In the run-up to Turkey’s June 24 elections, one of the biggest surprises for the government was perhaps the call for a far-reaching amnesty by its ally, the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP). Although top government officials dismissed the call, MHP leader Devlet Bahceli remained insistent. He is now likely to turn up the pressure, drawing on the critical role his party obtained in the elections. The outcome of the vote stripped the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) of its parliamentary majority, leaving it reliant on MHP support.

Turkey’s experience shows that talk of amnesty creates huge expectations and eventually materializes under public pressure. The most recent example was an amnesty law in 2000, which led to the release of tens of thousands of inmates. It all started with a call by Rahsan Ecevit, the wife of then-Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit and a veteran politician herself. She promoted a limited amnesty for what she saw as disproportionate convictions. “Kids who steal sweets receive sentences similar to those of bank robbers. This injustice should be remedied,” she argued. Others highlighted the plight of children who had to grow up in prison because of jailed mothers.

In December 2000, parliament passed a partial amnesty law, reducing sentences by 10 years. The move also aimed to relieve the overcrowded prisons, whose 70,000-strong capacity was full at the time.

Yet those who remained outside the scope of the law petitioned the Constitutional Court, citing violation of the principle of equality. The court ruled in favor of the petitioners, effectively expanding the scope of the amnesty. Rahsan Ecevit had to concede, “This is not my amnesty.”