The concept of '' minority '', which refers to those who are separated in terms of a particular quality within the society has continued its existence since people began to live in societies. This concept derives from the Latin word ‘minor’, which means ‘small, few’, and is used to refer to those who are less in number, as well as those who are different in terms of a quality. However, there is no clear definition of a minority accepted by the international community. This brings different models and reviews to the debate about the concept of minority. Particularly, with the rise of nation states and the rise of interstate relations, the importance of this concept and contributions to the international politics became inevatible.
The Republic of Turkey has also been interested in the minority issue inherited from the Ottoman Empire since its establishment; interpreted this concept with different definition from legal and sociopolitical aspects. To better understand these definitions, perception towards minorities from Ottoman ‘millet’ system to 1876 Constitution will be examined. There are still minority groups in Turkey which still seperate culturally, ethnically and religiously, even though they are not as rich as it was in the Ottoman State.
Under the ‘millet system’, non-Muslims were allowed to organize their own religious, social and legal lives, and as a result of the Western states use of these nations against the Ottomans, nationalist movements were strengthened. Thus, the Ottoman State had to grant many privileged rights to minorities by announcing the Tanzimat and Islahat Edicts. These minorities were the biggest supporters of those who invaded Anatolia after the Armistice of Mondros, which effectively ended the Ottoman Empire. The status of minorities in the new Turkish state was also determined by the Treaty of Lausanne.
As for the Democrat Party period, good treatment of minorities existed during the first years of party power, but this changed in later periods. The Greek Cypriots' ideal of ENOSIS and the increase of terrorising movements in Cyprus were instrumental in changing this policy. The "anti-Greek" in Turkish public opinion increased its violence with a newspaper report declaring that "a bomb attack was carried out on Atatürk's house in Thessaloniki" when the dates of September 6 showed and caused the events of September 6-7. President Celal Bayar and Prime Minister Adnan Menderes, who were in Istanbul during the events, returned to Ankara by train on the evening of 6 September. Then, with a statement from the Prime Minister's office, martial law was declared in Istanbul and Izmir. The public perception of the events of September 6-7 was that they were organized by the Democrat Party. However, there are conflicting views on the perpetrators of the incidents.
When we look at the events of 6-7 September, which marked the Democrat Party period and were one of the reasons for the shame of Turkish democracy, it is seen that the past Unitarian and anti-minority society structure was also effective as well as the effect of the conjuncture. The Democrat Party, which started with the Democratic motto, should be evaluated within this framework for failing to meet the requirements of a treaty that established the Republic of Turkey and which has great importance in democracies. 39th article of The Treaty of Lausanne. and 40th article by re-examining the articles, it is seen that the Democrat Party has violated the provisions that non-Muslim minorities and Muslims shall enjoy the same political rights and be subject to the same legal action and safeguards. It was also observed that the law on the immunity of life, property, rape and housing, which was included in the constitution of that period, dated 1924, was not complied with.
In the study, when all the topics are evaluated together, it is predicted that a majoritarian democracy concept prevails in Turkish democracy based on the minority example in the context of the Democrat Party. But whether a pluralistic understanding of democracy would be possible is open to debate. When the Democrat Party came to power, the Republic of Turkey, which was only 27 years old, needed time to digest its democratic regime. In this period, there is a dilemma in democracy. On the one hand, the rights granted to non-Muslims by the Treaty of Lausanne cannot be applied, on the other hand, the existence of different religious, ethnic and cultural groups is recognized and allowed to integrate into society. While the Democratic Party is committed to creating a homogeneous nation, historical, cultural and economic ties have not allowed it.
As a result, a pluralistic democracy in the Democratic Party era needed to define a minority on the basis of human rights and in accordance with international law, and to secure minority rights more vigorously. It is obvious that the common sense of belonging and values have been formed among these nations, which have lived together for many years, and with these values, the foundations of a pluralistic society in which basic rights and freedoms are brought to life under normal conditions can be laid. Minority events, seen as a black mark in the history of Turkish democracy, have also deeply shaken Turkey's international prestige
This study examines these minorities and minority events of the Democrat Party Era in the context of their impacts on Turkish democracy. In this context, in the first part of the study, definitions about the concept of minority will be discussed. In the second part, the point of view of Republic of Turkey to minorities will be evaluated within the framework of the Treaty of Lausanne. In the last part of the study, the minority events in the Democrat Party Era and its effects on Turkish democracy will be analyzed.
