Breaking News... Continuation of detention had been requested: Interim ruling announced in espionage case

The prosecutor announced their interim opinion on the merits in the espionage case.

In the case where Ekrem İmamoğlu, Merdan Yanardağ, Necati Özkan, and Hüseyin Gün are being tried while in custody on charges of 'espionage', the prosecutor requested the continuation of the detention for all defendants.

The court panel announced its interim ruling.

The Istanbul 25th High Criminal Court ruled for the continuation of the detention of all defendants in the case where Ekrem İmamoğlu, journalist Merdan Yanardağ, İmamoğlu's political advisor Necati Özkan, and Hüseyin Gün are being tried while in custody on charges of "Political espionage". The next hearing will be held on July 6.

13.15 | INTERIM RULING AWAITED

A recess was called for the interim ruling in the espionage case.

As Ekrem İmamoğlu was leaving the courtroom, he said, "Thank you for your efforts. I will not be coming for the interim ruling. I am heading to the IMM case. If I say something bad now, I'll get into trouble."

11.40 | GÜN: "MY STATEMENTS WERE ACCEPTED AS 'EFFECTIVE REMORSE'"

Finally, Hüseyin Gün began his defense against the prosecutor's opinion. Gün, who did not answer the question "Are you an organization leader?" asked of him last Monday, began his speech by answering this question.

Gün stated the following:

“I did not answer at that time because I thought it had no connection to the espionage case, and I used my right to remain silent. I want to answer this question in your presence because it will be beneficial for the integrity of my defense. I am not an organization leader; I did not establish an organization, nor am I a member of one. At the same time, I did not knowingly assist an alleged organization. In both the statement I gave to the police and the statement I gave in your presence, I conveyed what I knew with all sincerity, within the bounds of state discipline and dignity, and I did not slander anyone being tried with me in this file as a spy, and I would not.

These statements of mine were accepted as 'effective remorse' by the investigation prosecutor, thinking that they would contribute to the clarification of the incident. This is entirely the prosecutor's legal assessment; I also accepted this assessment. In any case, Mr. President, in my statement to the police, I did not confess to being an organization leader, nor to being a spy, nor to having committed the crime of espionage. Something that does not exist cannot be confessed to.

I am not a spy. I have adopted the Young Turk philosophy as my motto, to my state, only and only to my state... I am not a partisan, but for me, the essential thing is the state. I have carried out many activities abroad. Let me address all the state officials here, and with your permission, I will refer to the speech of MHP Chairman Mr. Devlet Bahçeli at the group meeting in parliament on March 31, 2026. In his speech that day, Mr. Bahçeli said that FETÖ has resurfaced and is active and moving again. In this context, this indictment is completely null and void. Whose spy am I? What state secret did I disclose? To whom did I serve it? What benefit did I gain?

Now it is written in the indictment; Israel, England, America. So, according to the countries where I have investments, I am both MOSSAD, CIA, and MI6. How does this happen? Well, what does it have to do with the other 3 respected names behind me? I was able to figure it out even though I have been in isolation for 10.5 months.

Mr. President, an attempt is being made to bring into existence something that does not exist here. Mr. President, esteemed panel; this is not something that can happen. I mean, is it not enough to be a Turk without being a 'this-ist', 'that-ist', or 'the-other-ist'? Do you have to be from a certain neighborhood? Do you have to be someone's man? I am just a simple Turkish citizen. I love my country, my land, and my flag; there can be no evidence to the contrary in the file or in the digital materials.

It is not possible to extract manipulation from the fact that I had social media analysis done for 10 days for Mr. İmamoğlu, with whom we are being tried together. Because this is an insult to the Turkish nation and its voters. Mr. President, candidates win elections; not software. Software can only help by 1 percent or a click above, there is no other explanation. Especially, it is not possible for it to happen within 10 days. My words are limited to these. I just want you to know that my trust in the Supreme Turkish Judiciary is complete. If not today, then tomorrow; but I have full faith that justice will be served.”

