Ottoman Parliament Research Articles

Van Province During The Rule Of Governors Ismail Hagg And Izzet Bey (1911-1913)

The article presents the state of Armenians in Van province during the tenure of governors Ismail Hagg and Izzet Bey, in 1911-1913. After the dismissal of their previous governor, Bekir Sami Bey, from the autumn of 1910 to the beginning of 1911, the position of deputy governor of Van was temporarily entrusted to the former Chief Clerk (Devtertar) (position, which is also responsible for accountancy) of the province, who was replaced by Ismail Hagg Pasha in early 1911. However, soon Izzet Bey, who is of Kurdish origin, was appointed the new governor of Van province. In the study, with the help of relevant facts from the source, for the first time, the situation of Armenians in Van province during the rule of Ismail Hagg and Izzet governors was covered, the Armenian-Kurdish relations of Van province in this period were highlighted, the agreement signed between ARF and Ittihat on February 13, 1912 was presented - the pact by which the ruling party was obliged to fulfill its long-standing promises regarding the solution of Armenians’ land, school, security and other problems. The article also revealed the elections of the Ottoman Parliament held in Van on April 6-8, 1912 and the mayor’s elections held in Van in 1912.

Birinci Dönem Büyük Millet Meclisi’ne Dahil Olabilen Son Osmanlı Mebuslarının Meclise Ulaşma Konusunda Yaşadıkları Sorunlar

The defeat of the Ottoman Empire in the First World War and the occupation of the country and its institutions, including Istanbul, by the Allied Powers hampered the work of the Parliament. This parliament, which was the last Ottoman Parliament, was an authority that showed the courage to take decisions that would positively affect the fate of the Turkish nation. So much so that it was able to take the "Misak-ı Milli" decisions, which are still actively used even in today's politics, and declare the indivisibility and unity of the homeland even under occupation.
 This parliament was seen as a structure that could not be controlled by the British and it was shut down. Subsequently, the members either fled or were sent into exile. Following this event, Mustafa Kemal and his friends deemed it necessary to open a new parliament in Ankara and this new constituent assembly was able to convene on April 23, 1920. As a result of the elections held, along with the new deputies who joined the assembly, the remaining deputies from the last Ottoman parliament were asked to come to Ankara and join the assembly.
 Many patriotic former Ottoman MPs who were able to escape from Istanbul, exile or imprisonment came to Ankara and started to work in the constituent assembly. The processes of their participation in the Grand National Assembly and the problems they faced are tried to be revealed in this study. The aforementioned process has been revealed by using both research works and official sources and memoirs of the period.
 Keywords: Ottoman Mebusan Assembly, Grand National Assembly, , Deputy.
 
 This parliament was seen as a structure that could not be controlled by the British and it was shut down. Subsequently, the members either fled or were sent into exile. Following this event, Mustafa Kemal and his friends deemed it necessary to open a new parliament in Ankara and this new constituent assembly was able to convene on April 20, 1920. As a result of the elections held, along with the new deputies who joined the assembly, the remaining deputies from the last Ottoman parliament were asked to come to Ankara and join the assembly. 
 Many patriotic former Ottoman MPs who were able to escape from Istanbul, exile or imprisonment came to Ankara and started to work in the constituent assembly. The processes of their participation in the First Grand National Assembly and the problems they faced are tried to be revealed in this study. The aforementioned process has been revealed by using both research works and official sources and memoirs of the period.
 Keywords: Ottoman Mebusan Assembly, Grand National Assembly, , Deputy,

