Türkiye’de otoriter liderliğin pekişmesinde seçim sistemi ve aday belirleme yönteminin rolü

Year 2024, Volume: 26 Issue: 1, 109 - 123, 01.06.2024

Ömer Faruk Gençkaya , Mehmet Kabasakal

https://doi.org/10.33707/akuiibfd.1357616

Abstract

Çağdaş demokrasilerde yöneticileri seçimle belirlenir. Temsili demokrasilerde iktidar, halkın istencini yansıtan dürüst ve serbest seçimle meşruluk kazanır. Bu nedenle, halkın parlamentodaki temsilcilerinin nasıl belirlendiği, milletvekillerinin temsil görevini nasıl yerine getirdikleri ve hangi görevleri üstlendikleri siyaset bilimi araştırmalarına konu olmaktadır. Son yıllarda dünyada yürütmenin güçlenmesiyle parlamentoların etkinliği azalırken lider hegemonyası artmıştır. Bu çalışmada, konu ile ilgili temel literatür taramasına dayanarak seçim sistemlerinin ve aday belirleme yöntemlerinin otoriter liderliği pekiştirici rolü üzerinde durulmaktadır. Bu çalışma, kuramsal varsayımları yakın dönem Türkiye siyasetinden somut örneklerle ve bazı siyasetçilerin değerlendirmelerine başvurarak incelemektedir. Bu çerçevede, V-Dem endeksinden yararlanarak 1983-2022 döneminde Türkiye'de aday belirleme, parti disiplini, parti kurumsallaşması, yasamanın yürütmeyi denetlemesi ve liderin kişiliğine ilişkin göstergelerin zaman içerisindeki seyri çalışmanın temel varsayımlarını açıklamak üzere irdelenmektedir. Lider egemenliğinin azaltılması ve parti içi demokrasinin sağlanması, Meclisin ve milletvekillerinin etkinliğinin artırılmasına yönelik bazı öneriler geliştirilmiştir. Sonuç olarak, seçim sistemi ne kadar adil ve aday belirleme yöntemi ne kadar katılımcı ise lider egemenliğinin azalacağı, parlamentonun etkinliğinin artacağı belirtilmekte ve Türkiye’de demokrasinin pekişmesi amacıyla seçim barajının kaldırılması ve önseçimin mutlaka gerekli koşullar ve altyapı oluşturularak yaygın biçimde uygulanması önerilmektedir.

Keywords

Seçim sistemi, Aday belirleme, Otoriter liderlik, Önseçim

Ethical Statement

Makale ile ilgili olarak üçüncü şahıslarla ilgili bir çıkar çatışması bulunmamaktadır. Çalışma ile ilgili etik izin formuna gerek duyulmamaktadır.

Supporting Institution

-

Thanks

-

The role of the election system and candidate selection procedure in the consolidation of authoritarian leadership in Türkiye

Abstract

In contemporary democracies, leaders are determined through elections. In representative democracies, political power gains its legitimacy through fair and free elections that reflect the will of the people. For this reason, how the people's representatives in parliament are determined, how the MPs fulfill their duty of representation, and what duties they undertake are the subject of political science research. In recent years, with the strengthening of the executive branch in the world, the effectiveness of parliaments has decreased while leader hegemony has increased. Based on a fundamental literature review, this study focuses on how election systems and candidate selection processes reinforce authoritarian leadership. Subsequently, theoretical inferences are supported by specific instances from current Turkish politics and by making reference to the evaluations of some politicians. In this context, the basic assumptions of the study are explained by analyzing, using the V-Dem index, the course of indicators regarding candidate selection, party discipline, party institutionalization, the legislature's supervision of the executive, and the personality of the leader in Turkey during the 1983–2022 period. A few recommendations have been made to lessen the power of party leaders, maintain intraparty democracy, and improve the efficiency of the Parliament and Members of Parliament. In conclusion, there will be less leader dominance, and the effectiveness of the parliament will rise with more equitable election systems and participatory candidate selection processes. It is suggested that the election threshold be removed and that primary elections be widely held by setting up the required framework and infrastructure in order to improve Turkey's democratic system.

