TÜRKİYE’DE SİYASİ PARTİLERİN 2011 VE 2015 GENEL SEÇİMLERİNDE ADAY BELİRLEME YÖNTEMLERİ

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 2, 366 - 376, 31.12.2022

Okan Çınar

Öz

Bu çalışma, Türkiye'deki siyasi partilerin aday belirleme yöntemlerini ortaya koymayı ve bu aday belirleme yöntemlerinin sonuçlarını analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu amaca ulaşmak için 12 Haziran 2011 ve 7 Haziran 2015 genel seçimlerinde yarışan AKP (Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi), CHP (Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi) ve MHP'nin (Milliyetçi Hareket Partisi) aday belirleme yöntemleri analiz edilecektir. Bu partilerin kullandıkları aday belirleme yöntemleri katılım, rekabet ve temsil kavramları üzerinden sonuçları tartışılacaktır. Katılım kavramı, seçmenin kapsayıcılığı ve dışlayıcılığı üzerinden ele alınacaktır. Seçmenlerin kapsayıcılığı ve dışlayıcılığının rekabet ve temsil kavramları üzerindeki etkisi ölçülecektir. Rekabet kavramı, mevcut adaylara karşı yeni adayların kazanma oranı ile ve temsil kavramı ise kadın ve genç aday kazanma oranları ile ölçülecektir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Aday belirleme yöntemleri, parti içi demokrasi, katılım, temsil, rekabet.

Destekleyen Kurum

Yok

Proje Numarası

Yok

Teşekkür

Yok

Candidate Selection Methods of the Turkish Political Parties in 2011 and 2015 General Elections

Öz

This study aims to state the existent candidate selection methods of political parties in Turkey and analyze the results of these candidate selection methods. To attain this objective, candidate selection methods having used by AKP (Justice and Development Party), CHP (Republican People's Party), MHP (Nationalist Action Party) competed in the general election on June 12, 2011, and June 7, 2015, are going to be analyzed. Candidate selection methods and results of methods used by these parties are going to be discussed concerning concepts of participation, competition, and representation. The concept of participation is going to be considered on inclusiveness and exclusiveness of the selectorate. The impact of inclusiveness and exclusiveness of selectorates on competition and representation concepts will be measured. The concept of competition is going to be measured by winning indices of new candidates against incumbents. The concept of representation is going to be measured by winning indices of women and young candidates.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Candidate selection, democracy within parties, participation, representation, competition.

Proje Numarası

Yok

Kaynakça

• Bille, L. (2001) Democratizing a democratic procedure: Myth or reality? Candidate selection in western European parties, 1960-1990. Party Politics, 7(3), 363– 380. DOI:10.1177/1354068801007003006.
• Bonnie F. N. & Siavelis P. M. (2008) Candidate Selection Procedures in Transitional Polities: A Research Note. Party Politics, 14(5), 620-639 doi: 10.1177/1354068808093393.
• Habermas, J. (1996) Between facts and norms contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
• Hazan, R.Y. & Rahat, G. (2010) Democracy within parties: Candidate selection methods and their political consequences. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Hopkin, J. (2001) Bringing the members back in? Democratizing candidate selection in Britain and Spain. Party Politics, 7(3): 343–361. DOI:10.1177/1354068801007003005.
• International Institue for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (2022) Voter Turnout Database. Accessed at March 29, 2022 via IDEA website: https://www.idea.int/data-tools/data/voter-turnout.
• Katz, R.S. (2001) The problem of candidate selection and models of party democracy. Party Politics, 7(3), 277–296. DOI: 10.1177/1354068801007003002.
• Katz, R.S. & Mair, P. (1995) Changing models of party organization and party democracy the emergence of the cartel party. Party Politics, 1(1), 5–28. DOI:10.1177/1354068895001001001.
• Lawson, K. (1988) When Linkage Fail. In K. Lawson & P. H. Merkl (Ed.) When Parties Fail: Emerging Alternative Organizations. (p.13-38). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Pennings, P. & Hazan R.Y. (2001) Democratizing candidate selection causes and consequences. Party Politics, 7(3), 267–275. DOI:10.1177/1354068801007003001.
• Power, G. (2012) Global Parliamentary Report: The changing nature of parliamentary representation. United Nations Publications.
• Rahat, G. & Hazan, R.Y. (2001) Candidate selection methods an analytical framework. Party Politics, 7(3), 297–322. DOI: 10.1177/1354068801007003003.
• Rahat, G., Hazan, R.Y. & Katz, R.S. (2008) Democracy and political parties on the uneasy relationships between participation, competition and representation. Party Politics, 14(6): 663683. DOI:10.1177/1354068808093405.
• Özkanan, A. & Erdem, R. (2015), Yönetimde kayırmacı uygulamalar üzerine nitel bir çalışma. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 2 (4), 7-28.
• Schattschneider, E.E. (1942) Party government. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
• Teorell, J. (1999) A deliberative defence of intra-party democracy. Party Politics, 5(3),63–382. DOI:10.1177/1354068899005003006.
• TURKSTAT (2022) Milletvekili Genel Seçimi Sonuçları (1983-2018) Accessed at March 29, 2022 via TUIK website https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Kategori/GetKategori?p=Adalet-ve-Secim-110
• van Biezen, I. & Borz, G. (2012) Models of party democracy: Patterns of party regulation in post-war European constitutions. European Political Science Review, 4(3): 327–359.
• van Biezen, I & Kopecky, P. (2014) The cartel party and the state party–state linkages in European democracies. Party Politics, 20(2): 170–182. doi:10.1177/1354068813519961.
• Ware, A. (1979) The logic of party democracy. New York: St. Martin’s Press.