Breaking News... Refused to present a defense: Interim decision in İmamoğlu's diploma case

Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Mayor and Republican People's Party (CHP) presidential candidate Ekrem İmamoğlu is appearing before the judge for the second time today in the case where he is being tried on allegations of a fake university diploma. İmamoğlu, who is being held in custody on charges of 'forgery of official documents in a chain,' which carries a prison sentence of 2 years and 6 months to 8 years and 9 months, is set to present his defense on the 216th day of his detention at the Marmara Closed Penal Execution Institution in Silivri.

Before the hearing, it was announced that lawyers and members of the press would not be admitted due to the insufficient capacity of the courtroom. This situation led to the start of protests and the subsequent toppling of barricades.

Lawyers submitted a petition to the court requesting that the hearing be moved to a larger hall. It was reported that Ekrem İmamoğlu would not attend the hearing if the courtroom was not changed.

COURTROOM CHANGED

Following the announcement by İmamoğlu and his lawyers that they would not attend the hearing unless the courtroom was changed, the trial was moved to Hall No. 2.

It was stated that the decision to change the courtroom was made by the duty judge.

After a short break, it was decided that the hearing would be held in a “larger” hall located on the -2nd floor. This new hall is known to be the place where the hearing of the imprisoned journalist Fatih Altaylı was held.

The decision was also communicated to those outside, and the lawyers and press members waiting outside were admitted to the hall.

Nuri Aslan, Dilek Kaya İmamoğlu, Selim İmamoğlu, and Hasan İmamoğlu also took their places in the courtroom.

DECISION BY İMAMOĞLU AND HIS LAWYERS NOT TO ATTEND THE HEARING

According to the latest information, Ekrem İmamoğlu and his lawyers decided not to attend the hearing following the developments.

The İmamoğlu family, lawyers, and deputies began to leave the hall.

According to information obtained from CHP sources, this decision was made on the grounds of “restriction of the right to defense.”

TENSION BETWEEN THE JUDGE AND LAWYERS

A verbal argument took place between the judge and the defense lawyers.

After the lawyers and some participants left, the judge made the following statements:

"You are aware of the court's stance, what are you abusing? We moved here, it is extremely reasonable. Hall No. 1 is not available. The hearing was already delayed by 2 hours, what contribution does your reaction here make to the defendant? We brought a very reasonable solution. I will take the defendant, I don't know why the defense lawyers didn't come. I don't know why people are leaving. You are abusing courtesy. I will not accept excuses. We did not instruct anyone to wait under the sun. You are also provoking people. What is the need for this? Why are the defendant's defense lawyers not attending the hearing? You are trying to create an image as if the court has taken a step back."

The defense lawyers, on the other hand, stated that they had been kept waiting under the sun for about two hours and that they were reacting because they were not taken into a larger hall.

Addressing the lawyers, the judge said, “I still believe that we will hold the hearing and that we will establish that communication with you.”

The judge stated that he would continue the trial even if the defense lawyers did not attend, and gave a short break so that the lawyers could consult among themselves.

The judge said, “You have targeted our independent court. I want you to think about what you wanted to achieve and what you achieved.”

All of the lawyers left the hall. Upon this, the judge instructed the gendarmerie to remove the person filming and said, “We will absolutely not allow it.”

Upon the delay in bringing İmamoğlu to the courtroom, the judge gave the instruction to “bring him now” again.

İMAMOĞLU BROUGHT TO THE COURTROOM

Ekrem İmamoğlu entered the hall to applause. Only defense lawyer Nusret Yılmaz was present at the hearing, while the other lawyers remained outside.

JUDGE'S STATEMENT ON "MEHMET PEHLİVAN"

The judge explained the reason for rejecting the request of İmamoğlu's imprisoned lawyer Mehmet Pehlivan to physically attend the hearing as a defense counsel as follows:

"We have conducted detailed examinations within the scope of Article 42 of the Attorneys' Law. Being present at the hearing to present a defense is a right belonging to the defendant. The defendant's presence is based on this right. We evaluated that the situation of a lawyer being imprisoned is incompatible with the principle of freedom of defense. With this conviction, we abandoned the decision for the defendant's counsel to be present at this session."

