At the hearing held by the Istanbul 33rd High Criminal Court in the hall opposite the Marmara Closed Penal Institution, the defendant driver Oğuz Kaan Demircioğlu, who was not under arrest, made his defense.
Defendant Demircioğlu said that he stood by his statement he had previously given to the prosecutor's office.
In his cross-examination, the public prosecutor said, "In your statement, you mention the delivery of money to Ahmet Şahin." The defendant Demircioğlu said, "Yes." he replied.
Demircioğlu, the prosecutor asked, "Why did you call Ahmet Şahin on FaceTime? Who said to call in this way? Did you have any contact before?" "He requested it. I met him 3 times. I had a phone call 3 times. I met him 3 times. I did not have any other meetings with him. I got to know Ahmet Şahin later, he became a municipal council member. He was later elected deputy mayor, but I did not know him at that time." he replied.
The prosecutor asked, "How many times did you give money? How did the delivery process take place, where did you meet? How did the money delivery happen?" Defendant Demircioğlu answered the questions: "I gave him money twice and met him three times. I met him at the construction site in Çırpıcı. The construction site belongs to Ali (Nuhoğlu) Bey. I sent the location myself via WhatsApp, he came there. He came with his driver. I delivered it to the trunk, I handed it over to him." he replied.
DEFENSE OF BUSINESS PERSON FURKAN REMZİ CEYLAN
Furkan Remzi Ceylan, the unarrested defendant businessman, stated in his defense that the statement of effective regret he gave to the prosecutor's office on July 1, 2025 is exactly valid, and made the following statement: "My family has been in the construction industry for many years. I, too, come from a family that has successfully completed and delivered many projects in exchange for flats with my family. Therefore, I am a person trained in the construction business from the core. I worked as a SGK holder at Ali Nuhoğlu company. In the following period, I also worked with Ali Bey." "I worked as a SGK employee. Then, after completing my personal ventures, I became a subcontractor in Ali Bey's biggest project. There are many commercial relations between me and him within the scope of these subcontracting works. I have already repeated this in all my statements. Within the scope of the business relations in this project, all of these are official and legal."
Defendant Ceylan said the following about the action subject to the indictment: "On the day of the incident, Ali Bey (Nuhoğlu) asked me for a loan of approximately 66 million liras. I never asked why he asked me for this money, since I had engaged in this money traffic with him many times before. After sending him the money, he asked me if I could deliver this money to the person called İbrahim Bülbüllü, who had an office in Beylikdüzü. I said that I could deliver it because I was available that day. Afterwards, I withdrew the money from the bank with a personnel authorized by him, went to İbrahim Bülbüllü's office in Beylikdüzü and handed over 1.5 million dollars to him, and then left the office.
In his cross-examination, the public prosecutor asked, "Is this 60 million lira money from the 200 million lira coming from KİPTAŞ?" he asked the question.
Defendant Ceylan said, "Yes. We entered into a process at KİPTAŞ. It is the advance payment for the tender. We have already sent the payment to Mr. Ali's account through the bank." he replied.
The prosecutor asked, "Is it true that an advance of 200 million liras is coming from KİPTAŞ now? On what date does the advance arrive?" Defendant Ceylan answered the question: "Yes. The advance payment is due around March 2024." he replied.
Ceylan said the prosecutor said, "After the payment is made, Mr. Ali asks you for a loan." "Yes." he said.
DEFENSE OF UNARRESTED DEFENDANT ADEM ALTINTAŞ
Defendant city planner Adem Altıntaş, who is not under arrest, said that he stands by his statement at the prosecutor's office regarding the protests.
In his cross-examination, when the public prosecutor asked him to explain the nursery construction incident included in the indictment, the defendant Altıntaş made the following statement:
"Mr. Emrah (Resul Emrah Şahan), after we explained the issue to him, said that they could be positive about this change in the zoning plan, but requested the construction of a nursery. We met with the owner. The owner accepted this request and then, beforehand, the owner wanted to build the nursery himself. But there are probably some protocol processes here that need to be carried out regarding the donation. There is a company currently carrying out the construction. It belongs to Adem Soytekin. I learned about that company during the prosecutor's investigation. I came here. "We received feedback that if you transfer this money, we will build the nursery, and the process progressed that way."
The prosecutor asked, "Were you settled after the checks were issued?" The defendant Altıntaş said, "We are talking about a very long process. The municipality also had an election at that time. The process was very complicated there, but it was approved as of the last moment." he replied.
Defendant Altıntaş said that the public prosecutor said, "It is about Action 39, the Profilo AVM issue. Again, according to your statements, you had a meeting with Resul Emrah Şahan during this process. There is a demand of 1.5 million dollars. What are the details of this issue?" "He made a request regarding the New Year's lighting. This request was for the lighting to be done. Afterwards, they got the license, it is a legal right, but they asked if they would do this regarding this. So, there is no demand for money here." he replied.
"THEY HAD TO BUY A 4 MILLION DOLLAR GARBAGE TRUCK"
When the prosecutor asked about his knowledge about action 42 in the indictment, the defendant Altıntaş said: "Just as I have done consultancy in many projects in the private sector, I also carried out a consultancy process in this project. The process started with the construction of a cultural center located right behind M., then the demand turned into the need for a garbage truck, and a process was carried out regarding the purchase of a garbage truck by M. making an official donation to the municipality. Here, too, the municipality normally asked for a garbage truck from them. The process was in the form of a donation to the municipality and the municipality purchasing the garbage truck. carried out."
The prosecutor said, "Again, it was said in your office that you were given 400 thousand dollars regarding this M. process. What do you say about that issue?" Defendant Altıntaş answered the question: "Our agreement was that part of the 1.5 million dollar consultancy fee was paid with an official invoice and part of it was paid in person. They wanted to pay some of it in person." he replied.
Defendant Altıntaş asked the prosecutor, "M.'s owner describes these donations as extortion. Have the parties involved in these donation transactions and processes asked you whether this is a donation or a bribe?" "They were not very happy. Buying a 4 million dollar garbage truck did not make them very happy, but they had to buy it." He replied:
The public prosecutor said, "You had a meeting with Mr. Resul Emrah Şahan. You made a statement in which you mentioned your reservations. What were your reservations? How did you express this situation to him? In your statement, you talked about a profitable aspect. You talked about professional reputation. You talked about the reservations in the process. Did you express these to Resul Emrah Şahan? Did they have information?" he asked the questions.
Defendant Altıntaş answered the question as follows: "After the 6-month consultancy process, I already told him that I did not want to continue this process after the contract I made with the company. I made very clear statements to the municipality about purchasing a garbage truck and that I do not want to be involved in such actions, I do not like them very much, and I want to be involved in the project development and other parts of the event. Because they are not things that investors enjoy doing very much anyway. I informed him that these processes are not very suitable for me."
The prosecutor said, "'Hakan Karademir handles such cash transactions in the municipality.' You have a clear statement: The defendant Altıntaş said, "There is a part that was requested from me, but in the rest of the part, it was completely private sector, the license and settlement processes were carried out through it. Some of it was in the form of buying iron stock, they needed iron. I delivered some of it in cash." he replied.
During the hearings, the defense of a total of 306 undetained defendants was completed.
The hearing was postponed until tomorrow to continue taking the defense statements of the defendants who were not detained.