Keywords

Electoral system, candidate selection, authoritarian leadership, primaries

References

• Akdağ, G.A. (2017). Candidate Selection Process as a Tool to Shape a Party's Dominant Coalition: The Case of The AKP in Turkey, Alternatif Politika. 9 (2), 142-163. https://alternatifpolitika.com/site/cilt/9/sayi/2/1-Gul-Arikan-Akdag-Candidate-Selection-Process-AKP.pdf.
• Aldrich, J. H. (2011). Why parties? A second look. University of Chicago Press.
• Anria, S. (2016). Democratizing Democracy? Civil Society and Party Organization in Bolivia. Comparative Politics, 48(4), 459-478. https://doi.org/10.5129/001041516819197566
• ANSAV Anadolu Stratejik Araştırmalar Vakfı (1997). Parti-içi Demokrasi Konferans Konuşmaları. ANSAV.
• Ashiabgor, S. (2008). Political Parties and Democracy in Theoretical and Practical Perspectives: Selecting Candidates for Legislative Office. National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, http://www.ndi.org/files/2406_polpart_report_engpdf_100708.pdf.
• Ayan-Musil, P. (2011). Authoritarian Party Structures and Democratic Political Setting in Turkey. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Bakkalbaşı, O. (1998). Tıkanan Türk Siyaseti. Ar Reklam ve Matbaa.
• Baykan, T. S. (2018). The Justice and Development Party in Turkey Populism, Personalism, Organization. Cambridge University Press.
• Bayraktar, S. U. & Altan, C. (2013). Explaining Turkish party centralism. In E. Massicard and N. Watts (Eds.). Negotiating Political Power in Turkey: Breaking up the Party (17-36). Routledge.
• Bektaş, A. (1993). Demokratikleşme Sürecinde Liderler Oligarşisi, CHP ve AP (1961-1980). Bağlam Yayıncılık.
• Bektaş, E. (2021). Legislative committees in the Turkish Parliament: Performing procedural minimum or effective scrutiny. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 29(1), 135-170. https://doi.org/10.1080/13572334.2021.1974707
• Bowler, S., Farrell, D. & Pettitt, R. (2005). Expert Opinion on Electoral Systems: So Which Electoral System is Best. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 15(1), 3-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/13689880500064544
• Bowler, S., Farrell, D. M. & Katz, R. S. (1999). Party Cohesion, Party Discipline, and Parliaments. In S. Bowler, D. Farrell & R. Katz (Eds.). Party Discipline and Parliamentary Government (3-22). Ohio State University Press.
• Bölükbaşı, M. (2022). Measuring the Level of Party Institutionalization in Turkey. Siyasal: Journal of Political Sciences, 31(2), 305-321. https://doi.org/10.26650/siyasal.2022.31.1100558
• Calise, M. (2015). The personal party: an analytical framework. Italian Political Science Review, 45(3), 301-315. https:// doi.org/10.1017/ipo.2015.18
• Carey, J. & Shugart, M. S. (1995). Incentives to cultivate a personal vote: A rank ordering of electoral formulas. Electoral Studies, 14(4), 417-439. https://doi.org/10.1016/0261-3794(94)00035-2
• Colomer, J. M. (2013). Introduction: Personal and Party Representation. In J. M. Colomer (Ed.), Personal Representation: The Neglected Dimension of Electoral Systems (1-21). ECPR Press.
• Cop, B. (2018). Türkiye’de Seçim Sistemleri. Tekin Yayınevi.
• Cordero, G. & Coller, X. (2015). Cohesion and Candidate Selection in Parliamentary Groups. Parliamentary Affairs, 68(3), 592-615. https://doi.org/10.1093/pa/gsu008
• Cox, G. W. (1997). Making Votes Count: Strategic Coordination in the World’s Electoral Systems. Cambridge University Press.
• Çam, E. (1977). Siyaset Bilimine Giriş. Güryay Matbaacılık.
• Çarkoğlu, A., Erdem, T., Kabasakal, M. & Gençkaya, Ö. F. (2000). Siyasi Partilerde Reform. Acar Matbaacılık.
• Çınar, Ü. O. (2016). Türkiye’deki Siyasi Partilerin Aday Belirleme Yöntemlerinin Rekabet ve Temsiliyet Bakımlarından Değerlendirilmesi: 2011 ve 2015 Genel Seçimleri (Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi), Hacettepe Üniversitesi.
• Çitçi, O. (1989). Yerel Yönetimlerde Temsil. Belediye Örneği. TODAİE.
• Diamond, L., Linz, J. & Lipset, M. (Eds.) (1995). Politics in Developing Countries, Comparing Experiences with Democracy. Second Edition. Lynne Rienner Publishers.
