The 'Corruption' investigation against Ekrem İmamoğlu, who was suspended from his post as the Mayor of Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality and arrested, was completed and a 3,809-page indictment was prepared on November 11, 2025. Ekrem İmamoğlu, who is mentioned as the 'organization leader' in the indictment; 'Establishing an organization for the purpose of committing a crime', 'Bribery', 'Laundering of proceeds of crime', 'Fraud to the detriment of public institutions and organizations', 'Recording personal data', 'Seizing and disseminating personal data', 'Hiding evidence of crime', 'Preventing communications', 'Damaging public property', 'Taking bribes', 'Publicly disseminating misleading information to the public', It was claimed that he committed the crimes of 'Extortion', 'Laundering of property values resulting from crime', 'Tender rigging', 'Deliberate pollution of the environment', 'Opposition to the tax procedure law', 'Opposition to the forest law' and 'Opposition to the mining law'. It is requested that İmamoğlu be sentenced to imprisonment from 828 years and 2 months to 2,352 years for 142 actions.
'I CAN'T REMEMBER EXACTLY'
Secret witness Gürgen, who was connected to the hearing via the SEGBİS system and whose voice and image were changed, said, "Tamer Gümüş founded the Sarıç Fidancılık company in 2021. At one time, purchases were made for both imported plants, local plants and tulip bulbs. Ali İhsan Mengir started with the rental of sieves. He later continued with purchases such as some plant materials, soil, fertilizer and fences." In his statement, the judge reminded Gürgen of Ali İhsan Mengir's statements that his companies received approximately 104 million TL worth of work from Ağaç A.Ş. in 2024 and that 15 million TL was paid for the construction in Ümraniye through Mengiroğlu İnşaat and said, "You gave these figures. Did you have documents in your hand when the statement was taken, where did you remember these figures?" he asked. Gürgen said, "I cannot remember the exact tender documents of that period, but I can give one of them, for example, the purchase of local peat, but I cannot remember the tender number exactly."
'IT'S NOT WHAT I SEEN, BUT THAT'S WHAT WAS TALKED ABOUT'
The judge asked Gürgen about his information about Ümit Polat. Gürgen said, "Ümit Polat is the purchasing manager. As a purchasing manager, he managed this process together with Ali Sukas because he knows the companies and the sector well." The judge asked, "What do you mean by this process?" Gürgen answered the question: "What I mean by this process is that they managed the departments related to the requested amounts, works, and to whom the work should be given." The judge reminded that Gürgen had stated in his statement that Murat Or had received money and said, "Do you have any testimony that you personally saw these? What did you make this statement about?" he asked. Gürgen said, "I haven't seen anything, but that's what was always said, sir." Gürgen answered the judge's question, "From what was said, what you heard, what you said. You do not have any testimony regarding the money exchange between Murat Or and Ümit Polat", and said, "No."
'IT IS NOT A STATEMENT TOLD TO ME SPECIFICALLY'
The judge asked Gürgen about his statements about Ertan Yıldız. Gürgen said, "Ertan Yıldız was already the advisor to the president responsible for the participants. He ensured the control of the payments that had to be made and collected from all the participants, including Ağaç A.Ş.. He would control it within that framework." The judge asked Ali Sukas' statement that he had exchanged money with Ertan Yıldız through his driver. Gürgen said, "The name of Ali Bey, the general manager's driver, was Ahmet, that's how I remember it. Some statements such as 'I'm going to Bakırköy, I'm going to the cafeteria, I'm going to leave something for President Ertan' were spoken in certain environments, and I heard it. I gave my statement this way because it was spoken in certain environments. He did not tell me. It is not a statement that was specifically told to me. It has been 1.5 years. It is not possible for me to remember exactly. I tried to explain it as much as I remember." he said.
'I HAVE NO DIRECT WITNESSMENT'
Secret witness Zeytin said, "I repeat the statements I gave in the judicial office. There were some payments received in the transactions related to the silhouette approval at the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Zoning Directorate, there were some events that I witnessed in the Bosphorus region, especially on the Anatolian side. I explained these and explained that some officials obtained benefits in some works."
The presiding judge asked, "Do you have any direct eyewitness, knowledge or testimony regarding the provision of a benefit?" Zeytin said "no" to the question.
'HE WANTED US TO CLOSE THE DEBT'
Witness Atilla Demir said, "We had started the license work for the Profilo Shopping Mall project in Şişli Municipality. Meanwhile, Adem Altıntaş called and said he wanted to meet. We met with him in his office. He told us that he could help us with zoning and licensing matters and speed up the process. After that, the municipality had a debt regarding lighting and he asked us to pay off that debt. I told him that I did not have the authority and that I had to meet with Mr. Süleyman. We met with Mr. Süleyman, but he did not accept such a payment." he said.
'IMAMOGLU AND ONGUN MADE THE DETERMINATIONS'
Witness Selman Narman said, "I have made some statements within the scope of the organization of outdoor advertising area tenders, concept design works, held by Kültür A.Ş. The most important of these is the section regarding outdoor advertising area tenders. These tenders were received by Kültür A.Ş. from IMM and Medya A.Ş., and then divided into sections and given to sub-companies. However, these are tenders whose winner and tender price are determined in advance. These are tenders made as a formality. These determinations were made by Ekrem İmamoğlu and Murat "Ongun does it. I know this not with my own statement, but with the instructions of my superiors," he said.
Narman, former Kültür A.Ş., after the tenders were received. Stating that he was called to a meeting by the General Manager, the defendant Serdal Taşkın, he said, "The deputy general manager, Doğan Hamit Doğruer, was also present at the meeting. First, he took our phones and left them in the drawer on the other side of the hall. Then he came and sat down and said, 'yes, friends, we are going to Saraçhane, finally the decision has been made, we are starting the sub-tenders.' He shared information about how many sections of the tenders would be spent, which section would be given to which company and what the price would be. Then, he gave instructions to prepare the sub-files. He prepared the tenders in this way." "we became," he said.
THE HEARING HAS BEEN POSTPONED
The hearing will continue tomorrow at 10:00.
