New decision in the CHP congress case! The decision of lack of jurisdiction has been lifted.

01.07.2025 14:33

The Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor's Office announced that the decision of lack of jurisdiction issued by the Ankara 26th Criminal Court of First Instance has been overturned by the Ankara 3rd Heavy Criminal Court. Following this decision, the congress case will be heard in the criminal court of first instance.

A new development has occurred in the case opened with the allegation of irregularities at the 38th congress of the CHP.

A case was filed at the Ankara 26th Criminal Court of First Instance for the prosecution of suspects regarding the violation of Article 112 of the Political Parties Law related to the 38th congress of the Republican People's Party. The court's decision of lack of jurisdiction was overturned by the Ankara 3rd Heavy Criminal Court's decision dated June 30.

LACK OF JURISDICTION DECISION OVERTURNED

The statement from the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor's Office is as follows:

"In the case filed at the Ankara 26th Criminal Court of First Instance for the prosecution of suspects regarding the violation of Article 112 of the Political Parties Law related to the 38th congress of the Republican People's Party, the court's decision of lack of jurisdiction has been overturned by the Ankara 3rd Heavy Criminal Court's decision dated June 30, 2025."

THE CASE WILL BE HANDLED BY THE CRIMINAL COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

Thus, the case will be handled by the criminal court of first instance.

WHAT HAPPENED IN THE 3RD HEARING OF THE CONGRESS CASE?

The case regarding the annulment of the 38th Ordinary Congress of the CHP, which took place on November 4-5, 2023, and the 21st Extraordinary Congress on April 6, 2025, was last seen in 3 hearings.

In the hearing at the Ankara 42nd Civil Court of First Instance, the lawyers of the CHP, Çağlar Çağlayan and Mehmet Can Keysan, along with the lawyer of the congress delegates, Onur Yusuf Üregen, attended.

"CRIMES WERE COMMITTED AT THE CONGRESS"

The judge announced that the party statute valid as of November 4-5, 2023, had been sent to the case file and read the names of those who requested to intervene in the case. The lawyers of the parties were given the floor regarding the incoming documents and requests. Lawyer Üregen stated that they objected to the intervention requests, claiming that this was an attempt to prolong the case.

Üregen, who claimed that the congress was absolutely invalid due to the chairman of the congress, Ekrem İmamoğlu, not acting impartially, argued that this situation was established in the indictment of the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor's Office and in the reasoned decision of the 26th Criminal Court of First Instance.

Üregen alleged that many crimes were committed involving numerous perpetrators to ensure that candidate Özgür Özel won the election for the party leadership under İmamoğlu's coordination, reminding that a case was opened against 12 people, and investigations were ongoing against more than 100 suspects, 9 of whom were members of parliament.

"THE WILL OF THE DELEGATE WAS MANIPULATED"

Üregen, who claimed that bribes were given to delegates before the congress and that both in-kind and cash benefits were provided, said:

"Jobs were given unlawfully and against the public interest before and after the congress in municipalities managed by mayors supporting Özgür Özel. Fake tenders were awarded unlawfully and against the public interest in municipalities managed by mayors supporting Özgür Özel before and after the congress. It was pressured that employees and their relatives working in municipalities managed by mayors supporting Özgür Özel would be dismissed if they did not support Özel. Evidence has shown that there was pressure on those who did not support Özel that they and their relatives would be dismissed if Özel won the congress. The congress was also marred by the unlawful practices of the chairman.

In this context, a healthy delegate will was prevented from forming by violating the minimum 3-hour period mandated by the statute between the two elections. Organized pressure was exerted on the candidate Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu to withdraw his candidacy as we detailed, and false information was spread that he had withdrawn, thus distorting the will of the delegates and the congress. The chairman intervened in the vote counting process, unlawfully canceling 18 votes cast in favor of candidate Kılıçdaroğlu in the first election, creating the perception that Özel would win and manipulating the will of the delegates."

Üregen stated that the 38th ordinary congress of the CHP was marred by organized crimes that violated constitutional imperative provisions, public order, and the minimum requirements of democracy, declaring that the said congress was absolutely invalid.

