Non-prosecution decision regarding Ekrem İmamoğlu's complaint against expert witness

The Bureau of Investigation for Crimes by Public Officials at the Büyükçekmece Chief Public Prosecutor's Office issued a decision of non-prosecution, stating that there was no concrete evidence to reach a sufficient suspicion to initiate a public lawsuit against the expert witness complained about by Ekrem İmamoğlu.

The decision noted that although an investigation into the expert had been initiated, no investigative action could legally be taken regarding matters in court files that could be construed as interference with ongoing or concluded judicial proceedings, as doing so would undermine the independence of the judiciary.

It was stated that while the complainant argued that the expert report and similar evidence were unlawful, such matters should be presented to the relevant court during ongoing proceedings, where they would be evaluated by the judge, who could then file a criminal complaint against officials responsible for any illegality. The decision noted that the petition submitted by İmamoğlu's lawyer claimed that the report prepared by the expert in the case ongoing at the Büyükçekmece 10th Criminal Court of First Instance contained matters contrary to law and fact, which was the basis for the complaint.

STATED THAT NO CONCRETE EVIDENCE WAS FOUND

The decision emphasized that because the trial is ongoing, public prosecutor's offices cannot audit or investigate whether expert reports—which are at the discretion of the courts—are unlawful, noting that the authority for such assessment lies directly with the courts. The decision concluded that there was no sufficient concrete evidence to warrant a public lawsuit against the expert and that there were no grounds for prosecution.

News Source: 12punto