• Diamond, L. & Plattner, M. F. (Ed.) (2006). Electoral Systems and Democracy. The John Hopkins University Press.
• Dikici-Bilgin, H. (2013). Seçimler ve Seçim Sistemleri. İçinde Sabri Sayarı ve H. Dikici-Bilgin (Editörler), Karşılaştırmalı Siyaset, Temel Konular ve Yaklaşımlar (146-168). İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi.
• Dorronsoro, G. & Massicard, E. (2005). Being a Member of Parliament in Contemporary Turkey. European Journal of Turkish Studies, 3, 1-31. https://doi.org/10.4000/ejts.502.
• Duran, H. & Aksu, A. (2009). Türkiye’de Milletvekillerinin Parti Değiştirmelerinin Tür ve Biçimleri Bağlamında Yeni Türkiye Partisi. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 24, 141-154. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/dpusbe/issue/4766/65524
• Duverger, M. (1974). Siyasi Partiler, İkinci Basım. (Ergun Özbudun, Çev). Bilgi Yayınevi.
• Duverger, M. (2003). Duverger’s Law: Forty Years Later. In B. Grofman & A. Lijphart (Eds.), Electoral Laws and Their Political Consequences. Third Edition, (69-84). Agathon Press.
• Epstein, L. D. (1967). Political Parties in Western Democracies. Praeger.
• Erdem, T. & Uygurer, N. (1994). CHP Üye Kayıtlarının Merkezde Toplanma Projesi 1978. Ünal Ofset Matbaacılık.
• Erdem, T. (2012). Anayasalar ve Belgeler. Doğan Kitap.
• Farkas R. P. (2007). Democratization in the Balkans: Prescriptions for a Badly Scarred Body Politics. Northeastern University Press.
• Farrell, D. M. (1997). Comparing Electoral Systems. Prentice Hall / Harvester Wheatsheaf.
• Ferreria da Silva, F. F. (2019). Party organizational change and leader effects on voting behavior: Linking the electoral and party faces of presidentialization. Party Politics, 27(4), 803-813. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068819893511
• Field, B. N. & Siavelis, P. M. (2011). Endogenizing legislative candidate selection procedures in nascent democracies: Evidence from Spain and Chile. Democratization. 18 (3), 797-822. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2011.563120
• Gallagher, M. (1998). The Political Impact of Electoral System Change in Japan and New Zealand, 1996. Party Politics, 4(2), 203-228. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068898004002004
• Gallagher, M. (1988). Introduction. In M. Gallagher ve M. Marsh (Eds.) Candidate Selection in Comparative Perspective: The Secret Garden of Politics (1-19). Sage Publications.
• Gençkaya, Ö. F. (2023). Kaliteli Bir Yasamanın ve Etkili Bir Yasanın Aracı Olarak Yasama Sonrası İnceleme. Özgürlük Araştırmaları Derneği. Liberal Perspektif Rapor (31).
• Gençkaya, Ö. F. (2022). Parliamentary Committees in the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (2002–2020). In T. Siefken & H. Rommetvedt (Eds.), Parliamentary Committees in the Policy Process (263-286). Routledge.
• Gençkaya, Ö. F. (2020). The Grand National Assembly of Turkey: A Decline in Legislative Capacity. In I. Khmelko, R. Stapenhurst, & M. L. Mezey (Eds.), Legislative Decline in the 21st Century A Comparative Perspective (82-93). Routledge.
• Gençkaya, Ö. F. (2000). Siyasi Partilere ve Adaylara Devlet Desteği, Bağışlar ve Seçim Giderlerinin Sınırlandırılması- Karşılaştırmalı Bir İnceleme ve Türkiye İçin Bir Öneri. İçinde A. Çarkoğlu vd., Siyasi Partilerde Reform (127-234). TESEV.
• Gençkaya, Ö. F. (1994). Consolidation of or Resistance to Democracy: Redemocratization and the Turkish Grand National Assembly. In L. D. Longley (Ed.), Working Papers on Comparative Legislative Studies (321-334), Research Committee of Legislative Studies International Political Science Association.
• Gençkaya, Ö. F. (1990). The Impact of Organizational Attributes on Legislative Performance: A Structural-functional Analysis of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, 1983-1987, (Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation), Boğaziçi Üniversitesi.
• Grofman, B. (2005). Comparisons among Electoral Systems: Distinguishing between Localism and Candidate-Centered Politics. Electoral Studies (24), 735–740. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2005.03.007
