Description
This study aims to conceptualize exceptional security, which comprises states of exception, emergency, and state authorities’ other practices that result in the restriction/suspension of constitutional rights and liberties. While every constitutional order has regulations on exceptional circumstances that might require taking exceptional security measures, not every exceptional security measure is taken based on the code of law. There is a common tendency in the literature to conceptualize every practice that restricts/suspends rights and liberties as a state of exception. The present study argues that such a conceptualization has an essentialist logic that may not comprehend the specificities of different cases and their historical backgrounds. While acknowledging that the concepts of ‘exception’ and ‘emergency’ connote the coexistence of politics and security, this study attempts to show that these concepts refer to different juridico-political situations. To illustrate the distinct relationalities between the law and politics, it interrogates Turkey between 1971 and 2002, where various methods of taking exceptional security measures were employed against the ‘enemy’ mostly referred to as ‘terrorists’. Methodologically, the present study distinguishes between means of exceptional security by looking at who the decision-maker is and how exceptional security measures are decided and taken. Through the examined methods of taking exceptional security measures, it aims to illustrate that juridical conditions (constitutional, unconstitutional, or extra-constitutional) of exceptional security measures may vary contextually.
Key words: emergency • enemy • exception • exceptional security • politics • terrorism • Turkey
