1912ի օսմանեան երեսփոխանական ընտրութիւնները եւ արեւմտահայութիւնը

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorԵղիկ Ճէրէճեան
dc.date.accessioned2025-11-12T08:14:59Z
dc.date.available2025-11-12T08:14:59Z
dc.date.issued2007
dc.description.abstractThe author notes that Armenian parliamentary politics started before the proclamation of the Republic of Armenia in 1918. Rather, they started with the participation of the Armenians in the first Duma of Tsarist Russia in 1906 and continued in the next three Dumas until 1917. On the other hand, with the restoration of the 1876 Constitution in 1908 in the Ottoman Empire, a new venue of Armenian parliamentary politics was established. Between 1908 and 1914 three legislative elections were held in the Ottoman Empire. The author dwells on the elections of 1912 arguing that in 1908 the Armenian parties and groupings were new to such a phenomenon and were not prepared for the first Ottoman Legislative elections. On the other hand, during the 1914 elections, the Empire was under one-party rule and the elections had lost their democratic nature. Every Ottoman male above the age of 25 was eligible to vote. Of these, all above the age of 30 were eligible to be elected. The elections were held in two stages. In the first stage every 250 to 275 voters would elect a representative for the Electoral College, which, in turn, elected the members of the Ottoman Legislative Assembly. In real terms the Assembly three months. In fact, the Assembly was inaugurated while elections were still being held in certain constituencies The article sheds new light on various aspects of the pre-electoral period and the politics of different Armenian and other ethnic parties, particularly the Ittihad ve Terakke (Party of Union and Progress, PUP) and the Hurriyet ve Itilaf (Party of Liberty and Coalition, PLC) The author notes that due to gerrymandering, the Armenians did not constitute a majority in any of the Electoral Colleges. Thus, they had to negotiate for seats in the Assembly. On the other hand, there was a significant discrepancy between the figures given by the Armenian Patriarchate of Constantinople and those of the Ottoman authorities. In almost all cases the number of Armenians given by the Ottoman authorities was far lower than the number registered by the Patriarchate. Furthermore, PUP aimed at having a majority in the parliament and opted to undermine ethnic parties and ethnic representation. These factors all led to unending and inconclusive discussions and negotiations between the Armenian parties and the PUP regarding the number of seats to be allocated to the Armenians. The Armenians demanded 23 while the PUP agreed to allocate a maximum of 15 seats but guaranteed 13. On the Armenian scene, the Armenians were grouped around a number of parties and the Patriarchate. The latter was active through its Political Assembly. The Armenian parties and the Political Assembly extensively discussed the issue of alliance. Some of the parties had predispositions against the PUP. The Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF) had pre-electoral links with the PUP and aimed at capitalizing on these links to have most of the Armenian seats. Besides, there was a disagreement on the allocation of seats to the parties and the Patriarchate. However, the basic issue was the formation of alliances. The parties disagreed on which party to ally with. Eventually all but the Social Democrat Hunchag Party (SDHP) allied with the PUP. Only 8 Armenians were elected to the Legislature. After several complaints and interventions two other Armenians were elected, which brought the total number of the Armenians to 10. Of these 5 were members of the ARF, 4 were members of the PUP and one was independent. The SDHP, which had allied with the opposition PLC, lost. All in all, out of the 275-member Assembly only 6 constituted the opposition. The 1912 Ottoman Legislature, however, could not survive the pressure of foreign politics. The loss of Tripolitania (Libya) to Italy was a major campaign issue which, unlike its vague impact in the pre-electoral period, was one of the main causes of the fall of the 1912 legislature. The article is an important contribution towards developing a theory of the politics of Armenian participation in legislative elections and Armenian inter-party relations.
dc.identifier.citationՃէրէճեան, Ե., «1912ի օսմանանեան երեսփոխանական ընտրութիւնները եւ արեւմտահայութիւնը», «Հայկազեան հայագիտական հանդէս», 2007, Պէյրութ, էջ 103-160
dc.identifier.urihttps://haigrepository.haigazian.edu.lb/handle/123456789/951
dc.title1912ի օսմանեան երեսփոխանական ընտրութիւնները եւ արեւմտահայութիւնը
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
Եղիկ Ճէրէճեան, «1912ի օսմանեան երեսփոխանական ընտրութիւնները եւ արեւմտահայութիւնը».pdf
Size:
6.59 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed to upon submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Articles