• Grofman, B. & Lijphart, A. (2003). Electoral Laws and Their Political Consequences. (Third Edition). Agathon Press.
• Güneş, T. (1956). Parlamenter Rejimin Bugünkü Manası ve İşleyişi. Nazir Akbasan Matbaası.
• Haynes, J. (2005). Comparative Politics in a Globalizing World. Polity Press.
• Hazama, Y. (1992). The Politics of amendment in the Turkish legislatures, The Developing Economies, (30), 284-298.
• Hazan, R. Y. & Voerman, G. (2006). Electoral Systems and Candidate Selection. Acta Politica. (41), 146-162. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ap.5500153
• Hazan, R. Y. & Rahat, G. (2010). Democracy within Parties: Candidate Selection Methods and their Consequences. Oxford University Press.
• Heller, W. B. & Mershon, C. (2009). Political Parties and Legislative Party Switching. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Hopkin, J. & Paolucci, C. (1999). The Business Firm Model of Party Organization: Cases from Spain and Italy. European Journal of Political Research 35 (3), 307-339. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006903925012
• Inglehart, R. (2018). “The Age of Insecurity: Can Democracy Save Itself?” Foreign Affairs. (3): 20–28.
• International IDEA (2002). International Electoral Standards Guidelines for Reviewing the Legal Framework of Elections, International IDEA.
• İnan, K. (2004). Devlet İdaresi. (7. Baskı). Timaş Yayınları.
• İnan, K. (2006). Siyaset Yılları. (2. Baskı). Timaş Yayınları.
• Kabasakal, M. (1991). Türkiye’de Siyasal Parti Örgütlenmesi. Tekin Yayınevi.
• Kabasakal, M. (2014). Factors influencing intra-party democracy and membership rights: The case of Turkey. Party Politics, 20 (5), 700-711. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068812453366
• Kabasakal, M. (2019). Deparliamentarization in Turkey: A Major Decline in the Scrutiny Function. (International Journal of Political Science & Urban Studies) Uluslararası Siyaset Bilimi ve Kentsel Araştırmalar Dergisi 7, (1), 168-190. https://doi.org/ 10.14782/ipsus.539212
• Kabasakal, M. (2020). Türkiye’nin Demokrasi Sınavı. Cumhuriyet Kitapları.
• Kalaycıoğlu, E. (1995). The Turkish Grand National Assembly: A Brief Inquiry into the Politics of Representation in Turkey. In Ç. Balım, E. Kalaycıoğlu, C. Karataş, G. Winrow, & F. Yasamee (Eds.). Turkey: Political, Social and Economic Challenges in the 1990s (42-60). Brill.
• Kalaycıoğlu, E. (1990). Cyclical Development, Redesign, and Nascent Institutionalization of a Legislative System. In Ulrike Liebert &Maurizio Cotta (Eds.), Parliament and Democratic Consolidation in Southern Europe (184-222). F. Pinter.
• Karakaş, E. (2012). Çağdaş Parti Örgütlenmesi, CHP ve Örgütsel Yenilenmenin Temel İlkeleri. Ceylan Matbaası.
• Karakoyun, U. (2018, 18 Mart). AK Parti Bayraklı kongresinde 'çift liste' krizi. https://www.dha.com.tr/politika/ak-parti-bayrakli-kongresinde-cift-liste-krizi-1569912
• Katz, R.S. and Mair, P. (1995). Changing Models of Party Organization and Party Democracy: The Emergence of the Cartel Party. Party Politics 1 (1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068895001001001
• Katz, R.S. and Mair, P. (2009). The Cartel Party Thesis: A Restatement. Perspectives on Politics 7 (4), 753–766. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592709991782
• Kircheimer, O. (1966). The Transformation of the Western European Party Systems. In J. La Palombara ve M. Weiner (Eds.). Political Parties and Political Development. (177-200). Princeton University Press.
• Kocaoğlu, E. (2002). Acemi Milletvekilinin Ankara Anıları. İyiadam Yayınları.
• Kristjánsson, S. (1998). Electoral Politics and Governance: Transformation of the Party System in Iceland, 1970–1996. In P. Pennings & J.-E. Lane (Eds.). Comparing Party System Change. (154-168). Routledge.
• Krook, M. L. (2009). Quotas for Women in Politics: Gender and Candidate Selection Reform Worldwide. Oxford University Press.
• Lijphart, A. (1999). Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. Yale University Press.
• Lisi, M. (2022). Conceptualising and Measuring Leadership Autonomy in Contemporary Party Organisations. Political Studies, https://doi.org/10.1177/00323217221117381.
