Objection to detention in IMM investigation rejected: İmamoğlu is among them

The Istanbul 41st High Criminal Court has upheld the decision to reject the release requests of 105 defendants currently in detention in the IMM case, which is among the significant trials. Names including the Republican People's Party's presidential candidate and Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu are still being tried while in detention following the operation last March.

While no defendant has been granted release since the indictment of the case was accepted, the Istanbul 40th High Criminal Court had recently ruled for the continuation of detention. The objection filed by the defense attorneys against this decision was rejected as a result of the review conducted by the 41st High Criminal Court.

OBJECTIONS REJECTED

In the rejection decision, general grounds such as the nature of the crimes attributed to the suspects, the status of the existing evidence, and the fact that their defenses have not yet been taken were taken into account. The court concluded that the decision of the 40th High Criminal Court was consistent with the content of the file and not contrary to the legislation, and rejected all objections individually.

Regarding this development, lawyer Hüseyin Ersöz, who represents some of the defendants in the case, stated in a post on his social media account: "In the IMM Case, '105 detained' defendants, including Ekrem İmamoğlu, Resul Emrah Şahan, Ramazan Gülten, and Aykut Erdoğdu, are being tried. Not a single person has been released since the acceptance of the indictment. In recent weeks, the Istanbul 40th High Criminal Court, which is hearing the case, conducted a review of detention and decided for the 'continuation of detention' for all detainees.

We learned with the notification that arrived just now that the Istanbul 41st High Criminal Court rejected our objection to this decision. For the 105 detainees, the Court's general reasoning consists solely of the sentence: 'Given the nature and character of the crimes attributed to them, the status of the existing evidence, and the fact that the defendants' defenses have not yet been taken, it is understood that the Istanbul 40th High Criminal Court's decision for the continuation of detention is proportionate to the scope of the file and in accordance with the law and regulations; therefore, the objections deemed unfounded are rejected individually.' I do not think any legal professional could accept this decision, which was given with general and boilerplate justifications. People in prison cannot be seen as mere numbers. Everyone needs to engage in a conscience check in the face of this decision."