Surprise support for Ekrem İmamoğlu from pro-government media

A prison sentence and a political ban have been requested in the lawsuit filed against Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu following an argument with Serkan Şahin, an AKP council member of the Beykoz Municipality.

It was reported that the trial for the case, which was opened due to the use of the word "ugly," will be held on February 27.

The incident was brought to the judiciary after Şahin filed a complaint following remarks made by İmamoğlu during a television program.

Evaluating the case, Türkiye newspaper columnist Atilla Yayla criticized the fact that İmamoğlu's words were made the subject of a lawsuit.

Yayla stated, "If you ask me, there is no insult here that should be the subject of a lawsuit. The word 'ugly' used by İmamoğlu does not constitute an insult or humiliation. A dialogue took place between two people, and both sides expressed their own perspectives."

Atilla Yayla's article in Türkiye newspaper titled "The 'ugly' lawsuit against İmamoğlu" is as follows:

"In a country where the rule of law prevails, no one carries a shield of immunity before the law. Anyone who is believed by judicial authorities to have serious accusations and strong evidence against them for committing a crime must be tried. Regardless of their name, title, or characteristics, no one can be exempted from trial in such cases. In this context, İmamoğlu being tried on corruption charges is neither strange nor a conspiracy by the government or any other actor; it is simply the result of the ordinary course of life and law.

However, it is difficult to say the same for every case that İmamoğlu faces or is forced to face. Like the 'ugly lawsuit' filed against İmamoğlu regarding an incident between him and a citizen where the word 'ugly' was used. Let's read what happened from a newspaper report:

“On October 26, 2024, at the SAHA EXPO Defense, Aviation and Space Industry Fair held in Bakırköy, Beykoz Municipality's AKP Council Member Serkan Şahin said to İmamoğlu, 'Our soldier was martyred while he is walking around here. What will happen now? He hosted Zeydan in his office yesterday.' İmamoğlu replied with the words, 'Continue your ugly politics, you are quite ugly.' The indictment prepared upon this was accepted by the Bakırköy 33rd Criminal Court of First Instance.”

It was stated that the first hearing of the case will be held on February 27, 2026, at 10:00 AM at the Bakırköy Courthouse.

In the indictment, a prison sentence ranging from 3 months and 15 days to 2 years and 4 months was requested for Ekrem İmamoğlu for the crime of 'insult.' Additionally, a political ban was requested for İmamoğlu under Article 53 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK).(*)

A relatively harsh dialogue took place between two political figures, one of whom has recognition in society and the other who is not as famous. The person criticizing İmamoğlu reacted with the above words, claiming that he both established a relationship with a DEM-affiliated mayor who acts with the support of a terrorist organization and came to the fair in question. İmamoğlu responded to these words with other words, saying that this person was "ugly" and was engaging in "ugly politics." The interlocutor who brought these words to the judiciary filed a criminal complaint against İmamoğlu. Thus, the judiciary took action.

If you ask me, there is no insult here that should be the subject of a lawsuit. The word "ugly" used by İmamoğlu does not constitute an insult or humiliation. A dialogue took place between two people, and both sides expressed their own perspectives. If one person says to another "you are ugly" and says that they are engaging in "ugly politics," what should be done is for that person to say to the other "you are the one who is actually ugly," "the politics you are doing is what is ugly," and continue on their way. In other words, the incident should end there.

However, in this case, one of the parties has filed a complaint with the judiciary. In this situation, what should have happened was for the prosecutor's office to state that the mutual words fall under freedom of expression and to reject the complaint. Not doing this and making the complaint a subject of a lawsuit, and furthermore requesting a penalty that could result in a political ban, is contrary to freedom of expression. Moreover, it is an invitation for such cases to increase. The result of such unnecessary lawsuits is the unnecessary narrowing of the space for freedom of expression, the prevention of dialogue and mutual exchanges between people, and the unnecessary increase in the workload of judicial authorities.

Let people criticize each other, even if it is harsh, and let them respond to criticisms. In the long run, this is very important both for the protection of freedom of expression and for the formation of a healthy democratic social life."