The Struggle on The Surname of Married Women in Turkey

In Turkey, the practice of a woman’s surname changing upon marriage and the obligation to take her husband’s surname is a burning issue for feminists. Women in Turkey secured their civil rights and the right to vote and be elected through a struggle spanning more than a hundred years, asserting “we are equal.” The right of a married woman to bear the surname of her choice was obtained in Turkey as a result of a 30-year legal struggle. However, women are still unable to fully exercise this right. The government continues to resist allowing them to do so. The struggle remains ongoing. Here, it is crucial to recognize the resilience, resistance, and unified consciousness of the women’s movement in Turkey. 

Although this may appear to be a minor issue to those not considering rights, it is actually a highly political matter in every aspect. The surname of a married woman serves as a symbolic space surrounded by barbed wire, designed to protect the entrenched power of patriarchy. Overcoming this barbed wire through legal means over the course of thirty years has been a significant achievement for women in dismantling the “myth of the sacred family.”

The surname, as a component of a woman’s individual and autonomous space in which she realizes herself, falls within the scope of the right to private life under human rights law. In other words, a woman is an autonomous individual with her own identity and cannot be reduced to a mere extension of a man or confined within the “sacred family” through marriage. The patriarchal imposition on a married woman to take her husband’s surname is a tool intended to subordinate women. Requiring a woman to relinquish her identity and autonomy when forming a family is to submit to the boundless power of patriarchy. To resist this demand is to challenge patriarchy and contribute to the diminishment of its power—a challenge that patriarchy is unwilling to accept.

Patriarchal institutions has resisted the women’s movement’s efforts to advance the gains and rights enshrined in the Turkish Civil Code, which is why they have refused to recognize and implement the Constitutional Court’s decision. The patriarchy perceives any demand for equality as an “excess” that challenges its power, particularly in matters related to the “sacred family” and the “principle of unity in the family surname.” 

The struggle along the years

When we examine the historical trajectory of human rights movements, it becomes evident that progress is not linear or uninterrupted, and that progressive movements have often been subjected to harsh repression. The women’s human rights movement has also progressed through intense struggles despite repression. Consequently, there are pivotal moments in which progress becomes irreversible. We are currently at such a juncture for the women’s rights movement in Turkey. Despite years of governmental suppression, structural, and systemic interventions, the struggle that began 30 years ago to amend the Civil Code regarding the surname of married women has reached a critical point.

The Turkish Constitutional Court has twice rejected requests for the annulment of Article 187 of the Turkish Civil Code, which obliges women to take the surname of their male spouse upon marriage. The first request for annulment was made in 1998, arguing that the law was unconstitutional. However, the Constitutional Court did not find any violation of the Constitution’s principle of equality in this obligation and thus, rejected the annulment request. Undeterred, women continued their struggle. After the 10-year waiting period mandated by the Constitution, they again appealed to the Constitutional Court. In 2011, the Constitutional Court ruled for the second time that, in order to protect the integrity of the family and the paternity of the child, a common surname is mandatory, stating that it must be the man’s surname and that this requirement was not contrary to the principle of equality in the Constitution. The Constitutional Court thus upheld its consistent stance on this “hot potato” periodically handed to it by patriarchy.

The women’s movement did not give up once more. After another 10-year waiting period, the women’s movement approached the Constitutional Court again, for the third time. In 2023, the Constitutional Court finally reversed its previous rulings, as it could no longer ignore the binding nature of human rights conventions to which Turkey is a party, such as the European Convention on Human Rights and the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). Moreover, it has contributed to the Court’s decision the struggle of the women’s movement, coupled with other legal advancements in gender equality, improvements in the Constitution, the establishment of the Individual Application Procedure as a domestic remedy to prevent rights violations, and the violation rulings of the European Court of Human Rights against Turkey concerning the surname of married women. The Constitutional Court eliminated the issue that had persisted for 30 years, namely the problem of the surname of married women. Legally, this issue no longer exists in Turkey; the relevant law has been annulled.

As a result, according to the Constitutional Court’s decision of April 24, 2023, married women should have three options: to take only the surname of the male spouse; to take the surname of the male spouse together with her premarital surname, and; to take her premarital surname alone. 

Registering the last of these options with the Constitutional Court’s decision is a very significant legal achievement.

The current context

The obligation for married women to take the surname of the male spouse was legally abolished on January 28, 2024, when the Turkish Constitutional Court’s decision came into force. However, a fierce political struggle has ensued in the Turkish Grand National Assembly, which was expected to be on vacation during the extraordinary summer heat, and will resume this Fall. This ongoing dispute arises from the government’s refusal to acknowledge the Constitutional Court’s decision, despite its finality, following 30 years of women’s advocacy. The issue has escalated into a dispute over whether the obligation for women to take the surname of their male spouse upon marriage should continue despite the binding annulment decision of the Constitutional Court.

Today, executive and legislative bodies have taken on the task of protecting the fortress of patriarchy regarding the surname of married women. The women’s struggle and the legal victory acknowledged by the Constitutional Court are being disregarded. The government has included the surname of married women in the 9th Judicial Package, which is an omnibus bill, as if it necessitates a change in the law. According to the draft law, married women will not be able to take their premarital surname alone; instead, the draft seeks to reinstate the provision that the Constitutional Court annulled as unconstitutional. The deliberations on the draft law, which commenced on July 11, 2024, lasted for 20.5 hours and ended on July 12. The nonstop deliberations were held in the Turkish Grand National Assembly (TGNA), which was forced to convene by postponing the summer recess. Ankara witnessed the most brutal and heated summer in terms of women’s rights. Despite the intense debates within the Commission, the ruling majority was not swayed. The draft was not presented to the General Assembly for a final vote and has been deferred until after the summer recess.

Although there have been reports that the draft law might be withdrawn due to the communication efforts and struggles of the women’s movement led by the Women’s Platform for Equality (EŞİK), some prominent members of the ruling party, and the Ministry of Family and Social Services, there is still no official confirmation. In the new legislative term, commencing in October at the end of the summer vacation, there remains the possibility that the government will pursue the enactment of this law in the General Assembly of the Turkish Grand National Assembly. It is evident that a prolonged and challenging battle will persist in Parliament. Women’s rights organizations and Bar Associations are closely monitoring the situation. This struggle is a unified effort: to protect the rule of law by enforcing court rulings, to resist a ruling-controlled legislature from undermining legal victories, and to challenge patriarchy in defense of women’s existence and identities.

Nezahat Doğan Demi̇ray is a doctor of constitutional law who works on women’s human rights, poverty and gender inequality. She is a member of the World March of Women in Turkey.