20th and 21st Term Kırıkkale Member of Parliament Kemal Albayrak: Every Neighborhood Has Begun Experiencing Injustice Through Decrees

When I heard about the fund issue, I could not help but think of the people who have faced injustice under executive decrees for years.

Because the debate over the unequal application of justice in Türkiye has continued for a long time. In particular, the experiences of people who were removed from their positions under executive decrees, suffered loss of rights and have been waiting for years for their grievances to be addressed remain an important test for the rule of law.

Now, the question raised by Albayrak carries an even broader meaning:

“Except for the privileged, has every neighborhood now become subject to the kind of injustice experienced by those affected by executive decrees?”

This question points not only to today’s debate but also to the sense of justice created in society by the methods used in the past.

Albayrak draws attention to the perception that discrimination has been applied particularly in cases involving victims of executive decrees, saying:

“Because discrimination is made specifically when injustice is inflicted upon these people.”

So what happens now?

If similar legal and administrative problems that were once experienced by certain groups have now begun affecting broader segments of society, what will be the position of the state and the administration?

The statement that “every neighborhood has begun experiencing injustice through executive decrees” therefore becomes a warning that deserves serious consideration.

When the same methods confront another segment of society tomorrow, will the arguments previously used remain valid? Or will the standard of justice change depending on who has suffered the injustice, their position or the opportunities available to them?

Another question raised by Albayrak is equally significant:

“What will the administration’s position be on this issue? Will you call it dissolved, perhaps?”

The real issue is not merely discussing today’s grievances. It is also about confronting the consequences that methods applied yesterday may create when they affect different segments of society today.

Because when law changes according to the person, it ceases to function as law. When justice is applied only to one group, the sense of justice shared by society as a whole is damaged.

We are now facing more fundamental questions:

What will happen to the grievances? Will the winners be protected, or the losers? Who will be held responsible? Where will the administration’s responsibility begin and where will it end?

Albayrak’s words, “What has become of this country? We will see who is responsible,” show that the debate is not limited merely to today’s events.

Because the issue is much larger than who wins or who loses.

The real issue is whether the same legal order operates according to the same standards for everyone.

And this is ultimately the answer society wants to see:

Will justice be applied according to the person, or will the same standard apply to everyone?