. H., & Kim, J.-O. (1978). Participation and political equality: A seven-nation comparison: University of Chicago Press.
• Yıldırım, B. (2011). Osmanlı Devleti’nde Yapılan İlk Modern Nüfus Sayımına (1881/1882–1893) Göre Edirne’deki Ermeni Nüfusu. Trakya Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 1 (2).