The hearing continues with the defense attorneys' arguments.

11.30 | REQUEST FOR RELEASE FROM ÖZKAN

In the final part of his defense, Necati Özkan requested his release and stated the following:

“There is a mindset here of 'I suspect you without evidence, without proof, and I am arresting you.' If there is no justice, there can be no will that any of us will follow or approve. There is no possibility for anyone to bow down to a will that lacks justice. Standing against a will that lacks justice becomes a duty of citizenship and humanity. Therefore, we only want justice from you, our esteemed Court, we do not want anything else.

I also want to say that the delay of justice is of no benefit to anyone. There is an Anglo-Saxon saying: 'It is better for 99 guilty people to walk free than for one innocent person to remain inside.' They say that persecuting a single innocent person is equivalent to corrupting an entire society.

I am innocent, Mr. President, Esteemed Panel. I have not collected any information or documents against the Republic of Turkey; I have not given them to anyone. There is no evidence regarding this, no statement in the entire content of this case and file. Please put an end to this persecution. Please release me, Mr. Ekrem, and Mr. Merdan as soon as possible and acquit us quickly.”

11.20 | ÖZKAN REACTED TO THE INDICTMENT

Following Yanardağ, Necati Özkan took the floor for his defense.

Özkan also reacted to the indictment, stating, “We are talking about an indictment for profit. There is only one profit here. This indictment was prepared to realize that profit, and that profit tells us this: 'Keep Ekrem İmamoğlu inside, confiscate Merdan Yanardağ's property.' This is the summary; there is nothing else.”

Necati Özkan stated that there is no concrete evidence in either the IMM Case or the Espionage case, and said the following:

“A political case is being heard here, and in this political case, we are kept busy defending ourselves for a crime that does not exist, for an act we did not commit. I said it yesterday too; this is an attempt to get two fleeces from a sheep that doesn't exist. Both the IMM case and the espionage case. What both are trying to tell is the same, and both are baseless. There is no evidence in either; there are only the Prosecutor's interpretations, that's all. None of those interpretations are based on any witness statement, any defendant's statement, any evidence, any secret witness statement, or anything like that. They are entirely abstract interpretations.”

11.00 | "THEY ARE TRYING TO BUILD A DICTATORIAL LAW"

Merdan Yanardağ, who made his defense by coming to the defendant's podium after Ekrem İmamoğlu, said, “A pro-American government, collaborators of imperialism, are trying to accuse this country's patriots, leftists, and republicans of espionage. They are trying to build a dictatorial law with a precedent to be created through court decisions.”

Criticizing the indictment, Yanardağ said, “We are facing such an indictment that I was tried in the September 12 courts, there was no such indictment during the September 12 period.”

Yanardağ asked, “This indictment does not even have the equipment, quality, or content to deserve a real political defense. First of all, its language is broken, its Turkish is broken. There are fake documents. Can a country's Public Prosecutor's Office put in a fake document? Can it show statements that were not given as if they were? Can it distort them?”

Merdan Yanardağ said, “They are trying to make this country's republicans bow down. Why? There is a coup regime. Why? They will change the regime. Why? This country is going through a liquidation process of the Republic. Why is Ekrem İmamoğlu feared? Because he showed that he could defeat them.”

Yanardağ concluded his defense with these words:

“In such a historical period, I believe, I said it yesterday too, there is a parallel structure. I have serious doubts about this, going through high criminal prosecutors and peace criminal judgeships. But I think that a very important part of the courthouse acts in accordance with the values of the Republic, the principle of the rule of law, and universal legal norms. I want to believe this. Your court decision will clearly reveal whether this is the case or not. I request that you contribute to social peace. I reject the opinion as it is.”

