Mayor of Istanbul, Ekrem Imamoglu (networking sites) (social networking sites)

It may have been expected that the ruling Justice and Development Party in Turkey would decline in the results of the recent local elections for several reasons, but the initial results showed an unexpected significant decline and a resounding loss for it, as the Republican People’s Party came ahead of it for the first time, and not only retained the municipalities of some major cities, but also annexed It has additional cities and provinces in a sweeping victory that was a shock to many.

Results

According to the unofficial preliminary results, the Republican People’s Party led the rest of the parties and outperformed the Justice and Development Party for the first time since the latter’s founding, achieving a vote percentage of 37.5%, while the Justice and Development Party came - for the first time - in second place with a vote percentage of 35.6%, and Welfare again came in third place. By 6.1%.

The Republican People won the mayorship of 36 cities and governorates, including 15 major cities and 21 governorates, while the Justice and Development Party won 23, including 11 major cities and 12 governorates, and the Peoples’ Equality and Democracy Party (successor to the “Kurdish” Peoples’ Democratic Party) won 10 municipalities, including three major cities. And seven governorates, the National Movement Party headed the municipalities of eight governorates, the Welfare Party again in two municipalities, one of which was a major city and the other a governorate, and the Good Party in one governorate municipality.

Thus, the Republican People's Party, the largest opposition party, has increased its share in the municipalities of cities and provinces from 20 to 36, while the share of the ruling Justice and Development Party has declined from 39 to 23, as well as its ally, the National Movement, from 11 to 8. While both Welfare again and Al-Jadeed won as president Municipalities For the first time, the Peoples' Equality and Democracy Party increased its tally from 8 (which the Peoples' Democratic Party won) to 10 municipalities.

In addition, the Republican People's Party obtained a majority in the municipal councils of both the municipalities of Ankara and Istanbul, which were held by the ruling Republican Alliance in the previous elections. Despite losing the mayorship of the two municipalities to the opposition.

In the sub-municipalities or municipalities of major city districts, the Republican People's Republic increased its score in Ankara from 3 to 16, compared to the AKP's decline from 19 to 8 out of 25 sub-municipalities. In Istanbul, the Republican People's Republic increased its score from 14 to 26, while the AKP decreased from 24 to 13 out of 39 sub-municipalities.

Thus, the progress of the Republican people is clearly evident, as well as the decline of the Justice and Development Party, significant and comprehensive, despite the fact that the presidential and legislative elections just 10 months ago carried results different from the current ones, which prompts a study and discussion of the reasons and factors contributing to this shocking result for the ruling party, which had won all electoral entitlements. Which it has fought since its founding in 2001 until now.

Punitive voting

In his speech after the initial results appeared, the Turkish President and Chairman of the Justice and Development Party, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, said: “The voter has presented his appreciation and his message through the ballot box,” a repeated phrase on the latter’s lips, but it remains key and explains what happened. The short period of time between the presidential and legislative elections in which Erdogan and the ruling public coalition won the presidency with a majority in parliament, and the current local elections, the results of which have previously been detailed, prompts consideration of the difference between the two elections on the one hand and the emerging causes and factors on the other.

The third indicator that supports the hypothesis of punitive voting is that the Welfare Party again advanced in these elections and came in third place. It is an Islamic party that was allied with the Justice and Development Party in 2023.

The difference between the two stations is that the latter is a local or municipal election whose direct impact on political life in the country is minimal, compared to the presidential and legislative elections, and therefore the commitment of the popular cores to vote for their parties may decrease. Meaning, today the Justice and Development Party lost the municipal elections, and retreated greatly in them, but that did not and will not shake stability in the country, as Erdogan is still president and the ruling coalition holds a majority in Parliament.

This meaning encourages the idea of ​​“punitive voting”; That is, delivering messages to the political leadership through the ballot boxes, which clearly happened in these elections, and has many indicators, and it happened from two parties.

On the opposition side, most of the opposition votes went to the Republican People's Candidates, considering them the most prominent competitor to the Justice and Development Party to prevent the latter from winning. This included even the parties that presented their own candidate, as evidenced by the decline in the percentage of their candidates in these elections compared to their weight in the various governorates and cities in the previous one. In the results, with the exception of the Republican People's Republic and the "Kurdish" party in the south and southeast regions, the votes of all the remaining parties declined significantly, especially the opposition Al-Jayyid Party.

As for the second segment, they are supporters of the Justice and Development Party or the segments that have always voted for him, especially the conservatives, who seem to have sent him the harshest message in the current elections. In the first place, the low participation rate indicates a clear reluctance to participate in the elections among supporters of the Justice and Development Party. If we exclude the local elections in 2004 (the first for the Justice and Development Party with a participation rate of 76.2%), this percentage is the lowest in the local elections since the 1970s. The decline in the number of votes obtained by the party by more than two million votes (15.7 million votes compared to 18 million votes in 2019), despite the increase in the number of voters, supports this hypothesis.

As for the third indicator that supports the hypothesis of punitive voting, it is that the Welfare Party again advanced in these elections and came in third place. It is an Islamic party that was allied with the Justice and Development Party in 2023, meaning that it is close to it ideologically and is not viewed by voters as necessarily an opponent, which means It represented a "safe alternative" for some voters. In the final picture, there are those who wanted to punish the ruling party, so they boycotted the elections, there are those who canceled their vote, and there are those who went to other parties, led by Welfare, again.

In examining the causes of defeat, there is what is old and ongoing and what is newly emerging. Among the most important criticisms and reservations about the Justice and Development Party and its recent governments is the deteriorating economic conditions in the country in the last few years, in which government measures do not seem to have been able to convince voters of their effectiveness, even in the future.

Among those related to the economy was the segment of retirees who were unhappy with their pension and dissatisfied with the government increase. There is also something related to the sluggishness of the party and the government, as is the case with parties that have ruled for a long time. There are also changes that have occurred in the party since its founding in thought, discourse, and political practice, as well as alliances.

These reasons were also present in the previous elections, and were at the forefront of the reasons responsible for the decline in the party’s vote percentage in the legislative elections in the last decade, but punitive voting in them would have had a very high cost, by bringing the opposition to the presidency and/or the majority of Parliament, and therefore some segments postponed That's for the recent local elections.

As for the new factors driving what some consider an “ear pinch” for the Turkish president, his party, and his government, it is the position on the aggression against Gaza, as the conservative segment in particular was dissatisfied with the official position and its ceiling, and repeatedly demanded additional practical steps to support the people of Gaza, specifically what It was related to trade with the occupying state without receiving deaf ears. Protesting, boycotting, canceling the vote, or voting for other parties was a tool for warning.

Pictures have spread on social media of many voters who invalidated their votes by writing slogans supporting Gaza and criticizing the government’s “negligent” position on it, in a clear indication of Gaza’s presence in the results’ influence after it was clearly present in the electoral campaigns. However, it is extremely difficult to accurately determine the size of this segment. .

In conclusion, the results of the recent local/municipal elections were a shocking and sharp message to the Justice and Development Party from its voters and supporters about the necessity of listening to the voice of the street and harmonizing with it, which is what Erdogan emphasized, as usual.

The results of these elections raise the alarm regarding the upcoming presidential and legislative elections in 2024, one of whose presidential candidates may be the Mayor of Greater Istanbul, Ekrem Imamoglu, especially since the ruling party may run without Erdogan, its winning horse in all previous electoral rounds.

Therefore, Erdogan and his party will have four years to regain voter confidence and prepare for the 2028 elections if they prove serious in responding to the funds’ messages regarding the required changes and improvements that are fundamental, real, and not formal.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Al Jazeera.