In the last week of June, at his parliamentary group meeting, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan announced the new stage of the Terror-Free Türkiye process, saying: "We are working on a legal framework that will accelerate the organization's dissolution process. After completing the necessary consultations, we will submit this regulation without further delay to the discretion of Parliament, which is the address for resolving problems."

The day before, Parliament Speaker Numan Kurtulmuş outlined the general framework of the legal regulation. From the statement, it is understood that the law will be time-bound and stand-alone. Its scope, duration of implementation, oversight mechanism, and who will benefit under which conditions will all be clearly defined. The regulation will not carry the character of a general amnesty or a personal pardon.

The state and political establishment's new solution-oriented approach toward the Terror-Free Türkiye goal was first announced in 2024 during the Aug. 30 Victory Day ceremonies at Malazgirt. In the nearly two years since, critical stages and thresholds have been passed on the way to this goal.

The terrorist organization's dissolution decision, the weapons-burning ceremony, the decision to withdraw from Türkiye, decisions taken by the state and political actors throughout this process, the establishment of the Process Commission, and the completion of its report at the end of its work – each stage has arrived at the present day through various tests and challenges. In other words, the process has been advanced all the way to the stage of legal regulation.

Although President Erdoğan, Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) leader Devlet Bahçeli, relevant actors of the People's Alliance, and state officials have repeatedly stressed their continued determination to reach the Terror-Free Türkiye goal, unfortunately, as before, debates and deliberately misleading interpretations meant to muddy the process have never been in short supply.

While the process continued, Türkiye was seriously affected on every front: to the north by the Russia-Ukraine war, to the south by the lingering aftershocks of the Syrian civil war, by Israel's genocide against Palestinians and its regional war plans, and to the east by U.S.-Israeli attacks on Iran.

The YPG terrorist organization's initial refusal to integrate into Syria's new administration, and attempts to draw certain Kurdish groups into the U.S.-Israel-Iran war, were significant developments that directly affected the process. Likewise, new equations sought to be established through the PKK's extensions in Iraq and Syria kept alive the possibility of outside interference aimed at delaying the organization's dissolution.

Despite this, the process toward the Terror-Free Türkiye and region goal has been brought, without incident, to the stage of "legal and institutional regulation."

The stage at which the legal regulation would be made was decided by consensus in the Parliamentary Process Commission. It was recorded in the report that the detection and confirmation of the PKK terrorist organization's disarmament would be carried out "according to objective, measurable, transparent, and auditable criteria, through coordination among institutions."

Therefore, it is not hard to foresee that once the bill comes before the Parliament in the coming days and becomes law, its "implementation" will depend on developments on the ground and on confirmation and detection by the relevant institutions. In this context, passing the law now is meant to remove from organization members any argument that could serve as a pretext for not laying down arms.

It had been emphasized on every occasion that when the process was relaunched, every stage of it would be specific to Türkiye. In this context, there will be no "third eye" or "external mediator" in the law. All processes will be completed under the legal and political legitimacy of the Parliament, in line with the Turkish model.

Various statements have indicated that during the implementation of this law, the critical threshold and confirmation mechanism will be handled by the relevant board or institutions defined as a matter of state policy.

Likewise, from statements reflected in public discourse, the regulation is expected to include matters such as the establishment of a monitoring board to coordinate the process, the definition of different mechanisms depending on whether someone is an organization member or has committed a crime, legal guarantees and immunity for those who have taken part in the process so far, and protection of victims' rights.

In addition, after the process is completed, support processes such as the rehabilitation and social reintegration of organization members will also need to be given a legal framework.

Among the issues that have most strained the Terror-Free Türkiye process over the past two years has been the expression of maximalist demands inconsistent with the original spirit of the process. Although it is widely accepted that debates likely to undermine public support should be avoided, unfortunately, some circles have failed to fulfill their responsibility in this regard.

In all likelihood, when this bill comes before Parliament, issues not directly related to the process will once again be raised. The process will be strained through maximalist demands or narrowed down solely to the status and position of Öcalan. Likewise, accusations that the state and the government are shirking responsibility will again be circulated.

At this stage, questioning the intentions of the state or of the People's Alliance regarding the Terror-Free Türkiye process is not the right approach for the process. From the very beginning, the state and the government have shown their good faith on this matter, accepting criticism from their own base, and have fulfilled their responsibilities.

The legal framework to be brought before Parliament should also be understood as one stage in the process. Should further regulations be needed to reach the terror-free Türkiye goal as the process continues, these too will be taken up in Parliament. Above all, then, it is necessary to act with the understanding that the process is moving forward dynamically.