12.09.2025 16:41
As the congress case to be seen on September 15 is expected to result in a trustee decision, CHP's 7th General Chairman Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, who has been criticized for remaining silent on these developments, has made his first evaluation. CHP Central Executive Board member Ali Haydar Fırat reported that during his conversation with Kılıçdaroğlu, he stated, "I won't say anything until I see the decision."
On September 15, CHP's 7th General President Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, who has been criticized for remaining silent in the face of the convention case and "trustee" allegations, made his first evaluation. CHP PM member Ali Haydar Fırat shared what was discussed during his meeting with Kılıçdaroğlu.
"I WON'T SAY ANYTHING WITHOUT SEEING THE DECISION"
Fırat described his conversation with Kılıçdaroğlu during a program he attended on TV100 as follows:
"Yesterday, I met with Kemal Bey. He said, 'I won't say anything without seeing the decision.' Besides that, we discussed national issues. We shared analyses based on his meetings with some academics. We discussed Kemal Tahir's book, Devlet Ana. I explained that I criticize the conceptualization of the state by the left in Turkey, that Western-centered analyses are insufficient, and that there is a need for a local conceptualization. We also talked about an article I wrote on this subject."
##19039251##
KILIÇDAROĞLU DID NOT RESPOND TO ÖZEL'S CALL
When Kılıçdaroğlu was photographed leaving his office today, he was asked about the call made to him by CHP leader Özgür Özel. Kılıçdaroğlu smiled and got into his vehicle without answering the journalists' question. Yesterday, Kılıçdaroğlu had also remained silent in response to a similar question in the Parliament, raising his hands and then heading to his vehicle.
ÖZEL'S "HE SHOULD MAKE A STATEMENT" OUTBURST
CHP General President Özgür Özel made a striking call regarding Kılıçdaroğlu's silence in an interview with journalist Ruşen Çakır.
Özel stated, "It would be very valuable for him to say that the CHP cannot be designed by the judiciary, that it cannot be managed by trustees; that decisions to be made with political guidance regarding congresses would be a coup attempt against the party. He needs to declare that he is the most important guarantee against this."
WHAT HAPPENED?
The investigation initiated by the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor's Office regarding the allegations of irregularities during the 38th Ordinary Congress of the CHP held on November 4-5, 2023, was completed on June 3. In the prepared indictment, it was requested that 12 people, including Ekrem İmamoğlu, who is detained in a corruption investigation and removed from the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality, be sentenced to up to 3 years in prison and political bans for the crime of 'manipulating the vote' under Article 112 of the Political Parties Law.
The indictment was sent to the Ankara 26th Criminal Court of First Instance. The court ruled 'lack of jurisdiction' on the grounds that the bribery allegations were serious crimes and ordered the file to be sent to the heavy penal court. The Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor's Office objected to the transfer of the file to the Ankara 3rd Heavy Penal Court. The lack of jurisdiction decision was lifted by the Ankara 3rd Heavy Penal Court's ruling dated June 30, 2025. The Ankara 26th Criminal Court of First Instance again issued a 'lack of jurisdiction' decision on July 4, sending the file to the 5th Criminal Chamber of the Ankara Regional Court of Justice for resolution of the jurisdiction dispute. The 5th Criminal Chamber of the Ankara Regional Court of Justice definitively decided that the competent court regarding the case opened about the CHP's congress was the Ankara 26th Criminal Court of First Instance.
APPLICATION TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT
Re-examining the file, the Ankara 26th Criminal Court of First Instance evaluated that the provision in the relevant article of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) that states, 'Objections can be made against the decisions of lack of jurisdiction given by the courts within the judicial jurisdiction' is unconstitutional. The court concluded that the provision contradicts Articles 2, 6, 9, 10, 13, 36, 37, 38, and 141 of the Constitution, which regulate the principles of the rule of law, judicial independence, and the right to a fair trial, and decided to send the file to the Constitutional Court for annulment of the decision.
CONSTITUTIONAL COURT REJECTED THE REQUEST
The Constitutional Court announced its decision regarding the annulment request made by the Ankara 26th Criminal Court of First Instance concerning the jurisdiction dispute between the courts in the criminal case opened due to the allegations of irregularities at the CHP's 38th Ordinary Congress. The Constitutional Court rejected the request for annulment of the relevant provision of the CPC on the grounds that 'there is no rule applicable in the case.'