A Portrait in the Last Ottoman Parliament During the War Years: Mehmet Ata Bey

Öğrenim hayatına Nevşehir İptidai Mektebinde başlayan Mehmet Ata Bey, orta öğrenimi Karaman Rüştiyesinde tamamlamıştır. Daha sonra İstanbul Mercan İdadisini bitirmiş ve 1905 Temmuzunda Mülkiye Mektebinin yüksek kısmından mezun olmuştur. 1 Eylül 1908 tarihinde Ürgüp Kaymakamlığı’na tayin olması ile devlet memuriyetine başlamıştır. Karaağaç, Aziziye ve Karaman da Kaymakamlık yapan Mehmet Ata Bey, Eylül 1913’te Sivas Vilayeti Mektupçuluğuna atanmıştır. Ardından Yozgat ve Maraş Mutasarrıflıklarına getirilmiştir. Mehmet Ata Beyin Maraş Mutasarrıflığı görevi devam ederken Osmanlı Mebusan Meclisinin son dönemi için yapılan seçimlerde Niğde mebusu olarak seçilmiştir. Mehmet Ata Bey, Osmanlı Mebusan Meclisinde 9 Şubat 1920 tarihli dokuzuncu oturumdan itibaren aktif rol almış, kısa süren mebusluk süresince bir takrir, bir sual takriri ve bazı önemli konular üzerine konuşmalar yapmıştır. Mebusan Meclisinin feshi sonrası Heyeti Temsiliye’nin çağrısına uyarak TBMM’ye Niğde mebusu olarak katılmıştır. Birinci Mecliste iki kez Dâhiliye Vekilliğine seçilmiştir. TBMM’nin II. ve III. dönemlerinde de Niğde mebusu seçilmiş, 1933 tarihinde vefat etmiştir. Bu çalışmada, yeni belgeler ışığında Mehmet Ata Beyin hayatı ve siyasi faaliyetleri Osmanlı Arşivi, TBMM kayıtları, Meclis-i Mebusan Zabıt Cerideleri, Emekli Sandığı Arşivi ve diğer tetkik eserlerden yararlanılarak değerlendirilmeye çalışılmıştır.

Newly discovered documents about Grigor Zohrap’s activity

After the publication of the monograph “The chronicle of the life and activities of Grigor Zohrap” by Prof. Albert Sharuryan it would seem that all episodes of Zohrap’s life had been revealed. Yet the study of Russian-German diplomatic clash in regard to the Armenian reforms in 1913 shows that G. Zohrap was actively involved not only in that process but he also functioned as the main negotiator from the Armenian side, a fact which remained un-noticed by historians and philologists. While the Armenian national delegation headed by Poghos Nubar was the official body representing the Armenian problem to great powers in Europe, in Constantinople the official negotiating body was the Commission of Safety of Armenian Patriarchy. G. Zohrap was one of the five members of the Harassing commission which supported the Safety commission who in the course of negotiations became the main actor. His participation in the negotiations was hidden by Russian diplomacy and by the Armenian circles and G. Zohrap himself. He was a member of the Ottoman parliament and it would be quite dangerous since the Young Turks could accuse him of treachery. The documents presented in the article deal with the meetings of G. Zohrap with the first translator of the Russian embassy A.N. After the publication of the monograph “The chronicle of the life and activities of Grigor Zohrap” by Prof. Albert Sharuryan it would seem that all episodes of Zohrap’s life had been revealed. Yet the study of Russian-German diplomatic clash in regard to the Armenian reforms in 1913 shows that G. Zohrap was actively involved not only in that process but he also functioned as the main negotiator from the Armenian side, a fact which remained un-noticed by historians and philologists. While the Armenian national delegation headed by Poghos Nubar was the official body representing the Armenian problem to great powers in Europe, in Constantinople the official negotiating body was the Commission of Safety of Armenian Patriarchy. G. Zohrap was one of the five members of the Harassing commission which supported the Safety commission who in the course of negotiations became the main actor. His participation in the negotiations was hidden by Russian diplomacy and by the Armenian circles and G. Zohrap himself. He was a member of the Ottoman parliament and it would be quite dangerous since the Young Turks could accuse him of treachery. The documents presented in the article deal with the meetings of G. Zohrap with the first translator of the Russian embassy A.N. Mandelstam on August 20, 21, and 24, September 1-2, 1913 and the second translator of the German embassy Schönberg on August 30. These documents are kept in the archive of the Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin. In the documents Zohrap’s name is missing but the comparison of documents of Great powers and memories of contemporaries comes to prove that it was he who negotiated on behalf of the patriarchy. After the end of the meetings G. Zohrap came to the Safety commission and talked about the course and results of the negotiations. His reports were recorded and sent to Gevorg V Surenyan, the Catholicos of All Armenians. The study of these documents shows that G. Zohrap had a considerable contribution in the achievement of a compromised Russian-German agreement in regard to the Armenian reforms.

