Why constitution problem, who will decide?
Kurdistan is not an independent state, but it has a federal government which is independent in its political, economical and lawmaking decision. Kurdistan has a president and a parliament which work in a legal and constitutional manner. But it's still not an independent entity in order to participate in decisions of international and developed democratic community legally and constitutionally, or to be considered as a recognized entity in UN.
Kurdistan has a constitution draft which has been discussed in the parliament since 2005. Several years ago, the parliament passed Kurdistan Region Constitution bill, the only thing left is to hold a referendum over it. Since then, political talks even between parties exists regarding this draft.
What's worth mentioning is, those who were against electing the President in the parliament and some other matters, they wanted people to elect the Region President directly. But now as power balance and political stances have changed and some external sides emerge to interfere in important and strategic issues of Kurdistan. One of the matters is the decision about the constitution of the Region, which is a strategic issue in defining Region's position in the future in terms of political and international relations, defining geographic borders, production and economy of Kurdistan, culture and coexistence of Kurdistan's component. These parties were against solving the problem inside parliament in the past, they now turned to say 'No, the issues must be solved inside parliament by balance and political agreements'. What mainly concerns public opinion is that when constitutional matters are affected by tempers, ideological reactions and narrow interests, national dimensions will be weakened and distrusted.
This is an important democratic matter, because the main part of a referendum is to give chance to people with all components to use their political participation and rights in such an important decision like referendum over the constitution draft.
In Kurdistan there is a group who will not participate in referendum, and there are ones that haven't yet made their minds whether participate of give white cards. There is another group whose decision is related to the decision and opinions of other political parties, they probably change their mind a short time before the referendum, and participate in the referendum whether positively or negatively.
The referendum over the constitution is related to determination and destiny of the country, and tightening constitutional, legal, political, democratic positions and human rights in Kurdistan Region. And the problem is that these matters are about to be minimized as the result of showing the disputes greater that what they are, and as the result of the current political viewpoints and close-mindedness of some parties in their political viewpoint. There is a group who wants to restrict the matter to the belief that the constitution is written for one person.
I think constitution as national principle should not be mixed with some opinions, interests and short reactions. The referendum over Kurdistan Region Constitution is related to formation of a constitutional entity and a civil society, government, other components such as Region Presidency and the Parliament. This matter should not be restricted to election of Kurdistan Region President, because anyone became the future president of Kurdistan Region, if he didn't work for forming a state, an entity and an economic, psychological, cultural and social situation, or didn't have better agendas than what now exists, then history would blame him. If the president, who is now in office, does not make a ground for people to participate in a transparent, democratic and respected way in the referendum over the constitution, he will be criticized.
The constitution should also make the above mentioned a principle for participating people in decisions regarding strategic and important issues. So when we want to strengthen basic principles of a civil and democratic society, we should go back to people's opinion. For respecting and implementing the hopes that people will vote for, let people decide, and political parties make politics. That's why people's choice of defining their determination and giving chance to them to participate in important decision is a suitable thing, and will tighten democratic position, not vice versa. The one who is fighting for people should make opportunity to people, not hinder them using their rights.