30.03.2025 14:31
The Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office has launched an investigation against political scientist Onur Alp Yılmaz for his statement "The boycott should spread to general consumption" made during a TV program, on charges of 'hate and discrimination' and 'inciting the public to hatred and hostility.'
Political scientist Onur Alp Yılmaz has been subjected to an ex officio investigation for his statements made during a program broadcast on Halk TV, where he claimed that "it prevents a segment of the public from engaging in economic activity," on charges of 'hate and discrimination' and 'inciting the public to hatred and hostility.'
WHAT DID HE SAY?
Political scientist Assoc. Dr. Onur Alp Yılmaz, during a live broadcast he participated in yesterday at the rally organized by the CHP in Maltepe, made the following assessment while discussing CHP Chairman Özgür Özel's call for a boycott against certain companies:
"What happens if you only make certain brands boycott in such an economy? Those brands will only suffer losses. There will be no decrease in general consumption. This does not mean the economy pays a price. It means the public pays a price. Why? When these companies suffer losses, they will not go to the esteemed president and say, 'Do not appoint trustees to CHP municipalities, do not arrest the mayors.' Instead, they will say, 'We took the initiative in your place, we put forth a will and suffered losses. Now do new favors for us, create new privileges.'
There is something that people close to the government always say: 'If there is an economic crisis, why are these cafes full?'. Why are those cafes full? Because even if people save, they know they cannot buy anything, so they say, 'At least let me socialize with my friends.' Because in the other case, they can buy neither a house nor a car. In this context, bringing this consumption close to zero on certain days will be more deterrent from the perspective of the government. If the aim is not to bankrupt these companies - because the moment they go bankrupt, they will receive other incentives - if the issue is to make the government take a step back, then reducing general consumption is a much more correct way."