Unutulan Bir Gün: Lozan Sulh Günü/Bayramı

Osmanlı Devleti’nin son 10 yılı savaşlarla geçmiştir. 1911’de başlayan Trablusgarp Savaşı, devamında Balkan Savaşları ile Birinci Dünya Savaşı ve en nihayetinde Anadolu’nun bağımsızlık savaşı. İttihat ve Terakki, Almanya ile ittifak hâlinde girdiği savaşta İtilaf bloğuna yenilmiştir. Savaşı bitiren Mondros Mütarekesi ise imparatorluğa aradığı barışı getirmekten çok İtilaf Devletleri’nin yeni işgallerine zemin hazırlamış ve durum aynı zamanda Anadolu’da bir direnişin başlamasına sebep olmuştur. Başta Mustafa Kemal olmak üzere diğer Millî Mücadele liderleri yıllardır savaşan bir toplumu içeride İstanbul hükûmetine, dışarıda ise emperyalizme karşı örgütlemek gibi oldukça zor bir görevle karşı karşıya kalmışlardır. Kongreler sürecinde şekillenen Misakımillî’nin Osmanlı Mebusan Meclisinde kabul edilmesi 16 Mart 1920’de İstanbul’un işgali ile sonuçlanmıştır. Bunun üzerine Ankara’da yeni bir meclis kurulmuş ve bu meclis Misakımillî sınırları içerisinde tam bağımsız bir ülke için her türlü mücadeleyi göze almıştır. Mudanya Mütarekesi; Millî Mücadele’nin askerî safhasını sona erdirmiş, Sevr Antlaşması’nın yerine geçecek yeni bir antlaşmanın imzalanmasına giden süreci başlatmıştır. Cephede olduğu gibi müzakere masasında da işler İsmet Paşa liderliğinde Türk heyeti için çok zorlu geçmiştir. Galip devletler kaybedilen bir savaşı diplomatik manevralarla kazanmak için çok çaba sarf etmiştir. Türk heyeti de bağımsızlığına gölge düşürecek her görüş ve öneriye şiddetle karşı çıkınca Lozan görüşmeleri bir çıkmaza girmiş ve taraflar masadan kalmak zorunda kalmışlardır. İkinci kez toplanan konferans sonunda Türkiye, nihayet Misakımillî’yi büyük ölçüde gerçekleştirdiği bir barış antlaşması imzalamayı başarmıştır. Lozan Sulh Muahedesi ile sadece Anadolu’nun bağımsızlığı onaylanmamış aynı zamanda 10 yıldır devam eden bir savaş ortamına da son verilmiştir. Bu nedenle 24 Temmuz günü Lozan Sulh Günü/Bayramı olarak uzun süre kutlanmıştır. Kutlamaların konjonktüre göre değişim göstermiş olduğu ve en nihayetinde artık unutulduğu görülmektedir. Bu çalışma unutulan bir günü/bayramı tekrar hatırlamak niyeti taşımakla birlikte ayrıca 24 Temmuz’un unutuluşunu konjonktürel olarak da ele almayı amaçlamıştır.

The Armenian Issue in 1912-1914 and the Extra-Parliamentary Activities of the Armenian Deputies of the Ottoman Parliament

Armenian MPs of the Ottoman Parliament made a contribution to the discussion of the Armenian Question by the Great Powers in 1912-1914. The Armenian MPs, on the one hand, undertook, in the structure of the commission, to develop a plan for reforms in Western Armenia and duly present it to the Great Powers, and on the other hand, undertook such a difficult and dangerous task as the negotiations with the authorities of Young Turks. Young Turks, on the contrary, did everything to obstruct the negotiation process and thereby prevent reforms. Armenian MPs since 1913 stopped meetings with Young Turks so as not to interfere with the negotiation process. Soon, on January 26, 1914 there was signed an agreement between Russia and the Ottoman Empire on the implementation of reforms in Western Armenia. On the initiative of the Armenian MPs, contacts with the European inspectors Hoff and Vestenenk were established. In May of 1914, Talaat Pasha signed an agreement with the European inspectors, according to which real power in Western Armenia passed from inspectors to the hands of the Young Turks. The Young Turks, dissatisfied with even this modest agreement, in June of 1914, demanded from the inspectors to leave the Ottoman Empire.