• Locatelli, L. G. B. (2022). Building Parties' Grassroots: Electoral Systems, Party Organizations, and Social Linkages from a Cross-National Perspective, Brazilian Political Science Review 2(16), 1-42. https://doi.org/10.1590/1981-3821202200020005
• Massicard, E. (2005). Differences in role orientation among Turkish MPs, Being a Member of Parliament in Contemporary Turkey. European Journal of Turkish Studies, 3. https://doi.org/10.4000/ejts.499
• Massicard, E. & Watts, N. (2013). Introduction Reconsidering parties, power, and social forces. In E. Massicard ve N. Watts (Eds.). Negotiating Political Power in Turkey: Breaking Up the Party (1-16), Routledge.
• Mayo, H. B. (1964). Demokratik Teoriye Giriş. (Emre Kongar, Çev.). Türk Siyasi İlimler Derneği.
• Mazzoleni, G. & Voerman, G. (2016.). Memberless Parties: Beyond the Party Model? Party Politics (23), 783-792. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068815627398
• Merkel, W. and Lührmann, A. (2021). Resilience of Democracies: Responses to Illiberal and Authoritarian Challenges. Democratization 28, (5): 869–884.
• Michels, R. (1968). Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligarchical Tendencies of Modern Democracy.. Free Press.
• Mimpen, J. (2007). Intra-Party Democracy and Its Discontents: Democratization, Volatile Political Landscape. NIMD Publication.
• Miş, N. (2015, 4 Ekim). Kurucu Felsefe’ye Dönüş Siyasal Yenilenme ve AK Parti. https://www.setav.org/kurucu-felsefeye-donus-siyasal-yenilenme-ve-ak-parti/
• Owens, J. E. (2011). Parties in Democratic National Assemblies, Comparative Assessment of Parliament (CAP) Note. https://www.academia.edu/6980422/Parties_in_Democratic_National_Assemblies.
• Özbudun, E. (2007). Çağdaş Türk Politikası, Demokratik Pekişmenin Önündeki Engeller. 2. Baskı, (A. R. Usul, Çev.). Doğan Kitap.
• Özdalga, H. (2005). Kötü Yönetilen Türkiye, Örnek Vaka DSP. Kitap Yayınevi
• Passarelli, G. (2020). Preference voting systems: influence on intra-party competition and voting behaviour. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Pennings, P. & Hazan, R.Y. (2001). Democratizing candidate selection. Party Politics, 7 (3), 267-275. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068801007003001
• Poguntke, T. & Webb, P. (Eds.) (2005a) The Presidentialization of Politics: A Comparative Study of Modern Democracies. Oxford University Press.
• Poguntke, T. & Webb, P. (2005b). The Presidentialization of Politics in Democratic Societies: A Framework for Analysis. In T. Poguntke& P. Webb (Eds.) The Presidentialization of Politics: A Comparative Study of Modern Democracies (1-25). Oxford University Press.
• Powell, B. J. (2014). Conclusion: Why Elections Matter. In L. LeDuc, R. Niemi& P. Norris (Eds.). Comparing Democracies 4 (187-204). Sage.
• Rahat, G. & Hazan, R. (2010). Democracy within Parties: Candidate Selection Methods and their Political Consequences Oxford University Press.
• Rahat, G. & Hazan, R. (2001). Candidate Selection Methods: An Analytical Framework. Party Politics, 7(3), 297-322. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068801007003003
• Rahat, G. & Kenig, O. (2018). From Party Politics to Personalized Politics?: Party Change and Political Personalization in Democracies. Oxford University Press.
• Ranney, A. (1981). “Candidate Selection”. İçinde D. Butler, R.P. Howard ve R. Austin (Eds.). Democracy at the Polls: A Comparative Study of Competitive National Elections (75-106). American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.
• Sandri, G., Seddone, A. & Venturıno, F. (Eds.). (2015). Party Primaries in Comparative Perspective. Ashgate.
• Sarol, Mükerrem (1983). Bilinmeyen Menderes. Kervan Yayınları.
• Savcı, B. (1963). Demokrasimiz Üzerine Düşünceler. Sevinç Matbaası.
• Sayarı, S. (2002). Introduction. In Metin Heper & Sabri Sayarı (Eds.). Political Leaders and Democracy in Turkey (1-7). Lexington Books.
• Sayarı, S. & Dikici-Bilgin, H. (Editörler) (2013). Karşılaştırmalı Siyaset, Temel Konular ve Yaklaşımlar. İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
