The difference between the İmamoğlu and Ergenekon indictments!..

The indictment prepared against Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu, who has been in detention for 8 months, was announced on Tuesday.

In terms of its volume, the number of defendants, certain expressions used in the indictment, and the requested sentences, the Ergenekon indictment immediately came to mind, and similarities were pointed out.

Let us look at the differences between the two indictments in the name of the right to a fair trial, the presumption of innocence, and the law.

While the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office had not yet made an official statement, the pro-government media announced that the indictment had been completed in a sense, with the headline "Four-thousand-page indictment for the heist of the century."

And so it was. It was reported that Chief Public Prosecutor Akın Gürlek would hold a press conference at 14:30 on the same day.

In the expected meeting, Chief Public Prosecutor Gürlek summarized that the indictment was ready and would be submitted to the court at 15:00, stating, "We have explained the structure of the criminal organization in detail in the indictment. The organizational chart is important. There are 6 organization leaders. Ekrem İmamoğlu is the leader of the organization. Our court must conduct a rapid trial. It must reach a conclusion as soon as possible."

In the statement made by the Chief Public Prosecutor's Office after Gürlek, information was provided about how many suspects were included in the indictment, what they were accused of, and the sentences requested for them.

Meanwhile, it was stated that the 3,739-page indictment was prepared by Deputy Chief Public Prosecutor Can Tuncay and 6 prosecutors.

Then?

As in many critical cases, all the details of this indictment, which had not even reached the court yet and whose acceptance was uncertain, were published in full detail and began to be debated. In other words, the media court was established first, and verdicts were rendered in advance!..

It Was Like This 17 Years Ago

Now, let us recall the announcement process of the Ergenekon indictment on July 14, 2008, which left its mark on an era and, just like now, was perceived through the extensive allegations of the government/FETÖ media beforehand.

The indictment, prepared by the so-called prosecutor Zekeriya Öz, who fled in 2015, and Mehmet Ali Pekgüzel and Nihat Taşkın, who were later tried for "FETÖ," was announced by the then-Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor Aykut Cengiz Engin and Deputy Chief Public Prosecutor Turan Çolakkadı.

Chief Public Prosecutor Engin stated that the indictment prepared regarding the completed part of the investigation was automatically distributed to the Istanbul 13th High Criminal Court via the UYAP system. Apart from this, he explained how many pages and folders the indictment consisted of, how many suspects were involved, and what crimes they would be tried for, and noted the following:

- "It is not possible to provide information other than this statement. Learning the content of the indictment in detail will only be possible once it is accepted by the court."

- "Since the date the investigation was initiated, documents and information, some of which were confidential, have been published in the written and visual press with an intensity rarely seen before, and publications and comments violating the confidentiality of the investigation have been made. Informing the public is, of course, the primary duty of the press, and it is absolutely out of the question to think that this primary duty should not be performed. However, I would like to state that a very large portion of these publications and comments are, unfortunately, untrue. These publications have caused a serious level of information pollution, and the public has been and is being misinformed. Much of the information, which is not true, has been misinterpreted by various individuals and groups, and this has led to false expectations in the public. This situation violates the integrity of the investigation, the private lives and fundamental rights of the suspects, and also causes unfair and harsh criticism against the Judiciary."

- "How long the court will take to evaluate the indictment is its own business."

The rule was the same; the relevant court had to make a decision on the acceptance or rejection of the case within 15 days.

Because the indictment was not announced until the court's decision was clear, only comments like the following could be made in the media:

- "After this stage, the evidence is important. What evidence was obtained, how the connection was established between these and the defendants, we will wait for these details to emerge."

- "If the 13th High Criminal Court decides to 'accept' as a result of the examination it will conduct within the 15-day legal period, we will be able to learn the content of the indictment in detail."

- "The excited wait could not end... The statements of Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor Aykut Cengiz Engin did not relieve the curiosity of those who waited for yesterday with pounding hearts. Engin 'announced' the knowns, such as the number of pages of the indictment, the number of detained and non-detained defendants, and the attempt to overthrow the government of the Republic of Turkey by establishing an armed terrorist organization and using force and violence. Since the indictment was sent to the court and it was not yet clear whether it would be accepted, he did not go into detail. It seems we will wait a while longer."

- "Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor Aykut Cengiz Engin gave general information about the Ergenekon indictment. He outlined the framework of the indictment, but could not go into details because the court had not yet accepted the indictment."

While the decision of the Istanbul 13th High Criminal Court regarding the 2,455-page indictment was expected 11 days later, members of the press practically camped in front of the Istanbul Courthouse in Beşiktaş. And after it was announced that it had been accepted, the full text of the indictment was published in the media.

Returning to the approximately 4,000-page İmamoğlu indictment; legal experts point out that it is impossible for the court to examine this within the 15-day legal period, that the court has become dysfunctional under these conditions, and that its ability to perform its duties has been obstructed.

Is there any need for the court to examine the indictment, especially after the extensive publications and verdicts rendered in the pro-government media? In fact, where Chief Public Prosecutor Akın Gürlek himself says, "Our court must conduct a rapid trial and reach a conclusion as soon as possible," does the court have any option left but to accept the indictment?

Turkey was more of a state of law 17 years ago when major plots were being hatched, wasn't it?!

Müyesser YILDIZ

November 14, 2025