İMAMOĞLU REACTS TO LAWYERS NOT BEING ADMITTED

After the judge's explanation, which lasted about an hour, regarding the unauthorized filming in the court and the rejection of lawyer Mehmet Pehlivan's participation in the case via SEGBİS, İmamoğlu was given the floor.

First drawing attention to the injustices in the judicial processes and the treatment shown to the lawyers, İmamoğlu also reacted to the fact that his lawyers could not enter during the commotion that broke out because the change of the courtroom was notified late.

Stating that he arrived at the hall around 10:30 and was informed about the commotion with the gendarmerie at the door around 12:30, İmamoğlu said, “The place where I was kept waiting for two hours without being aware of the process was not a place to be kept waiting. We should have been informed beforehand.”

İMAMOĞLU: LET THE TRIAL BE ADJOURNED

Stating that he did not want to present a defense on the grounds that three of his four defense lawyers were not in the hall, İmamoğlu said he wanted the trial to be adjourned.

Ekrem İmamoğlu said the following at the podium:

"I was kept waiting in a freezing room for three hours until the hearing started. It was not a very appropriate treatment for not only me but also my gendarmerie brothers to wait there with me.

Have no doubt. I listened to your explanation and sensitivity carefully. It is a fact that we are facing many complaints from the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office regarding the issues concerning the lawyers, especially my defense counsel who are here, regarding what happened outside that circle.

Perhaps the most absurd case in Turkey's history. It will be talked about for years. An absurd court where not a single document was fake in the transition I made 35 years ago. We are in a very difficult environment. I think more sensitive behavior is needed. It is important that you say 'I was on annual leave, I saw other halls,' but Ekrem İmamoğlu and his defense counsel should have been informed earlier in a forgery case that the world is mocking. A lawyer fainted; there was no need for people to fall into that situation. Only one of my defense counsel is here right now. I would like to convey to you the request that this trial should be adjourned. I have been dealing with the court for nearly 10 months.

I think that my imprisoned defense counsel Mehmet Pehlivan was unjustly imprisoned in a way that my right to a fair trial was also taken away from me. We are in a difficult period, under total judicial harassment for nearly 8 months, full of illegalities, by raiding the house in the morning. We were informed about the courtroom for our case to be held today this morning. There was no detail that reached us since Friday. There is a large crowd of lawyers and spectators who came today. We had lawyers who could not enter because it was taken to the narrowest hall. Hasan Fehmi Demir, Tora Pekin, and Fikret İlkiz. Teamwork was being done."

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL TIME FROM İMAMOĞLU AND LAWYER YILMAZ

After the short speeches of İmamoğlu and his defense counsel Nusret Yılmaz, the prosecutor was given the floor. The prosecutor expressed the opinion that the final result of the case heard in the administrative court regarding the cancellation of the diploma should be awaited and that the trial should continue accordingly.

The judge gave the floor to İmamoğlu in response to this request. İmamoğlu and his lawyer Nusret Yılmaz requested additional time for the continuation of the case on the grounds that 3 of İmamoğlu's defense counsel were not in the hall and that the "lawyers work in coordination."

Upon İmamoğlu's request, the judge said, “We cannot force you to say anything, but I do not find your attitude reasonable.”

İmamoğlu replied to the judge, “I also understand that you do not find it reasonable. I care about your sensitivity regarding the non-prolongation of the judiciary. But I am also saddened by the environment experienced today. I also stood in a freezing environment downstairs for 3 hours. I would like to underline that this was also very difficult.”

Defense lawyer Nusret Yılmaz said the following:

“It is obvious that a hearing of a case that closely concerns the Turkish agenda will be of interest. The crowdedness of the last session is a manifestation of this. A reaction was shown because the hearing was moved to a small hall and then changed, and lawyers could not enter the hall and were removed by force. As the defense, our goal is for justice to be served. We prepared the defense as a whole. We request that the evaluation phase of the evidence take place in another session.”

The hearing was adjourned before the interim decision.

CASE ADJOURNED TO DECEMBER 8

During the break, İmamoğlu was taken to the detention center. The case was adjourned to December 8.

News Source: 12punto