A Contribution of Democracy Research to Turkish History: Evaluation of The National Turkish Party and Its Program

The National Turkish Party was founded on December 9th, 1919 in Istanbul. The National Turkish Party was founded prior to the 1919 election. In a sense; it aimed at maintaining policies of the National Constitutional Monarchy Party and the movement of Turkism in the period of the armistice and of an occupation and cosmopolitan climate. The party participated in the pre-election work and elections and made some name for itself. The party dissented in opinion from other parties at the National Congress. Abdulhak Adnan (Adıvar), Hamdullah Suphi (Tanrıöver), Mehmet Emin (Erişirgil) and Ahmet Ferit (Tek), party’s nominees, got into parliament in the elections in which the party participated with an independent list. In orderto better understand the cosmopolitan pluralistic capital in a political way, we can consider that a newly established party, which formally adopted “Turkish Nationalism”, was able to win a parliamentary seat in armistice Istanbul. The National Turkish Party was not able to open any branch office except in Istanbul. They tried to explain themselves to the masses through the newspaper İfham. The party sent Ahmet Hikmet and Hamdullah Suphi as delegates to the National Congress. They were in conflict with other political organizations because of not taking a harsh attitude towards the Anatolian movement. The Party was strongly criticized especially by the Freedom and Accord Party circles for supporting the movement of the Union for the Defense of Law as well as centralizing the resistance point in Anatolia under the leadership of Mustafa Kemal Pasha. After the invasion and abolition of the Ottoman Parliament, the party became unable to work in Istanbul. Ahmet Ferit, Dr. Adnan Adıvar, and Hamdullah Suphi, the founders and directors of the party, moved to Ankara and participatedin the Grand National Assembly of Turkey. Thus, the political life of the National Turkish Party ended.

DEBATES ON UNCONSTITUTIONALITY IN OTTOMAN PARLIAMENT

Türk hukuk tarihinin ilk anayasası olan 1876 tarihli Kanun-i Esasi, anayasanın üstünlüğü ve bağlayıcılığı ilkelerini benimsediği gibi, değişiklik yapılmasını olağan kanun yapım usulünden farklı şekilde düzenlediği için katı bir anayasa olarak nitelendirilmiştir. Ancak anayasaya aykırı bir kanunun kabulü halinde herhangi bir yargısal denetim öngörülmemiş; bu durum, söz konusu dönem açısından son derece olağan bulunmuştur. Bununla birlikte, Kanun-i Esasi’de iki kanatlı parlamentonun, üyeleri Padişah tarafından belirlenen kanadı olan Heyet-i Ayan’ın görevleri arasında kanunların anayasaya uygunluğunun siyasal denetimi de yer almıştır. Bu doğrultuda, Birinci ve İkinci Meşrutiyet dönemi boyunca Osmanlı parlamentosunda gerçekleşen görüşmelerde ileri sürülen anayasaya aykırılık iddiaları değerlendirilerek, gerek Devletin temel organları, gerek kişi hak ve özgürlükleri açısından hangi konuların dile getirildiği araştırılmıştır. Söz konusu iddiaların değerlendirilmesi, 1924 Anayasası döneminde ülkede Amerikan modeli bir anayasa yargısı kurulması ihtimali tartışılırken, bu tartışmalara altyapı hazırlanıp hazırlanmadığı açısından önemlidir. Dolayısıyla Türk hukuk sisteminde 1961 Anayasası’yla anayasa yargısı sistemi kabul edildiğinde, konunun Kanun-i Esasi döneminden itibaren süregelen bir tartışma zeminine sahip olduğu ileri sürülebilir.

