Turkish state television reported that the Ministry of Labor and Social Security imposed, last Monday, seizure procedures on the funds and accounts of 4 major municipalities and a district municipality run by the Republican People’s Party, one of the largest opposition parties, while other Turkish media reported that the seizure procedures affected 6 municipalities, in a move that raised the eyebrows. Widespread controversy.
The seizure procedures included the municipalities of Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir, Adana, Mersin and Sisli, allegedly collecting debts owed to the Social Security Institution.
While the government asserts that this step is necessary to restore state rights, the opposition describes the measure as “political targeting” aimed at paralyzing opposition municipalities that are increasingly popular among citizens.
The Ministry of Labor and Social Security had previously announced a list of the most indebted municipalities, which was as follows:
- Greater Ankara Municipality: 8.7 billion Turkish liras ($248.6 million)
- Istanbul Greater Municipality: 6.4 billion Turkish liras ($182.9 million)
- Izmir Greater Municipality: 5.3 billion Turkish liras ($151.4 million)
- Greater Adana Municipality: 4.3 billion Turkish liras ($122.9 million)
- Sisli Municipality in Istanbul: 2.8 billion Turkish liras ($80 million)
- Greater Mersin Municipality: 1 billion Turkish liras ($28.6 million)
The beginning of the crisis
The controversy over municipal debts to the Social Security Institution began following statements by Republican People’s Party leader Ozgur Ozal last July, during which he criticized the increase in pensions and called for raising the minimum pension to the level of the minimum wage.
During the Justice and Development Party’s parliamentary bloc meeting on July 24, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan called on the municipalities affiliated with the Republican People’s Party to pay their accumulated debts, warning that the government would resort to deducting these debts “at their source” if they are not paid.
At a cabinet meeting on December 10, Erdogan escalated his criticism of the opposition’s proposals regarding raising the minimum wage, directing his speech to the opposition municipalities, saying: “I call on them to pay their accumulated debts to the Social Security Institution. The minister must be more resolute in dealing with them.” .
Last month, the Turkish Minister of Labor and Social Security, Widad Ashkahan, revealed the approach followed by the ministry in collecting accumulated municipal debts for the benefit of the Social Security Institution.
The Minister stressed that the Ministry deals with all municipalities on the principle of equality, saying: “We extend the same invitation to all municipalities, and we repeat it to you: Pay your debts and do not allow them to accumulate to levels that are difficult to pay. If paying in one go is not possible, you can contact us to pay it in installments. You can even offer Offers to exchange properties for their value, and we are ready to consider and accept them.”
Ashkahan pointed out that the ministry is forced to apply strict legal measures, including seizure, to municipalities that do not take actual steps to pay off their debts.
He added: “Unfortunately, the municipalities with the highest debt are the municipalities affiliated with the Republican People’s Party. For example, the Greater Ankara Municipality currently owes 8.4 billion Turkish liras ($240 million) to the Social Security Institution.”
He continued, “When the administration was handed over in 2019 from former mayor Melih Gokcek, the debts did not exceed 200 million liras ($5.7 million). By last March, when we first pointed out this problem, the debts had risen to 4.5 billion liras ($128.6 million). million dollars), but in just 7 months, it almost doubled to reach 8.4 billion liras ($240 million).”
The minister concluded by referring to the distribution of the accumulated debts between the parties, saying: “The total municipal debts amount to 150 billion Turkish liras, and are distributed as follows: 67.5% of the debts are owed to the municipalities of the Republican People’s Party, 25% to the municipalities of the Justice and Development Party, and 3% to the municipalities of the Nationalist Movement Party.” And 2% for the municipalities of the Democratic and Equality Party.”
Opposition position
The Greater Istanbul Municipality issued an official statement denying the reports circulated by some media regarding the freezing of its bank accounts or the accounts of its affiliated companies.
The municipality confirmed on social media platforms that these allegations are baseless, noting that all of its accounts are operating normally without any seizure or freezing procedures.
On the other hand, the municipality of Sisli confirmed – to Al Jazeera Net – that it had received an official notification from the Social Security Institution regarding the start of implementing seizure procedures on its funds, due to the debts accumulated on it.
The municipality added that it will communicate with the concerned authorities to resolve the crisis through appropriate means, stressing that it seeks to avoid disrupting any of the citizens’ interests.
For his part, the Mayor of Greater Ankara, Mansur Yavaş, stated on social media platforms that the seizure procedures included the accounts of 6 companies affiliated with the municipality.
Yavash stressed that these measures will not affect the services and support that the municipality provides to citizens, and said: “Despite these interventions, we are committed to continuing to provide our support without any reduction, and we will even work to increase it.”
Political analyst Gokhan Bulut believes that the crisis of seizure of municipal funds affiliated with the Republican People’s Party reflects a complex conflict between the political and administrative dimensions in Turkey, which makes the issue an area of ongoing debate between the government and the opposition.
In an interview with Al Jazeera Net, Bulut believes that the government has legal justifications to support its measures, as it believes that the debts accumulated by municipalities constitute a large burden on the Social Security Institution, which is essential for the stability of the social welfare system.
Bulut points out that these measures, despite their justifications, carry clear political dimensions, as the focus on the municipalities of the Republican People’s Party in particular, while ignoring other municipalities facing similar financial problems, supports the opposition’s claims that the government is using this file to put political pressure on the opposition municipalities.
Regarding the impact of this crisis on citizens, Bulut believes that freezing municipal accounts may lead to a decline in their ability to provide basic services, such as paying employee salaries and financing vital projects, but he believes that municipalities also bear responsibility for part of this crisis, given their failure to take sufficient measures. To address debt, such as reducing spending or diversifying revenue sources.
A decision in the right direction
For his part, political researcher Murat Toral confirmed that the measures taken by the Turkish government against municipalities indebted to the Social Security Institution came after a series of warnings that the government sent to the municipalities concerned, especially those that carry high debts that constitute a great burden on the institution.
Speaking to Al Jazeera Net, Toral pointed out that these steps prompted some municipalities to take serious measures to settle their debts, explaining: “For example, the municipality of Izmir rushed to contact the Social Security Institution to discuss the mechanism for scheduling its debts after the seizure was announced, and this proves that the government decision was “In the right direction, as it forced municipalities to move to solve the debt problem instead of ignoring it.”
He explained that the government decision came after it became clear that some municipalities did not have a serious intention to repay or negotiate their debts.
The researcher denied that the campaign was directed against municipalities affiliated with the opposition in particular, pointing out that there are other municipalities affiliated with the opposition that have debts but were not subjected to seizure procedures.
Toral explained that the government focused only on municipalities with high debts that put great pressure on the Social Security Institution, which proves that the goal of the measures was to collect dues and not political targeting.
Toral added that this is not the first time that the Turkish government has carried out such campaigns, citing what happened on November 16, 2000, when the then Minister of Labor, Yaşar Okoyan, launched a campaign targeting 950 municipalities that had not paid their debts. The campaign then included seizure procedures that reached To confiscate the property of the mayors themselves.
