In the 97th hearing of the trial of 436 defendants, 53 of whom are detained, regarding the "İmamoğlu profit-oriented criminal organization", the defense of some detained defendants continues to be taken. At the hearing held by the Istanbul 33rd High Criminal Court in the hall opposite the Marmara Closed Penal Institution, the detained defendant, IBB Sports Club President Fatih Keleş, made his defense within the scope of the additional indictment.
Defendant Keleş argued that it was out of the question for him to give any instructions or directives to the public officials of Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality and the managers and employees of Ağaç A.Ş., who organized the tender, or even to influence or suggest them, and claimed that he even learned about the existence of these tenders and works from the additional indictment, and that he did not know the owners of the companies that won the tender. Stating that his name was not mentioned at any stage of the processes, Keleş noted that Ertan Yıldız was the chairman's advisor responsible for the subsidiaries for 5 years and the chairman of the board of directors of İstanbul Yönetimi AŞ for the last year. Defendant Keleş stated that the subsidiaries were under the coordination and management of Yıldız.
Repeating his defenses and demands against the main indictment, Keleş requested his acquittal in terms of all the actions for which he was asked to be punished in the supplementary indictment.
DEFENSE OF AĞAÇ AŞ GENERAL MANAGER ALİ SUKAS
Another detained defendant, Ağaç A.Ş. General Manager Ali Sukas, also made a defense within the scope of the additional indictment. Defendant Sukas stated that Ağaç AŞ's job is not just about receiving a tender from IMM and distributing it to other companies, and said, "The company has production, nurseries, stocks, garden market activities, retail and corporate sales and sales to different customers. In addition, it carries out the works undertaken against IMM." he said.
Arguing that it is necessary to know or examine all of these activities in order to understand for what purpose, under which file a purchased product was purchased and where it went, Sukas made the following statement: "Counting every plant, every amount of fertilizer, medicine, construction material or irrigation materials or similar consumables purchased in the same year as an expense of a single IMM contract can only result from not understanding the actual functioning of the company. At the same time, Ağaç AŞ undertakes work from the same unit or different units of Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality with very different contracts and multiple contracts in the same year. "These purchases may be for each of these contracts, or they may be outside them, or they may be for commercial purposes. My duty is to ensure that these works are carried out without disrupting each other, within the framework of the budget we have prepared and approved within the scope of legal responsibility at Ağaç AŞ, and the company's approved strategic plan and targets."
Sukas argued that meeting the needs, continuation of production, supply, delivery and the company's solvency must be considered together. Saying that the purchase price cannot be considered alone when evaluating a request, Sukas explained that the stock status of the product, when and where the requested product will be used, planning of the sewing personnel, that is, knowing the field application and the financing required for the purchase, must be determined. Defendant Sukas denied the accusations made against him and asked for his release first and then his acquittal.
İmamoğlu will defend for 4 days
Presiding Judge Selçuk Aylan said that they gave the detained defendant Ekrem İmamoğlu time to make his defense tomorrow, Thursday, Friday and Saturday. The court is also expected to announce its interim decision on Saturday.
The hearing continues with the defense of the defendants.
