The perception of the breakthrough created by the 1 March Decision in Turkey

The public exercises its authority at specific intervals through elected political parties and the representatives designated by these parties. It is observed that the power granted by the people is represented by the party. This situation entails responsibilities of the parties towards the public. For the flawless functioning of the system, it is essential for parties to have disciplinary authority over their representatives. Thus, efforts are made to prevent members from acting contrary to party decisions. However, the flaws in this systematic order may occasionally surface. For instance, in the case of the 1st of March Resolution, it is noteworthy that the decision was rejected by a significant number of votes in defiance of the party's general decision. In this study, the reasons behind representatives making decisions contrary to their parties' general decisions will be examined. The justifications for the rejection of the resolution, despite the power of the government and the parliamentary system, will be elucidated. The study aims to elucidate the internal rift within the ruling AK Party during that period by exploring the factors influencing representatives. Factors such as public sentiment, public pressure, and the attitudes of the opposition party, the CHP, have also played a significant role in the decisions of the representatives. This case serves as an example of the functioning of the democratic system in Turkey.