69 T urkey’s Constitutional Court occu- pies a central and controversial place in Turkish politics and in Turkey’s legal system. Its role and functions have attracted diferent reactions and responses, both within Turkey and beyond. While some –especially those in favor of secularism (laikler)—praise the court for its service as a watchdog over- seeing the regime, some others – both among conservatives and liberals—harshly criticize its actions and even question why such an insti- tution exists. Critics mostly make reference to the court’s attempts to shape the political sphere, arguing that this is a role that should be played by political parties alone. his study seeks to address the following questions: what political role does the Consti- tutional Court play in Turkey? On what justi- ications does it rely in delivering its politically and legally controversial rulings? Are there any Constitutional Court: Its Limits to Shape Turkish Politics * Eskişehir Osmangazi University, Department of International Relations, cenapcakmak@yahoo.com ** Eskişehir Osmangazi University, Department of International Relations, cdinc@ogu.edu.tr his paper argues that the Turkish Constitutional Court acts within a set of limitations which signiicantly afect its inal judgments. he court’s major consideration and motivation in its deliberations over political cases has primarily been to guard the regime and order, as deined and outlined by a fairly pro- state interpretation. To study the Court’s involvement in political cases, this study examines two types of cases, which will help identify the parameters restricting the Court’s ability to proceed with its expected role. In party closure cases, the Court has considered the probable threat posed by the political party under review; accordingly, its rulings have mostly been in line with the prosecutor’s indictment. he same also applies to cases concerning the headscarf ban, a sensitive issue that could be seen as a fault line in Turkey’s social and political life. ABSTRACT Insight Turkey Vol. 12 / No. 4 / 2010 pp. 69-92 CENAP ÇAKMAK* and CENGİZ DİNÇ**