THE MYTH OF GENDER EQUALITY IN TURKEY: HER NAME OR SIR-NAME (original) (raw)
Related papers
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN TURKISH LAW REGARDING THE SURNAME OF A MARRIED WOMAN
According to Article 187 of the Turkish Civil Code, a married woman must change her surname upon marriage. The article only provides a married woman with the right to bear her own surname before the surname of her husband. This rule is not only in conflict with the Turkish Constitution but also with the international agreements to which Turkey became a party. The Turkish courts have changed their application of Article 187 in the last years. Practically, Article 187 is considered void by the courts but there is no amendment to the article so far. Even though the courts do not apply Article 187, administrative authorities adhere to it. Therefore, a woman who does not wish to bear a family name is forced to file a lawsuit to use this right. Unless Article 187 is amended, the problem cannot be fully solved. There are some amendment proposals but none of them are satisfying.
Legal gender recognition in Turkey
Despite recent advances in transgender rights in European countries, some legal systems still have barriers such as obligatory diagnosis, sterilization, and medical interventions and incorporating societal acceptance and public order into their discourse. This study dealing with the regime of legal gender recognition in Turkey first reveals critical reciprocating historical developments in national legal regulations for affirming trans identities. Then, the recent conditions laid down by the 2017 Constitutional Court judgments stating that transgender people do not require permanent sterilization any more but require sex reassignment surgery for legal gender change are evaluated. Moreover, this paper explains that while the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights partly reflects the current Turkish legislation, it is not a big step for transgender rights. The findings also underline that the new Turkish regulations appear reformist but are indeed strong measures for legal consistency to solve the dilemma in the previous period in order to maintain the status quo.
The Constitutional Status of Women in Turkey at a Crossroads: Reflections from Comparison
2015
Constitutionalism and the Establishment of a Gender Order Since its foundation, the Turkish Republic took the enhanced status of women to epitomize its promise of modernity. Yet to the extent that women´s equality was even articulated in Turkey, as well as anywhere else in that time, its expression was primarily sought in the public, not in the private, domain. Thus, the 1924 Turkish Constitution explicitly sanctioned primary education-free and compulsory-for both men and women (art. 37), as well as the equal right of men and women to vote and be elected (arts. 10 and 11). Also, a general reference to the principle of equality before the law, without any explicit mention to sex, was included (art. 69). Yet none of these expressions of equality were seen as incompatible with many of the inequalities between men and women explicitly enshrined in the Civil Code-adopted in 1926 and largely drawing from the Swiss Civil Code-, or in the Criminal Code adopted that same year, largely inspired by the Italian code. Both of these codes which came to replace the legality of the Ottoman Empire simply reflected the XIXth century European family ideology, an ideology revolving around the construct of the male breadwinner / female homemaker, which accompanied the establishment of the modern industrialist order. The constitutions of the time simply accepted, rather than challenged, this ideology and the gender order that came with it. This basically held true for early post-World War II constitutionalism as well. There was, after all, a significant overlap in time between the heyday of the breadwinner family model (in the 1950s and early 1960s, coinciding with a strong postwar pro-natalist movement) and the postwar wave of European constitutionalism, which we take as epitomizing contemporary European constitutionalism. If we look at both the Italian Constitution (1947) and the German Fundamental Law (1949), we find that they both prohibit discrimination on the grounds of sex at the same time as they endorse elements of the dominant family ideology. The German Constitution refers to the duty of the state to protect marriage and the family, but also, specifically mothers (6.1 GBL and 6.4 GBL). Even more explicit is the Italian Constitution, which, additionally, refers to the concept of the family wage (36.1) and to women´s essential family duties which must be respected through adequate working conditions (art. 37). It is therefore not that surprising that the first post-WWII constitution in Turkey, that of 1961, which was largely inspired in the German Basic Law, also banned discrimination on the basis of sex (art. 12), while at the same time referring to the family, as the fundamental unit of the Turkish society, which, like motherhood and childhood, deserved State protection (art. 35). It also contemplated the need to protect women from being employed in jobs unsuited to their sex (art. 43). This family ideology and, linked to it, this particular constitutional understanding of equality of sexes, was also reinforced in the early case law of the constitutional courts. Thus, in Italy, in the early 1960s' jurisprudence, the Constitutional Court affirmed the husband´s "marital authority" as well as his obligation to provide for his wife.[1] Most infamously, in 1961, the Court upheld a criminal code provision making the wife's adultery a criminal offence, yet qualifying the husband's as such only when it was performed within the household or "notoriously" elsewhere, considering the distinction justified on the basis of the social consensus around the different meanings of men's and women's adultery, as well as on the fact, taken as self-evident, that the wife's adultery constituted a more serious attack to family unity,[2] a doctrine it would abandon just a few years later. Slightly more subtle was the German Federal Constitutional Court, which, although clearly rejecting the idea of woman´s marital subordination, still interpreted the gender equality and the sex antidiscrimination clauses in the German Basic Law (arts. 3.2 and 3.3 GBL) to allow for differentiations based not only on "objective biological" but also on "functional" differences, mostly linked to their expected different family roles, assuming women´s greater dependency on men.[3]
2013
As Turkey is officially a secular state and it adopts Swiss Civil Code, thestate implements secular legal system. However, as people in Turkey are predominantlyMuslim and theyare born and raised in a traditionally Muslim environment,people generally and especially women live under the influence of these two sometimescontradictory and inconsistent legal systems and customs. As a result, thereare clashes and especially Muslim women are subjected to the negative impact ofthose clashes. So for example, women who wear headscarf because of being inline with Islamic principles face problems when they want to go to school or workor engage in politics. Or when they want to keep their maiden surname which isvery mainstream practice in many Muslim societies, it becomes impossible for Muslimwomen in Turkey because of the secular Swiss Law. In the present paper thecircumstances in which Muslim women live under these inconsistent and contradictorylegal systems will be studied.
Aftermath of a Revolution: A Case Study of Turkish Family Law
Pace Int'l L. Rev., 2005
In this paper, I challenge the conventional wisdom that secular laws of the Turkish Republic have constituted a clear and absolute break from the Islamic laws of the country’s predecessor, the Ottoman Empire. Specifically, I discuss in detail the adoption of and amendments to the Turkish Civil Codes of 1926 and 2002, which govern various matters including family relations, marriage and divorce. A detailed analysis of family law provisions contained in both these Turkish Civil Codes demonstrates that although significant progress has been made toward gender equality, certain Islamic laws dealing with female sexuality survive in their entirety, and in contradiction to the general spirit of gender egalitarianism of the codes. I argue that this is not anomalous considering that revolutions are often built upon inherited politico-legal and social foundations, and thus often fail to completely eradicate the past.
Building the Nation with Ancient Names: The Surname Law in Turkey (1934)
Prof. Dr. Bige Sükan’a Armağan Cumhuriyet Tarihi Yazıları / Essays on History of Turkish Republic in Honour of Professor Bige Sükan, 2022
This chapter aims to address the Surname Law (Soyadı Kanunu) adopted by the Turkish Grand National Assembly on 21June 1934. The law was one of the last Kemalist reforms initiated after the political revolution led by Gazi Mustafa Kemal Pasha against the Ottoman rule. It came to the fore to put an end to the identity confusion both in the relations among individuals and their relations with the modern state, which was in the process of formation since the beginning of the nineteenth century. All modern states, by definition, require clear and intelligible personal identities for meticulous taxation and conscription. However, among Turks, there was no tradition of using surnames to distinguish individuals from one another.