“The Republic” that Robespierre was referring to was, of course, simply a euphemism for dictatorship – run by him and his comrades.

Just fast-forward from 1794 to 2008 and move from Paris to Ankara – not a long voyage, believe me – and you will come across a similar scene. The guardians of the Turkish Revolution, who have carried out not a Great Terror but a small-scale yet long-term one, have just launched one of their historic attempts in order to punish the popular politicians who challenge their authority. “The Republic is at stake,” they proudly say, “and we can do anything.”

Respectful, But Not Stupid

I am speaking about the case to close down the ruling AKP (Justice and Development Party), and to ban its leadership from politics. It is a show trial, because, as I have noted in my previous columns, the indictment that the chief prosecutor launched last month and the Constitutional Court accepted last Monday is totally unsubstantiated. The “crimes” of the AKP are simply the statements or acts by its leaders toward broader religious freedom. And that very fact gives some observers the hope that such nonsense will be rejected by the country’s top judges, as it should be.

I am not that optimistic, or naïve. I indeed see it as almost certain that the Constitutional Court will decide upon the closure of the AKP, if things continue in the current mood. The four opposing votes in the group of 11 judges that emerged during the discussion on President Abdullah Gül actually prove that not all court members are blind supporters of the chief prosecutor’s cause. But seven out of 11 is precisely the number of judges that is enough to politically execute the AKP.

We should really note that the Turkish judiciary, along with its sister institutions, is enacted not to serve democracy. It is rather enacted to protect the system from democracy. In the past, in 1961, a similar high court decided upon the execution of Prime Minister Adnan Menderes and two of his ministers. During the course of that notorious show trial, Menderes had complained to the prosecutor about the unfairness of the whole process. The prosecutor, Salim Başol, had responded with a famous line: “Well, this is what the power that put you here demands.”

Today’s differences lie not in the mindset of the Turkish revolutionaries, or the purpose of their show trials, but in their reduced ability to execute their goals. Turkey’s integration with the world, thank God, has unsharpened their swords. Yet, as you see, they are still alive and kicking.

So what needs to be done?… There are some commentators who advice the AKP, and the rest of us, to “respect the legal process.” Well, we might be respectful, but we are not stupid. Everybody knows that this is a political attack, not a legal case. If we “respect” it, it will probably crush what we know as Turkish democracy.

That’s why I think that the AKP should go on the “offensive,” and take the initiative to counter this assault. They should fix what Mr. Olli Rehn, the European Commissioner for Enlargement, rightfully described as “a systemic error in the Turkish constitutional framework.” They have enough seats in Parliament in order to initiate a constitutional amendment which will make it impossible to close down a political party unless it supports violence. Then they would have to take this amendment to a referendum, which is all the better, and which I bet they will win. Then the plot to overthrow Turkey’s popularly elected government will be popularly overthrown.

Some commentators argue that such legal arrangements don’t work in the retrospective, and thus the case against the AKP would go on as is. No!.. In Turkish legal system, changes in laws affect all the ongoing processes. Abdullah Öcalan, the leader of the terrorist PKK (Kurdistan Workers’ Party), was put on trial in 1999 and the prosecutor had asked for his execution. But in the course of the trial, due to the EU-driven reforms, Turkey abolished the death penalty. Hence Öcalan is still safe and sound in his prison cell.

Tanks in The Streets?

Some Turks fear that a constitutional amendment by the AKP, which will render the “judiciary coup” ineffective, might drive “the Republic” even more insane, and its guardians might attempt to launch a military coup – a real live one: tanks in streets, bodies in torture chambers. Now, I concede that there is some risk, but a very minor one, and it is perhaps worth taking. How long will the coup makers be able to sit there, while all the world and much of the people will be against them? They will soon turn into something like the “State Emergency Committee” who tried to save the Soviet Union by a final attempt during the last days of Michael Gorbachev. They will fail.

Now, a final word for my colleagues who have started to rant about “the mistakes of the AKP” these days, and have taken a “middle position” between the government and the coup makers. Yes, the AKP has zillions of mistakes, and I can lecture you about them all day long. Political parties do make mistakes, and it is our job to criticize them. But the current attack on the AKP cannot be justified by any of those arguments. Mistakes within democracy do not validate the attacks on democracy.

Turkish pundits should realize that there is really no moral half way between democracy and tyranny. When you try to create such a midpoint, you don’t become an objective commentator. You just become an unprincipled one.