04.06.2026 13:50
The court case filed in the Ankara 3rd Civil Court of First Instance, seeking the annulment of all decisions made at the 38th Ordinary Congress of the CHP and the Istanbul Provincial Congress, and the absolute nullity and voidance of the congress, has been dismissed.
At the hearing in the Ankara 3rd Civil Court of First Instance, the defendant CHP's lawyer, Kadri Gökhan Sultan, was present, while the plaintiff's lawyer, Onur Yusuf Üregen, did not attend the hearing, citing an excuse.
The presiding judge stated that the plaintiffs, who sought the annulment of the Istanbul Provincial Congress, had renounced their case. Subsequently, lawyer Sultan, who was given the floor, requested the dismissal of the case.
CASE DISMISSED
Announcing the decision, the judge rejected the request for the annulment of the Istanbul Provincial Congress due to the renunciation of the case. The judge noted that another lawsuit regarding the CHP's 38th Ordinary Convention had also been filed in a different court and that case was pending, and therefore ruled for the dismissal of the case on these grounds as well.
BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
A lawsuit had also been filed in the Ankara 3rd Civil Court of First Instance regarding the CHP's 38th Ordinary Convention and the Istanbul Provincial Congress, alleging that "delegates were provided with benefits, corrupting their will," seeking the annulment of all decisions and the declaration of the convention and congress as void due to absolute nullity.
In the hearing held on September 11, 2025, the court had decided to dismiss the case on procedural grounds, citing that the lawsuit regarding the 38th Ordinary Convention held on November 4-5, 2023, was continuing in the Ankara 42nd Civil Court of First Instance, and that there was an ongoing case on the same subject.
Additionally, the court had ruled for the dismissal of the lawsuit filed against the CHP Istanbul Provincial Directorate due to "lack of passive standing."
After the plaintiff's lawyer, Onur Yusuf Üregen, objected to the decision, the case file was transferred to the appellate court.
The 4th Civil Chamber of the Ankara Regional Court of Justice found the local court's decision to dismiss the case on the grounds of "lack of passive standing" to be "contrary to the right to a fair hearing" because the verdict was rendered in the absence of the plaintiff, who had an excuse.
Stating that it was also a procedural error to render a decision before the legal deadlines for the parties to present their evidence had expired, the chamber overturned the decision of the Ankara 3rd Civil Court of First Instance and ordered a retrial of the case.