Özet:

Max Weber is the administrative staff of the ‘obligatory political organization’ referred to as the human community with the right to use legitimate power in the given region in the form of the ‘human community holding the unity of legitimate physical power in a particular land’ defined by the state, and the human community seeking to ensure continuous sovereignty. These generally exist in the form of army and police with a geographical distinction. However, in certain circumstances, the state can organize the power unit in a different structure except for traditional hard devices. The temporary village protection system, which takes its legal basis from the date of 1924 and the Village Act No. 442, was also established in 1985 as a hard tool that the state organized differently from other equipment in the countryside (the police, the army, the gendarmery) to preserve the order. The village protection was implemented in 1924 to protect the peasant from the potential danger due to the lack of state security equipment in every region. The temporary rural protection system is a measure developed to protect the local people against a constant danger, unlike the application of rural protection in terms of law and practice. Although a historical experience is benefited, the reason for the creation of temporary rural protection is closer to the practices of other countries where similar structures are located. This study aims to analyze the temporary rural protection policy. The analysis was based on the process model in the context of the public policy discipline that is relatively newly developing in Turkey. The process model allows it to be analyzed by dividing it into the stages of a particular public policy. There are different predictions about how many stages of politics will be studied in literature. For the policy discussed in the study, a four-step resolution was made in the form of the emergence of the problem that generates the temporary rural protection policy, the production of the solution, the implementation and evaluation of the policy. The temporary rural protection policy was created with the aim of shut down the security gap that occurs in villages where ordinary hard equipment is not effective by armed local people. In the early 1990s, in the growing protection system, which was provided to the peasants in a manner appropriate to the purpose and with a variety of benefits, resolutions began in parallel with the increasing activities of the PKK. The policy that developed on the basis of consensus during its first implementation in the 1990s has caused many negatives. From the state point of view, the temporary rural protection system in this period has been a sign of commitment to the state more than the protection of the peasant. In the 2000s, in parallel with the mildness of the conflict between the State and the PKK, the elimination of the protection policy has often come to the agenda. During this period, the acquisition of protectors has been interrupted for a long time and mainly the rights of the protectors within the system have been improved. While the temporary rural protection policy has achieved a number of successes, it is a failed policy when it is assessed by the disadvantages revealed in the implementation phase, the rights violations caused by the protectors within the system and the reasons why they are deprived of the minimum rights that a public official possesses. In addition, it has been concluded that it is based on a weak legal basis, that the practices are heavy and that it is an unusual policy that encompasses privacy. The purpose of the public benefit function has revealed other results. The policy, which is often criticized due to its failure in the assessments made, is mainly supported on the basis of 'security' and 'employment' in terms of state and guardians.

Anahtar Kelimeler: