Making the system a point of discussion

Today, I was going to write about a couple of modest but positive moves by the Higher Education Board (YÖK), but when President Recep Tayyip Erdo?an said the system had changed, I was more interested in that theme as a law person myself. 

This is what the president said: "Now, [because I was elected by popular vote], there is no symbolic president in the country anymore but one with de facto powers. The president, indeed within the framework of the constitution, but directly responsible to the nation, has to conduct his duties... What needs to be done now is to verify with a new constitution the legal framework of this de facto situation."

First of all, the concept of "the president with de facto powers" is extremely problematic legally. The law does not accept the concept of "de facto power." Being elected by popular vote does not give "de facto powers" to the president. 

Did Erdo?an mean "political power?" Yes, under the rule of law, "political power" can change the constitution and laws in parliament but do not give "de facto power" to anybody. When the president's powers have not been changed by the constitution and laws, then he cannot use "de facto power" just because he was elected by the people. 

In Europe's parliamentarian democracies, the presidents of seven countries are elected by popular vote: Austria, Finland, Lithuania, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia and Iceland. In all of them the president is symbolic, above and outside domestic politics. 

Numerous legal experts have repeatedly made it clear that when the election process changes, it does not mean legal powers have also changed. Erdo?an did not accept this, he continued in his belief of "de facto power." But then, serious conflicts in authority, disputes and...