Üregen stated, "The decision for the Extraordinary Congress was made by an unauthorized chairman. If a decision of invalidity is made regarding the 38th Ordinary Congress, this congress call should be considered null and void as it was made by an unauthorized chairman. We request that it be decided that the CHP 21st Extraordinary Congress dated April 6, 2025, is null and void, and for the sake of preserving public order, the current CHP administration should be temporarily removed from office until the end of the case, and the previous chairman and decision-making bodies should be called to duty, and our case should be accepted as we requested."

"THE COURT MUST ISSUE A DECISION OF LACK OF JURISDICTION"

The defendant's lawyer, Çağlar Çağlayan, requested the acceptance of the intervention requests that came to the file between the hearings.

Çağlayan stated, "The request for intervention does not have a prolonging aspect to the trial. The plaintiffs' lawyer stated that the chairman of the congress did not act impartially, but the congress consists of 9 members, and decisions are made by majority vote. The fact that the chairman was not on duty at the congress, that he delegated his duties to the election court judge, and that the processes were carried out by the election court judge does not mean that the chairman conducted an unlawful election."

Çağlayan argued that the court should consider that witnesses in the criminal trial did not testify, asserting that the criminal trial should be awaited, and if the defendants were acquitted in the criminal trial, the trial would be dragged into an irretrievable and irreparable situation.

Claiming that judicial courts are not authorized to examine the congress elections of political parties according to the YSK decision and Supreme Court precedents, Çağlayan continued his statements:

"Political party congresses consist of two stages. All objections regarding the election are made to the election board, and the election judge makes a final decision. The matters for which intervention is requested in the case are the election results. Judicial courts do not have the authority to examine the processes and results of political party congress elections. Objecting to the results of political party congress elections conducted under judicial supervision in court is clearly against Article 21 of the Political Parties Law, which is a special law. In this respect, the court must issue a decision of lack of jurisdiction.

The court does not have the authority to decide who will manage political parties. In party congresses conducted under judicial supervision, the objection period is kept short, and the result is requested to be announced as soon as possible. This causes elected officials to be under pressure while performing their duties under the constant threat of court. The request for absolute invalidity requires acting in accordance with the rules of honesty."Sure! Here is the translated text while preserving the existing HTML structure and translating the `title` and `alt` attributes within any `img` tags:



```html

A result has emerged from the 38th Ordinary Congress, and the party has been managed accordingly. One of the plaintiffs has become a candidate for mayor with the decision of the management elected at the 38th Ordinary Congress. The subsequent statement by the plaintiffs, 'I know some things regarding the day of the congress,' is inconsistent with the principle of honesty.

Çağlayan, who argued that the statute of limitations for filing a lawsuit regarding the congress has expired and that the case should be dismissed on this basis, stated that political parties should be managed by those elected at their congresses, and that it is contrary to the spirit of the law to leave the management of the party to someone else through court intervention.

The defendant's lawyer, Mehmet Can Keysan, also requested the dismissal of the case and a decision to accept the intervention requests.

The lawyers of the intervenors participating in the case stated that they fully agreed with the statements of the CHP deputies and requested a decision to dismiss the case.

The plaintiff's lawyer, Üregen, stated, "We do not have a request for the appointment of a trustee. There is no need to wait for the outcome of the criminal proceedings for this case. It is evident that the will of the delegates has been cumulatively impaired. There is a matter of suspicion at hand, and this suspicion should be evaluated and revealed in the presence of the court. This is not a political case; it is a legal case."

THE CASE HAS BEEN POSTPONED TO SEPTEMBER 8

After the statements, the court announced its interim decision and accepted the intervention requests. The court decided to wait for the outcome of the objection to the lack of jurisdiction in the criminal proceedings and postponed the hearing to September 8.

WHAT HAD HAPPENED?

The Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor's Office prepared an indictment against 12 people, including Ekrem İmamoğlu, İzmir Metropolitan Mayor Cemil Tugay, CHP Istanbul Provincial Chairman Özgür Çelik, Beşiktaş Mayor Rıza Akpolat, CHP Bursa Provincial Chairman Nihat Yeşiltaş, and CHP Erzurum Provincial Chairman Serhat Can Eş, for the crime of "violating the political parties law."

The indictment included allegations that some delegates were induced to vote in exchange for benefits during the congress held by the CHP at the Ankara Sports Hall on November 4-5, 2023.

The prepared indictment requested up to 3 years of imprisonment for 12 individuals under Article 112 of the Political Parties Law No. 2820 and Articles 53 and 37 of the Turkish Penal Code.