Trabzon Sanjak in the Last Ottoman Parliamentary Elections (Unionist-Entente Struggle)

Osmanlı Devleti’nde ilk seçimler muhassıllık meclislerinde yapılmış olsa da halk genel anlamda 1908 yılında yapılan seçimlerde seçme hakkını kullanmıştır. Buna göre Osmanlı Devleti’nde seçim sistemi iki dereceli olarak uygulanmış olup söz konusu sistem 1946 yılına kadar geçerli olmuştur. Dolayısıyla Trabzon sancağında yapılan 1919 yılı seçimleri de bu kurallar çerçevesinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Konu ile alakalı ATASE, TİTE, devlet arşivleri ve döneme ait gazetelerden tespit edilen bilgilere göre 1919 yılı seçimlerini genel anlamda Temsil Heyeti adına aday gösterilen Müdafaa-i Hukuk Cemiyeti üyeleri kazanmıştır. Buna mukabil arşiv kayıtları ve döneme ilişkin gazetelerinin aktardığına göre İttihatçı – İtilafçı mücadelesinin yaşandığı Trabzon seçimlerinde Mustafa Kemal Paşa cephesi pek üstünlük sağlayamamıştır. Seçimlerde Trabzon sancağından yedi mebus seçilmiştir. Sakizade Hasan Bey, Nafis Müsteşarı Ahmet Muhtar Bey, Reiszade Ali Şükrü, Efendizade Ali Şefik Bey, müstafi Kaymakam Hüsrev (Gerede) Bey, Ordulu İsmail Bey, Dizdarzade Eşref Bey, Son Osmanlı Mebusan Meclisi’ne seçilen mebuslardır. Bu çalışmada Arşiv belgeleri doğrultusunda Trabzon vilayetine bağlı Trabzon merkez sancağında 1919 yılı seçimlerine giden süreç ve seçimler konusu ele alınacaktır.

The Conscription of Greek Ottomans into the Sultan's Army, 1908–1912

AbstractWith the reinstatement of the parliament in 1908, the Ottoman state faced new challenges connected to citizenship. As a policy to finally make citizens equal in rights as well as duties, military conscription figured prominently in this new context. For the first time in Ottoman history, the empire's non-Muslims began to be drafted en masse. This article explores meanings of imperial citizenship and equality through the lens of debates over the conscription of Greek Ottomans, the largest non-Muslim population of the Ottoman Empire. In contrast to the widespread suggestion of the Turkish nationalist historiography on these matters, Greek Ottomans and other non-Muslim populations enthusiastically supported the military service in principle. But amidst this general agreement was a tremendous array of views on what conscription ought to look like in practice. The issue came to center on whether Greek Ottomans should have separate battalions in the army. All units would eventually come to be religiously integrated, but the conscription debates in the Ottoman parliament as well as in the Turkish and Greek language press reveal some of the crucial fissures of an empire as various actors were attempting to navigate between a unified citizenship and a diverse population.

First Victory of The National Struggle: The National Struggle and Heroism of Marash

<p class="ql-align-justify">Anatolia was invaded by the Allied Powers after the signing of the Armistice of Mudros. Marash was also invaded by the British towards the end of 1918.&nbsp;The Armenians who had been relocated prior to this started to return to their homelands after the announcement of the ‘Decree of Return’. This could have caused some tension; however, the British did not let these tensions arise by not interfering with the lives of the locals. The British Invasion lasted for approximately eight months after which the French took over the city. The French Army was financed by Agop Hirlakian who was the richest person of the city. Hirlakian, who was a catholic, also served as a representative of Marash in the Ottoman Parliament after the 1914 elections. The people of Marash formed a national defense community and got organized. This was pioneered by people such as Evliya Efendi and Aslan Beg. Preparations were made to save all the neighborhoods of Marash. The people of Marash refused to practice Friday’s prayers when the city was under invasion and defended the city against the French and the Armenians wearing French uniforms. As a result, a war broke out which continued for 22 days and 22 nights. The people of Marash heroically defended the city. The French and the Armenians were much better equipped, and also had the numbers and psychological advantage; however, the determination of the people of Marash prevailed. The victory of Marash was honored by the Turkish Parliament and Marash was given the ‘Medal of Liberty’. The ‘Heroism’ title was given to Marash in 1973. However, it is clear that this title had in fact been given to Marash long before, and this will be discussed in the papers. In this study, the national struggle and the liberation of Marash will be examined. The fact that the determination of the people of Marash increased the moral of the Turkish nation and increased the courage of the people to save the whole of Anatolia will be examined. The main bibliography will consist of documents from the Archive of the Turkish Parliament, Republic Archives and Military Archives as well as the memoirs of the people who served in the national struggle of Marash.&nbsp;