10.50 | REACTION FROM İMAMOĞLU TO THE PROSECUTOR'S OPINION

Criticizing the opinion, İmamoğlu said, “What other information do you need? Let's move on, I mean, let's move on. Ah, I would have understood if he had said: 'Let the current MIT President come, let's listen to him.' I would have said, 'Wow, what a brave prosecution office.' For example, let him come and speak. Why is he mute? Why doesn't he speak, for example? Or if he had said, 'Let people who have served as ministers or vice presidents in past periods come and be heard so that the person can be better explained and understood'; I would have said, 'Oh, how nice, bravo.' And if these had happened, there would have been a logic to it. But there isn't.”

İMAMOĞLU REQUESTED RELEASE NOT FOR HIMSELF, BUT FOR YANARDAĞ AND ÖZKAN

In the final part of his defense, İmamoğlu requested release not for himself, but for Merdan Yanardağ and Necati Özkan, and said the following:

“We are determined to wage a struggle as great as resisting. The result of this struggle will end in the victory of the nation. Let this be known from here. If you are asking what I have to say against an opinion regarding the request for the continuation of detention; my answer is very simple: Release Mr. Necati Özkan and Mr. Merdan Yanardağ. This is my view and request against this detention.

As honorable, honest members of the Turkish judiciary, save this nation from this disgraceful situation as soon as possible. Save it. You cannot lay your heads on your pillows comfortably, that is very clear. You have to contribute to the correction of this judicial order of this country that has gone off the rails. Protect the honor of law and justice.

Do not think that this case being heard in this hall is a simple, ordinary case; it is not a trumped-up espionage and treason case, it is a very important case regarding the survival and future of the nation. In this context, please put an end to this suffering, this torment, this disgrace.”

10.25 | İMAMOĞLU: 'I PREDICTED THAT THE PROSECUTION WOULD STALL!'

According to Cumhuriyet, Ekrem İmamoğlu, who came to the podium to make his defense against the opinion, said, "This indictment is a legal murder. They are people who can do anything in line with instructions."

İmamoğlu stated, "I predicted that the prosecution would stall. It makes no difference to me. The same corrupt order continues. The prosecution is working like an office attached to the political power."

10.20 | OPINION ANNOUNCED

The hearing prosecutor announced his interim opinion regarding the detentions.

He requested the continuation of the detention of İmamoğlu, Özkan, Yanardağ, and Gün.

"TO THE CONTINUATION OF DETENTION..."

The prosecutor announced his opinion with the following statements:

“Requesting the IP addresses used by the IMM and the relevant server providers from the Information and Communication Technologies Authority; identifying the user IP records that provide access to systems with the ibb.gov.tr extension; identifying which user accounts were logged in through the mentioned IP addresses, along with access, date, and time information, and requesting the identification of log records in this direction.

From the MIT Presidency and the TEM Branch Directorate; regarding the IP addresses and user information used by the IMM obtained from the Information and Communication Technologies Authority, determining whether the e-mail addresses in the images on pages 111, 122, and 123 of the indictment are real; determining whether the people mentioned in the e-mails were working at the IMM on the dates of the crimes; identifying user IP records, access timestamps, mail session records, and security log records that provide access to systems with the ibb.gov.tr extension; determining whether connections were made to mail servers, VPN, active directory, remote access systems, or other corporate systems connected to systems with the ibb.gov.tr extension through the relevant e-mail accounts.

Examining the log records to identify findings of unauthorized access, data leakage, or account takeover; requesting that the incoming raw data be organized and turned into a report; requesting an opinion on whether the information and documents in the indictment and the defendants' digital examination reports are information that should remain secret due to their nature in terms of state security or internal or external political interests; taking action for witnesses; deciding to reject the requests of the defendants and defense attorneys as it is understood that they will not add anything new to the file; that there is concrete evidence showing suspicion of crime regarding the crime charged against the defendants, the nature and quality of the charged crime, the lower and upper limits of the penalty foreseen in the law for the charged crime, and that the duration of detention is proportionate according to the time spent in detention and the amount of penalty foreseen in the law for the charged crime.

Considering that the evidence collection procedures have not yet been completed and that judicial control will not be sufficient at this stage; it is requested and opined on behalf of the public that a decision be made for the continuation of detention at this stage.”

News Source: 12punto