The 99th hearing of the 'İmamoğlu criminal organization for profit' case has ended
Quick Look
Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu, in the courtroom hearing in front of the Marmara Closed Penal Institution, rejected the bribery, extortion and other accusations against him, emphasized that it is mandatory to be accountable as a public official, and stated that he could not find a single public harm or personal benefit in the file.
AI-generated summary
Why It Matters
While İmamoğlu was serving as the Mayor of Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality, he became the subject of an investigation within the scope of bribery, extortion and other financial accusations regarding the actions taken in the area opposite the Marmara Closed Penitentiary Institution and he defended himself in the criminal court.
İmamoğlu, whose defense was taken at the hearing held by the Istanbul 33rd High Criminal Court in the hall opposite the Marmara Closed Penal Institution, said that being accountable is the most fundamental duty of a public official and therefore they do not refrain from being held accountable.
Talking about the investigations opened against him, İmamoğlu stated that they did not hold back from anything and that they were held accountable for everything. Stating that not a single penny of public damage could be detected as a result of the investigations and inspections, İmamoğlu said, "The so-called organization also has a management team. I showed you the organizational structure of the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality as an organization. Now I want to move on to the part about the managers that I have mentioned a little here. There are six names here, Murat Ongun is my consultant, Fatih Keleş was a member of the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Council and president of the Istanbul Metropolitan Sports Club, Ertan Yıldız is my consultant, Adem Soytekin is a businessman, Hüseyin "I don't know Gün at all, I know Murat Gülibrahimoğlu very little and he is a businessman." he said.
Explaining his acquaintance with the defendants, who are the managers of the organization in the indictment, İmamoğlu also explained how he worked with these people. Defendant İmamoğlu said, "There is no criminal organization, there is the glorious and honorable Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality, it has hundreds of patriotic administrators, hard-working civil servants, engineers and drivers. I am proud of all of them." he said.
İmamoğlu, who rejected the accusations regarding the actions in the Cebeci Mine site in the indictment, claimed that he had no responsibility in this place. Defendant İmamoğlu stated that 69 of the 155 actions were committed by bribery and said, "They said bribery, so whose pocket did the money go, who became rich? None. Which money went to which account? None. Is there a single document of this in the file? None. Is there a single bank record? None. What is in the file? There is a nursery, a school, a mosque, a dormitory, a sports facility, a parking lot, a cemevi, a public building, restored historical buildings." "There are parks, there are old historical buildings, they all belong to the people of Istanbul." he said.
Stating that the person who built the nursery was shown as a briber, İmamoğlu said, "What is described as bribery in this file is the gain of the city. There is no personal benefit, it is for the public benefit." he said. Claiming that there is not a single piece of evidence regarding the crime of 'laundering' in the indictment, İmamoğlu said, "They said 'he hid evidence', but no evidence was found. Four of the 155 acts are hiding evidence of crime. Which evidence did I hide? How did I hide it? It is not clear." he said.
Stating that the indictment includes "bribery, extortion, bid rigging, laundering, fraud, concealing evidence, seizing personal data, opposition to forest and mining laws" crimes related to 155 actions, İmamoğlu said, "Almost every crime mentioned in the criminal law has been put in this file. Why are so many, so many different accusations directed against a mayor? There is no legal explanation for this, the explanation is clearly political." made his defense.
What to Watch
AI outlook — possibilities, not facts
The court will announce its decision on the case next month.
Possible · Within weeks
Open Questions
- What is the evidence for the claim that 69 of the 155 acts mentioned within the scope of the investigation were corrupted?
- What exactly are the roles of the managers mentioned by İmamoğlu in these actions?
- Is it explained how it is shown that there is no public harm or personal interest in the file?