Osmanlı Devlet Adamlarından Hacı Âdil Bey’in II. Meşrutiyet Dönemindeki Faaliyetleri / Activities of Hacı Âdil Bey, who is the Ottoman Statesmen, in the Second Constitutional Period

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Abstract &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Haci Adil (Arda) Bey, born in Lovech in 1869, was an important politician and jurist who held important positions in government offices both in the Ottoman Empire and in the Republic of Turkey. Throughout his career as a government official, which he started as a customs official in Yemen in 1890, he took several government offices in Yemen, Istanbul, and Thessaloniki for about 20 years and was inducted as the Governor of Edirne a short while after the proclamation of the Second Constitutionalist Period. Taking office as a senior manager within the party of Union and Progress following assume of governor of Edirne office, lasted for about a year, Haci Adil was appointed as Interior minister in 1912. He continued to hold critical offices during the Turco-Italian War, Balkan War and the First World War while the government was having hard times. He became interior minister once again in the government formed after the Sublime Porte Raid in 1913. HE was appointed as the governor of Edirne once again after the city was taken back during the Balkan War II, and held the office of chairperson of the Ottoman Parliament between the years 1915 and 1918. Arrested and exiled to Malta after end of First World War, Haci Adil lived the life of an exile abroad between the years 1919 and 1922. Returning home after his captivity in Malta, Haci Adil held the offices of the Governor of Adana and Bursa, lectured at the Ottoman University Darülfünun, and represented country on international courts. Haci Adil, who also held offices in Istanbul Municipality, died in 1935.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;This study gives information on the political and administrative activities of Haci Adil, who was one of the members of the headquarter of party of Union and Progress, during the Second Constitutional Period based on archive documents. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Öz&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;1869 yılında Lofça’da dünyaya gelen Hacı Âdil (Arda) Bey, hem Osmanlı Devleti hem de Türkiye Cumhuriyeti zamanında mühim devlet görevlerinde bulunmuş önemli bir siyasetçi ve hukuk adamıdır. 1890 yılında Yemen’de gümrük memuru olarak başladığı devlet hizmetinde yaklaşık 20 yıl süre ile Yemen, İstanbul ve Selanik’te çeşitli memuriyetler üstlenmiş, II. Meşrutiyet’in ilanından kısa bir süre sonra Edirne Valisi olarak atanmıştır. Yaklaşık bir yıl süren Edirne Valiliği görevinden sonra İttihat ve Terakki Fırkası içerisinde üst düzey yöneticilik görevi alan Hacı Âdil Bey, 1912 yılında Dâhiliye Nâzırlığı’na getirilmiştir. Trablusgarp Savaşı, Balkan Savaşı ve I. Dünya Savaşı yıllarında devletin zor günlerinde kritik görevler almaya devam eden Hacı Âdil Bey 1913 yılında Bâb-ı Âlî Baskını sonrasında kurulan hükûmette bir kez daha Dâhiliye Nâzırı olmuş, II. Balkan Savaşı sırasında Edirne’nin geri alınmasının ardından bir kez daha bu şehre vali olarak atanmış, 1915-1918 yılları arasında da Meclis-i Mebusan Reisliği görevini yürütmüştür. I. Dünya Savaşı’nın sona ermesinin ardından tutuklanan ve Malta’ya sürgüne gönderilen Hacı Âdil Bey, 1919-1922 yılları arasında yurtdışında sürgün hayatı yaşamıştır. Malta esareti sonrasında yurda dönen Hacı Âdil Bey, Adana ve Bursa valilikleri görevlerinde bulunmuş, Dârülfünûn’da dersler vermiş ve uluslararası mahkemelerde ülkemizi temsil etmiştir. İstanbul Belediyesi’nde de görevler üstlenen Hacı Âdil Bey 1935 yılında vefat etmiştir.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Söz konusu çalışmada İttihat ve Terakki Fırkası’nın merkez-i umumi azalarından olan Hacı Âdil Bey’in II. Meşrutiyet dönemindeki siyasî-idarî faaliyetleri hakkında arşiv belgeleri ekseninde bilgiler verilmektedir. &lt;/p&gt;

