Discussing powers granted by Turkey's referendum

Azerbaijani President İlham Aliyev recently appointed his wife as the country's first ever vice-president. His elected colleagues greeted this decision with a standing ovation. 

Aliyev won 87 percent of the vote at the last election. He is seen as a "secular" statesman and his wife Mihriban Aliyeva is a modern woman who has dedicated herself to social matters. 

If the "secular" Aliyev is able to do this after winning 87 percent of the votes, just imagine what Kenan Evren could have done after the 1982 constitution was approved in Turkey with 92 percent of the vote. However, Evren did not get rid of the parliamentary system, he only later made himself president - limited in the constitution he wrote at one term. He retired after a seven-year term and years later was taken to court. 
When you look at these two situations, do you have the same thoughts as me? 

A "civilian" authoritarian leader can appoint his wife after winning 87 percent in an election one country, while in another country a strong leader who has led a military coup insists on keeping the parliamentary system and leaves his seat even after having his constitution approved by 92 percent of voters. 

Is this the most important difference between the "Turkish-type presidential regimes" of the various Turkic republics and Turkey's 94-year-old republic and 67-year-old universal parliamentary system?  

I have another cheeky question: If in one country 87 percent of the votes are enough to gather all powers in one household and in two persons, what is the percentage of votes necessary in another country to gather all powers in one household and one person? 

Why is my friend prisoned? 

Now, imagine a country where these...