İmamoğlu said that he has been waiting for a response to MİT regarding the spying allegation for 4 months.

At the hearing held at the Istanbul 25th High Criminal Court, in the hall opposite the Marmara Closed Penal Institution, the detained defendant Ekrem İmamoğlu made his defense.

Stating that he has been subjected to a process in which he has been dealt with nearly 20 cases in two years, İmamoğlu said, "I am currently struggling with 13 criminal cases. I am living in an environment where my fair trial is completely prevented by changing nearly 23 judges in these courts. I say close to 23, I cannot count anymore, how many people have changed, who came, who went, who is who? We have come to a point where we cannot even recognize the judges from one court to another." he said.

İmamoğlu said the following in his defense: "I am facing a different accusation in each of the judicial processes carried out against me since March 19. I go to many hearings in these halls. One day I have to defend my diploma. What am I going to defend? One day I am asked to explain my municipal activities, the other day my official car. In other words, I refuse the rental car, which I see has a monthly rent of 200 thousand liras in today's money, and I allocate my own car to the municipality for public use, free of charge. I'm being judged by this."

Stating that he sometimes attended 3 hearings on the same day, and sometimes 5 hearings in 5 days, İmamoğlu said, "I am facing the charge of espionage. Today, we continue to make a mark in history with 2 hearings on the same day. In other words, those who betray their country, work with foreign powers... This is what we are told. We are told that we are a person who acts against the security of the state. By whom? He is the person who wrote this in the prosecution office, for which I pray for God to give wisdom. They say this. Get out of there." he said.

İmamoğlu made the following statement: "Is there any espionage activity or not? This court asked this directly to the National Intelligence Organization (MİT). It asked not once, but twice. We have been waiting for MİT to answer 2 very simple questions for 4 months since May. Does MİT have a report or determination that I and my other friends on trial are engaged in espionage activities? The data said to belong to Mr. Hüseyin Gün and 'Is the data said to belong to ibb.gov.tr among the information that must remain confidential due to its nature, in terms of the security of the state or its internal or external political interests, within the scope of Article 328 1 of the Turkish Penal Code?

Expressing that he felt sorry for the nation, not for himself, İmamoğlu said, "Because you are not interested in the material reality. If the MIT does not respond for years, will you continue to expect that what does not exist does not exist? Will you continue to hold us captive for years?" he said.

Having completed his defense, Ekrem İmamoğlu left here to attend the hearing of the "İmamoğlu profit-oriented criminal organization" case, which was held in the other hall.

WITNESSES WERE HEARD

Witness Zeynep Şen, who was heard through the Audio and Video Information System (SEGBİS) at the hearing, said that she started working as a secretary in Seher Alaçam's office in 2005, was promoted to assistant within 6 months, and that she knew the defendant Hüseyin Gün from there.

Stating that he has known Gün since 2005, Şen said, "I was Seher Alaçam's assistant. Hüseyin Gün was first introduced to me as Seher Hanım's nephew. Later, in the following periods, Hüseyin Bey called Seher Hanım 'Mother.' he started to say. When Mr. Hüseyin had business meetings, I would arrange meals out or plane tickets at work. "I was mostly Ms. Seher's personal assistant." he said.

When asked what he said about some of Hüseyin Gün's speeches in his previous statements, Şen said, "After 2016, yes, Mr. Hüseyin was saying, 'It is impossible to live in this country anyway, they will seize the bank accounts.' As a result, an account was opened abroad, in Switzerland, and the money went abroad in batches. Later, Hüseyin Bey founded a company in America, and money was transferred to that company from time to time." he claimed.

Witness Berkay Yağlıcı, in his statement via SEGBİS, said that he knew Merdan Yanardağ because he used to go to Hüseyin Gün. Explaining that he was Seher Alaçam's driver, Yağlıcı said: "Since Hüseyin Bey lived with Seher Hanım, I was also his driver. Hüseyin Bey and I became closer after Seher Hanım's death. We started going and coming together more. I also know Merdan Bey because I brought him aid or money during the election period. He had an assistant driver, Tamer Bey. I called Tamer Bey and told Merdan Bey to go to his office that way. "I had his contact number, but I did not have Mr. Merdan's contact number."

The President of the Court said: "'I was taking money.' you said. What money were you bringing?" Responding to the question, Yağlıcı said, "Sometimes Hüseyin Bey would put it in an envelope, I would withdraw it from the bank, I would take it and deliver it. He said, 'We are helping.' he was sending. 'Let us also contribute.' he was sending. "I was taking him to Mr. Merdan." he replied.

Yağlıcı asked, "How much money did you take with you this way?" "I was withdrawing from the bank, he was putting it in an envelope, but for example, 5 thousand euros, 10 thousand euros, that way. I was withdrawing it myself. Mr. Hüseyin gave instructions, but I did not put it in the envelope myself. I withdrew 10 thousand euros from Hüseyin Gün's account, I withdrew 5 thousand euros on different days. He told me to deliver it personally to Mr. Merdan. So I was looking for Mr. Tamer, he came to Merdan Bey at the entrance of his office. "I handed it over to the turnstiles." He replied:

Speaking on the claims of the witness, the defendant Merdan Yanardağ said, "I did not receive any money. It is not possible for someone to bring me money and give me money, even for the operator of the channel. I may have seen the witness, maybe because he was Seher Hanım's driver. Seher Hanım would come and go from time to time. Because Seher Hanım was a supporter of Tele 1. Seher Hanım used to give sponsorship support to Tele 1 within the framework of our campaign, she was small, small. I did not receive any money from her. A driver came to me in front of the turnstiles. "Giving money with an envelope is against the normal flow of our workplace. It is not possible to have a relationship with such a driver, bringing or taking money with an envelope." he claimed.

At the hearing, Seher Alaçam's son Ümit Deniz Alaçam also testified as a "witness" by connecting to the hearing via SEGBİS.

CONTINUATION OF DETENTION OF THE DEFENDANTS WAS REQUESTED

The Public Prosecutor, who was asked for his opinion, requested that the fate of the warrants written to the MİT Presidency be asked and that it be decided to continue the detention of the defendants due to the current state of evidence and the nature and nature of the crime charged against them.

At the hearing, which continued after a break, the detained defendants Hüseyin Gün, Necati Özkan and Merdan Yanardağ and their lawyers were asked what they would say against the statements of the witnesses and the opinion of the prosecutor.

After the statements of the defendants and their lawyers were completed, the court panel announced its interim decision. The committee decided to continue the detention of the defendants Ekrem İmamoğlu, Necati Özkan, Merdan Yanardağ and Hüseyin Gün. The court postponed the hearing to December 23 to correct the deficiencies.