The Late Ottoman Ulema’s Constitutionalism

By examining laws and proposals related to constitutional amendments, the Mecelle, and sharī‘a courts in the 1908–1912 Ottoman parliament, I attempt to explain how ulema in parliament tried to implement their understandings of constitutionalism and legal reform within the legislative framework of the period as set against the framework of parliamentary politics. I focus on the upper-level ulema members of the Chamber of Deputies as they worked to implement their understandings of law and constitutionalism and followed a political strategy to achieve their goals. Based on my study of the draft constitution, official parliamentary publications, and the popular press, I identify the understandings of legal reform that underpinned their proposals and how they influenced the constitutional amendment process, by contrast to the failure of their efforts to expand the Mecelle and reform the sharī‘a courts.

Turkey’s Forgotten Political Opposition: The Demise of Kadirbeyoğlu Zeki Bey, 1919–1927

This article encourages a reevaluation of the role of Anatolian Muslim merchants and notability in the Turkish nationalist movement after World War I. It offers the political career of Gümüşhane merchant Kadirbeyoğlu Zeki Bey (1884–1952) as one step toward such a reevaluation. Zeki is known to historians of Turkey for his seemingly unusual opposition: For a time, he was the only independent member of parliament under the Turkish single-party regime. Zeki was also one of the few outspoken opponents in parliament of abolishing the caliphate. But an examination of the reasons for Zeki’s persistent opposition shows that his background and platform were far from unique. This article first pinpoints the origins of Zeki’s political mobilization in the polarized environment of post-World-War-I Anatolia and explains his initial success in the Turkish nationalist movement. It then charts Zeki’s step-by-step alienation from this movement, from the Erzurum Congress to the last Ottoman parliament. Finally, it details Zeki’s “last hurrah”, the second Turkish parliament, where he championed causes dear to Anatolian Muslim merchants and notability: economic liberalism, social conservatism, civilian rule, and anti-authoritarianism. Zeki owed his initial success to his partisan neutrality and ties to the Ottoman social system, but the quickly changing dynamics of the Turkish nationalist movement soon made his opposition, and that of nationalists with a similar background, untenable.

THE OTTOMAN LEGACY IN COLD WAR MODERNIZATION

On 19 March 1877, the first Ottoman parliament opened at Dolmabahçe Palace when Sultan Abdülhamit II crossed a velvet carpet to stand beside a golden throne. Seen later as the finale of the Tanzimat reform era, the parliament appeared to diplomatic observers as the strategy of former grand vizier Midhat Paşa. Midhat's constitutionalism was a plan for “reform, revival, and indeed survival” that included seeking allies against Russia and containing Russian influence in the Balkans. Abdülhamit listened as his secretary charged the new body: “The progress effected by civilised states, the security and wealth they enjoy, are the fruit of the participation of all in the enactment of laws and in the administration of public affairs.” Among the most urgent priorities was “the development of agriculture and industry, and the progress of civilisation and of public wealth.” Parliament later responded with a pledge to deliver the empire from its malaise, to “eliminate the last traces of abuses, the heritage of the regime of despotism.”

