23.05.2026 19:50
The statements of 13 suspects detained in the investigation conducted by the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office regarding the 38th Ordinary Congress of the CHP have been included in the case file. Although the suspects deny the allegations of "interest," the statements have revealed a striking network of relationships, including the placement of delegates' children into jobs, municipal tenders, nepotism involving entire families, and the granting of council memberships after the congress.
Statements of 13 suspects detained in the investigation conducted by the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office regarding the 38th Ordinary Congress of the CHP have been added to the case file. Although the suspects denied the allegations, the statements highlighted recruitments in municipalities, contacts with congress delegates, municipal tenders, and hearsay about "delegates' children being placed in jobs."
In particular, the job search of Gülhan Aydın's daughter, the employment connections of CHP Istanbul Provincial Deputy Chair Melda Tanışman Tutan's family members in municipalities, the contracts Safi Karayalçın received from CHP-run municipalities, and the political positions Metin Kaya obtained in return for his declaration of "closeness to Kılıçdaroğlu" were among the most striking points of the case file.
COMMON DEFENSE IN THE CONGRESS CASE: I DID NOT RECEIVE ANY BENEFIT In the statements taken within the scope of the investigation conducted by the Organized Crimes Investigation Bureau of the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office, almost all suspects defended themselves along the same lines. The suspects claimed that they were not provided with money, jobs, tenders, or any other benefit in return for their voting preferences during the 38th Ordinary Congress of the CHP.
However, when the statements reflected in the records are brought together, the picture at the center of the investigation becomes striking. While some individuals admitted to being congress delegates, others stated that they made their voting choice with their "free will." Nevertheless, the same statements separately included municipal employments, municipal tenders, the hiring of close relatives, contacts before and after the congress, and political relationships that could influence delegates in the case file.
GÜLHAN AYDIN CASE: MY DAUGHTER MAY HAVE MET FOR A JOB One of the most notable statements in the case file belonged to Gülhan Aydın. Aydın recounted that Özkan Yalım, the dismissed Uşak Mayor who was arrested, called her asking whom she supported in the congress, and then inquired about whether her children were employed. Aydın stated that she later saw her daughter had contacted Özkan Yalım on her phone, asked who Yalım was, and consulted him about whether he "could help with finding a job."
While Aydın admitted that her daughter might have sent her CV to Özkan Yalım, she argued that this was not done at her direction. She denied Yalım's claim, made under the scope of effective remorse, that she would support Özgür Özel on the condition that her children were hired in CHP-run municipalities.
However, within the investigation, Aydın admitted to being a congress delegate, contacting Özkan Yalım, discussing her children's unemployment, and that her daughter might have later contacted Yalım for a job. This chain of dialogue was recorded as one of the factors strengthening the allegation of "voting preference in return for job promises" within the case file.
FAMILY EMPLOYMENT IN MUNICIPALITIES The statement of Melda Tanışman Tutan brought to light the political relationship network established through municipal employment. Tutan admitted that she was a CHP Provincial Deputy Chair, previously served as the Çekmeköy District Chair, her husband works at Çekmeköy Municipality, and her brother started working at the Beşiktaş Municipality's Public Works unit in December 2024. Tutan argued that her brother's employment was unrelated to the congress, stating, "If it were a congress bargain, he wouldn't have waited a year."
Melda Tanışman Tutan "A DELEGATE'S SON WAS PLACED IN A MUNICIPAL JOB" One of the suspects, Hayati Kaya, denied the allegations, stating that no benefit was offered to him. However, one sentence in his statement became one of the most striking notes of the case file. Kaya declared that he had heard that the son of a person named Aydın, a delegate from Ümraniye, was placed in a municipal job. Although Kaya noted that he had no direct knowledge of this, the statement was recorded as hearsay consistent with the main allegation of the investigation.
"MUNICIPAL AND IMMUNICIPAL COUNCIL MEMBERSHIPS CAME AFTER THE PROVINCIAL CONGRESS" Suspect Metin Kaya stated in his testimony that he had a fellow townsman and distant kinship tie with Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, and that if he had the right to vote in the congress, he would support Kılıçdaroğlu. He declared that he was on Cemal Canpolat's list in the Istanbul Provincial Congress but remained neutral after seeing the list. Kaya denied the allegation that he distributed money to delegates in favor of Özgür Özel during the congress process, but stated that he was subsequently appointed to positions as a council member in the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality and Ümraniye Municipality.
"WE COINCIDENTALLY ENCOUNTERED ÖZGÜR'S TEAM IN KAHRAMANMARAŞ" Kalender Özdemir stated that he did not take an active role during the congress period, did not distribute money to delegates, and knew Turgut Koç from the Ataşehir Municipality period. Denying the statements of the secret witness and Turgut Koç, Özdemir claimed that he was in front of the party building during Özgür Özel's visit to Kahramanmaraş but that this was coincidental. Özdemir's defense was, "I was there, but I was not part of the organization."
VELİ AĞBABA'S DRIVER WAS ASKED ABOUT THE ALLEGATION OF "CARRYING MONEY" Gaffar Çiçek, the driver of suspect and CHP Malatya Deputy Veli Ağbaba, stated that he works for Ağbaba and denied the allegations of carrying money. Çiçek, arguing that he was not the person mentioned in Gökhan Böcek's statements, claimed that he lives in Malatya, rarely goes to Ankara, and that examining his financial profile would show the allegations are false. However, Çiçek's statements that he knows Turgut Koç, that he drove for Gökhan Cumalı when Veli Ağbaba came to Istanbul, and that he was Koç's employee were among the details showing the network of relationships among individuals in the case file.
Gaffar Çiçek (Left) "I DEFENDED CUMALİ AT VELİ AĞBABA'S REQUEST" Ayça Akpek Şenay stated that she was not a congress delegate but a member of the High Disciplinary Board, and that she had no information or knowledge about benefits being provided to delegates. However, she admitted to undertaking the defense of Gökhan Cumalı in his criminal court inquiry upon the request of Veli Ağbaba. This statement was recorded as a striking element revealing how the political and legal support network of the investigation operates.