Abstract:

When the political history of Turkey is examined, it is seen that different governmental systems have been applied. During its long parliamentarian government model experience, Turkey had failed to establish political stability because of its fractured political landscape. It is true that there were debates on how to establish a more democratic and stable political landscape in a quick way. During those debates, there were talks which were about executive-presidential government system were suitable to country or not. In Turkish political history, there had been many unstable and short-lived coalition governments which created some chronical problems in political and administrative system of the country under the parliamentary system. In order to overcome these problems, especially after the “crisis of 367” in 2007, the arguments about the implementation of a different and alternative government system have become the very first topics of the agenda of the country. At the ends of 2016, the Justice and Development Party and the Nationalist Movement Party signed an agreement on the constitutional amendment, in particular the Presidential Government System; The Presidential Government System was voted and accepted in the referendum on 16 April 2017. The system was started to be implemented with the presidential election on 24 June 2018. After the system change that firstly aimed in the presidential government system, policy boards and offices were established for various purposes. Thus, the role of the presidency in the determination, implementation and evaluation of public policies has been increased by taking presidency to the center of politics and management. In this context, the aim of the study is to examine the activities, impacts and roles of policy boards and offices as a new actor in public policies. Qualitative approach is used.

Keywords: