Significant development in CHP's congress lawsuit: What do the court rulings mean?

CHP lawyer Çağlar Çağlayan, in a statement made via social media, evaluated the decision of the Ankara 3rd Civil Court of First Instance regarding the lawsuits filed for the cancellation of the Istanbul Provincial Congress. The court rejected the requests for injunctions in the cases that were previously consolidated due to lack of jurisdiction.

Çağlayan summarized the court's decision as follows:

1. Regarding the CHP Chairmanship, the requests for the cancellation of the Istanbul Provincial Ordinary Congress were rejected.
2. The lawsuit was rejected due to the absence of passive standing, as the Istanbul Provincial Presidency does not have legal personality.
3. For one of the plaintiffs, the lawsuit was rejected on the grounds of lis pendens due to the ongoing congress cancellation lawsuit at the Ankara 42nd Civil Court of First Instance.

The injunction decision issued by the Istanbul 45th Civil Court of First Instance provided temporary protection from a legal perspective.

However, with the Ankara Court's decision to reject, this injunction no longer has legal validity.

Çağlayan emphasized that, in accordance with the principle of legal certainty, multiple lawsuits cannot be conducted on the same subject.

Stating that the Istanbul Court's injunction decision should be lifted following the Ankara Court's ruling, Çağlayan expressed that the illegality must be rectified.

The Istanbul Court has been informed of the rejection decision in Ankara and stated that the next step is the lifting of the injunction.