Minority rights in international law

Why should international human rights law vest members of a minority community with rights that secure a measure of autonomy from the state in which they are located? Answers to this question typically rest on a commitment to the protection of certain universal attributes of human identity from the exercise of sovereign power. Minority protection thus operates on the assumption that religious, cultural, and linguistic affi liations are essential features of what it means to be human. This essay offers an alternative account of why minority rights possess international signifi cance, one that trades less on the currency of religion, culture, and language and more on the value of international distributive justice. On this approach, international minority rights speak to wrongs that international law itself produces by organizing international political reality into a legal order. This account avoids the normative instabilities of attaching universal value to religious, cultural, and linguistic affi liation and, instead, challenges the international legal order to remedy pathologies of its own making. 1. In a kaleidoscopic redistribution of sovereign power after the First World War, the once-great Ottoman Empire ceased to exist, its territory divided, partitioned, and reallocated to friends and enemies alike. France received mandates from the League of Nations to govern Syria and Lebanon. The United Kingdom received mandates to govern Iraq, Palestine, and what eventually became Israel and Jordan. Turkish nationals repelled Allied forces occupying their country and established the Republic of Turkey, while huge swaths of the Arabian Peninsula became parts of modern-day Saudi Arabia and Yemen. The instruments that invested these political developments with international legal validity dramatically reshaped the structure of the international legal order. The 1923 Treaty of Lausanne, for example, delineated the territorial sovereignty of the new Republic of Turkey, replacing the 1920 Treaty of Sevres, which had been negotiated but not ratifi ed by the Ottoman Parliament. In doing so, the Treaty of Lausanne restored Turkey’s previous boundary with Bulgaria and Western Thrace, annulled the transfer of Smyrna to Greece, and relieved Turkey of postwar obligations to compensate Allied civilian nationals for wartime losses. The treaty also provided for extensive population exchanges between Turkey and Greece and repudiated Turkey’s

Debating the Armenian Massacres in the Last Ottoman Parliament, November December 1918

Debating the Armenian Massacres in the Last Ottoman Parliament, November December 1918

Public Good and Private Exploitation: Criticism of the Tobacco Régie in 1909

On 7 ubat 1324/1909, Riza Bey,2 the M.P. for Drama, made a speech in the Ottoman Parliament in which he criticised he Tobacco R gie and re quested that the Minister of Finance explain the Regie's current position. In re sponse, the minister too criticised the R gie,3 threatening that if the R gie con tinued to act in contravention of laws and regulations, then the government would consider itself free to act as it thought fit.4 The minister's speech was pub lished in the Official Gazette on 12 ubat 1324, Number 131.5 The R gie started a campaign against the allegations put forward by the Minister and Riza by sending its top officials to the sadarefi and submitting a petition (ariza) to the sadrazam, a document (takrir) to the Ministry of Finance and a report to the administrative committee of the company itself.7 The R gie

Expectations From The Last Ottoman Parliament As To Istanbul Press

In Ottoman Empire, the declaration of the Constituon in1876 is accepted as the beginning of Ist Mesrutiyet. During the period of Ist Mesrutiyet, the Assembly could have been active only for five months and then it was suppended by the decision of Abdulhamit the 2 nd . With the decleration of 2nd Mesrutiyet (1908) Assembly days begin again. From that date until 1920 Ottoman Assembly had continued its works in spite of some deduction. The last Ottoman Assembly had been active between January 12 nd 1920 and April 11 th 1920. The Assembly had taken some important decisions in spite of that short period. The most important of them is the acceptance and decleration of Misâk-i Milli (National Pact of 1920). And also this Assembly is the last Constitutional movement in Ottoman state and providing to cause a new state is rather important. As a result with the closing of the last Assembly of Ottoman State, T.B.M.M will take its place and the new state which is going to be established will be formed by this Assembly.

The Central Legislative Councils in the Nineteenth Century Ottoman Reform Movement Before 1876

When the Ottoman Parliament was first elected and organized in 1876–8, surprised Europeans tended to assume that this institution was a direct result of European example and European pressure. Indeed, from that day to the present, it has been assumed that this was, in fact, the first Ottoman parliament, the first Ottoman effort at representative government, and the first experiment at involving the subjects of the Sultan in the process of rule, traditionally restricted only to members of his Ruling Class. Yet in fact this Parliament was the culmination of a century-long process of change which had been taking place in the Ottoman body politic since the early years of Sultan Selim III (1789–1807). It might well be argued that if the Parliament of 1876–8 was a failure, it was because of the failure of those who constructed it to rely sufficiently on this previous experience in representative government and legislation instead of simply imitating the European example. The representative legislative and executive institutions developed by the nineteenth century Ottoman reformers on the provincial and local levels will be discussed in a separate study. It is the object of this article to describe the same development in the central Ottoman government during the period of the Tanzimat (1839–76), to provide additional background for subsequent studies of the fate of Ottoman constitutionalism in the years which followed.