• Scarrow, S. (2005). Political Parties and Democracy in Theoretical and Practical Perspectives, Implementing Intra-party Democracy. National Democratic Institute for International Affairs.
• Shugart, M. S. (2005). Comparative electoral systems research: The maturation of a field and new challenges ahead. In M. Gallagher & P. Mitchell (Eds.), The politics of electoral systems (25-55). Oxford University Press.
• Strøm, K. (1998). Parliamentary Committees in European Democracies. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 4(1), 21-59. https://doi.org/10.1080/13572339808420538
• TESAV (2016). Cumhuriyet Döneminde Kurulan ve Kapanan Siyasi Partiler, http://www.tesav.org.tr/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/3.1923ten_Bu_Yana_Kurulan_ve_Kapatilan_Siyasi_Partiler.pdf.
• Tilly, C. (2001). Mechanisms in Political Processes. Annual Review of Political Science. (4), 21-41. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.4.1.21
• Touraine, A. (2004). Demokrasi Nedir? 4. Baskı (O. Kunal, Çev.). Yapı Kredi Yayınları.
• Tuncay, S. (1996). Parti İçi Demokrasi ve Türkiye. Gündoğan Yayınları.
• Tuncer, E. (2003). Osmanlıdan Günümüze Seçimler (1877-2002). Genişletilmiş 2. Baskı. Yücel Ofset.
• Tuncer, E. (2008). 1946 Seçimleri. Yeniden Grup Matbaacılık.
• Tuncer, E. (2010) 1950 Seçimleri. Hazar Reklam Matbaacılık.
• Turan, İ. (1985). Changing horses in midstream, party changers in the Turkish Grand National Assembly. Legislative Studies Quarterly. (10), 21-34. https://doi.org/10.2307/440113
• Turan, İ. (1997). The Turkish Legislature: From Symbolic to Substantive Representation. İçinde G. W. Copeland & S. C. Patterson (Eds.). Parliament in the Modern World, Changing Institutions (105-128). The University of Michigan Press.
• Turan, İ. (2000). Parlamentoların Etkinliği ve Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi. İçinde İ.Turan (Koord.). Devlet Reformu: TBMM’nin Etkinliği. İstanbul: TESEV Yayınları,
• Turan, İ. (2003). Volatility in politics, stability in parliament: An impossible dream? The Turkish Grand National Assembly during the last two decades. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 9(2), 151-176. https://doi.org/10.1080/1357233032000250671
• Turan, İ. (2011). Türk Siyasal Partilerinde Lider Oligarşisi: Evrimi, Kurumsallaşması ve Sonuçları. İ.Ü. Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi, (45)3, 1-21. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/iusiyasal/issue/627/6384
• Turan, İ. (2016). Türkiye’de Parlamento ve Seçimler. İçinde M. Kabasakal (Ed.). Türkiye’de Siyasal Yaşam: Dün, Bugün, Yarın (99-125). İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
• Turan, İ., İba, Ş. and Zarakol, A. (2005). Inter-party mobility in the Turkish Grand National Assembly: curse orblessing? European Journal of Turkish Studies, 3. https://doi.org/10.4000/ejts.400
• Türkmen, A. (2016). The institutional design of intra-party democracy through legal instruments: Turkish case, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Westminster.
• Vandeleene, A., Janssen, C. and Cogels, M. (2021). Breaking Free from Partitocracy: Do Belgian candidates stand out? İçinde D. Caluwaerts, ve M. Reuchamps (Eds.). Belgian Exceptionalism: Belgian Politics Between Realism And Surrealism. (93-107). Routledge.
• Volpi, E. (2019). Ideology and Party Switching: A Comparison of 12 West European Countries. Parliamentary Affairs (72), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1093/pa/gsx079
• Winter, L. (1988). Belgium: Democracy or Oligarchy? In M. Gallagher & M. Marsh (Eds.), Candidate Selection in Comparative Perspective: The Secret Garden of Politics, (20-46). Sage Publications.
• Yazıcı, S. (2009). Demokratikleşme Sürecinde Türkiye. İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
• Zittel, T. ve Gschwend, T. (2008). Individualised Constituency Campaigns in Mixed-Member Electoral Systems: Candidates in the 2005 German Elections. West European Politics 31(5), 978–1003. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402380802234656
• Zürcher, E. J. (2017). Turkey A Modern History. I.B. Tauris.