The bill including regulations on the security organization and the press was debated with intense discussions in the Turkish Grand National Assembly. Opposition deputies argued that the bill sparked new criticisms regarding police working conditions, economic pressure on the press, forest areas, and municipal properties.
Police Working Conditions Take Center Stage
Selçuk Özdağ, Deputy Chairman of the New Path Party Group, stated that the main problem in the security organization is not staffing ratios but rather unpaid overtime, lack of psychological support, insufficient personnel rights, and a promotion system based on loyalty rather than merit. Özdağ claimed that issues such as suicides and mobbing cases remain unresolved and that the bill does not address these problems.
Sadullah Kısacık, New Path Party Deputy from Adana, also argued that police officers work overtime, receive low salaries, and suffer from professional burnout. Kısacık emphasized that suicides within the security forces should not be dismissed as "personal problems" and called for a separate police profession law.
Mustafa Kalaycı, Deputy Chairman of the MHP and Deputy from Konya, highlighted the harsh working conditions of security personnel. Kalaycı said that working and leave periods, security service compensation, and overtime pay need to be reorganized, stressing that police officers should live under humane conditions both during service and retirement.
Press Regulation and Economic Pressure Criticized
Ayyüce Türkeş, Deputy Chairman of the İYİ Party and Deputy from Adana, objected to the regulations concerning the Press Advertisement Institution. Türkeş argued that the institution’s structure, mission, and decision-making mechanisms should be reconsidered with a democratic, transparent, and pluralistic approach, stating that methods that coerce the press through economic sanctions are not a solution.
Hakkı Saruhan Oluç, DEM Party Deputy from Antalya, claimed the bill attempts to turn the Press Advertisement Institution into a semi-administrative supervisory body that exerts economic pressure. Oluç said that the authority for ex officio inspections is not the institution’s role and argued that this aims to create a monolithic media system.
Forest Areas and Local Government Provisions Also Criticized
The bill’s provision allowing the establishment of care and rehabilitation centers for the disabled and elderly in forest areas also sparked debate. Türkeş and Cavit Arı, CHP Deputy from Antalya, argued that construction in forested areas would disrupt ecological balance and expressed concerns that these facilities might later be transferred to private enterprises.
Arı also opposed the regulation facilitating the sale of municipal properties. He stated that tradespeople with a single license plate and those with many should not be treated the same and emphasized the need for a clear account of the revenue loss from multiple sales.
Sadullah Kısacık also claimed that the bill eases the sale of local government properties. Opposition representatives reiterated their view that the regulation would weaken public assets.
Taxi Drivers and SCT Regulation Also Debated
MHP’s Kalaycı said that taxi, dolmuş, minibus, midibus, bus, tow truck, and truck drivers who earn their living with a single vehicle should be able to renew their vehicles without SCT (Special Consumption Tax) under the condition of at least 10 years of commercial use of the same type of domestic vehicle. He added that those who recycle vehicles aged 25 years or older should also be allowed to purchase new domestic vehicles of the same type without SCT.
İYİ Party’s Türkeş explained that taxi drivers would be taxed under the actual method instead of the simplified method and argued that the transition cost should be determined within a fair, sustainable, and uncomplicated framework. CHP’s Cavit Arı said that the situation of those with many license plates should be evaluated separately.
AK Party Defends the Scope of the Bill
Orhan Yegin, AK Party Deputy from Ankara and one of the bill’s initial signatories, described the regulation as a package that strengthens legal security, fulfills Constitutional Court decisions, supports digitalization, enhances public administration, and facilitates economic life. Yegin opposed criticisms of the omnibus bill, arguing that making some provisions separate laws would not be practical.
Yegin noted that the article concerning forest areas only added new definitions for care and rehabilitation centers for the disabled and elderly. Regarding the regulation on municipal property sales, he said that the installment sale option aims to attract more bidders to auctions and sell public property at higher values.
Yegin also stated that taxi drivers’ rights are preserved during the transition to the new system and that the bill carries a framework that considers the public interest. After the debates concluded, Parliament Deputy Speaker Pervin Buldan adjourned the session, which was later closed to reconvene tomorrow at 14:00 as the commission did not take its place after the break.
