Özet:

Formation of a corpus of (written) rules as a basis for organized public life, and in this wise the idea of preventing the arbitrary behavior of the governors and administrators could be considered one of the most important stages of the history of humanity. Constitutionalist movement in the West is not only a movement through which each state could have a so-called formal constitution, on the contrary it aims to achieve a limited government bounded by the rule of law and supremacy of the constitution. In actuality, the dynamics of political life do not meet the constitutional norms. Generally, the ‘documented results’ of those historical developments take place in political and social life as an ethical issue of politics and law. Just that is the concrete and actual case of the majoritarian model which the Constitution of 1982 produced and transformed into current “regime”, so to say, a medallion around the neck of the constitution, just one side symbolizing the ‘authority’ while the other side ‘democracy’. It reflects authority as ‘state power’, and democracy as “the ballot box’ which allows absolute numerical superiority to majority. As the “identity of the constitution”, the design of political through which the values transferred into the law becomes concrete in social-political life. The fundamental question is whether “citizens” can find themselves in that identity or not. The Constitution of 1982 responses that question as a “homework” for citizens, and “tutelage” for the political power. The article ultimately concentrate on the question how the shackles of power pathologically formed in the constitution and the ways to overcome those problems.

Anahtar Kelimeler: