7th hearing in the IMM case: Call from İmamoğlu to the presiding judge

The 6th hearing of the case against the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IMM) was held in the shadow of courtroom disputes and new restrictions introduced in previous sessions. In the case where 407 defendants, including IMM Mayor and presidential candidate Ekrem İmamoğlu, are being tried, with 107 of them in custody, the defense statements of 5 people were heard throughout the day. The court panel concluded the hearing at 16:45 following the defense statements of the businesspeople. The trial continued today with its seventh session.

14.00 | ALİ SUKAS: I PASSED THROUGH TÜRKEŞ'S EXPERIENCE

Ağaç A.Ş. General Manager Ali Sukas said the following in his defense:

"I am from Rize. I have been a Forest Engineer for 37 years. I have held different jobs and positions in both the public and private sectors.

However, those who know me personally or by reputation do not know me for my education or my professional career. Everyone has identified me with my political identity, which I am a part of and proud of.

In the Nationalist Movement, which was crushed like a steamroller by the September 12 coup, I served as the Istanbul Provincial Head of the Idealist Hearths (Ülkü Ocakları) while its leader was in prison. Beyond all these titles, the greatest honor of my life was to be in the closest circle of Alparslan Türkeş during my youth and to pass through his experience.

The reason I am making this introduction is not to express my political identity. I am not dragging it out for that reason anyway. My purpose is only to ensure that the background of the views I will express is understood so that you can more easily make sense of my perspective on the world and my way of living life.

Undoubtedly, if one were to describe the values of the Turkish state, which has a thousands-year-old tradition, and those that have filtered down through history in a single word; it is clear that concepts such as custom, religion, geography, and language would not be enough to cover it. While these values were expressed as "töre" (tradition/law) thousands of years ago, they are most accurately described today by the set of rules called "law."

Therefore, if one were to attribute an adjective to the state today; one must speak of a state of law that operates according to legislative provisions and has deep-rooted traditions and its own hierarchy.

Individuals, the conjuncture, technology, and current events are in a constant state of change. Conversely, the only reason the state can maintain its existence is the legitimacy it derives from the law and the power provided by this legitimacy.

The state cannot share its power, staff, resources, and authorities with a structure that is outside the rules, outside the law, outside the legislation, outside tradition, and outside the hierarchy; such a possibility cannot even be spoken of. Any structure that tries to govern the state in this way is sooner or later liquidated by the state itself. Otherwise, one cannot speak of a state, and the permanence of this state would not be possible.

This is how my view of the state and the law has been since I can remember, and it has never changed.

I am a lover of the homeland. However, the fact that the homeland, which spread across three continents yesterday, is squeezed into the Anatolian geography today clearly reveals that the borders of the homeland we love can vary.

I am a Turkish nationalist; however, our understanding is not based on race. Thousands of years ago, Bilge Kağan expressed his war with his enemies and its aftermath as follows: "Those who died, died; those who remained became a nation." In other words, even those who remained from a war are included in the same definition of a nation.

For this reason, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk also put forward an understanding of a nation based not on race but on a sense of belonging by saying, "How happy is the one who says I am a Turk," not "How happy is the one who is a Turk."

I am a Muslim and I am proud of it. However, our state existed before Islam as well. To say that what makes us one body is only religion would be an incomplete assessment.

In summary; each of the concepts of custom, religion, nation, and homeland is sacred and extremely valuable to us. However, the state expresses a separate unifying, continuity, and definability above these.

For this reason, it is never possible for us, who have struggled throughout our lives against the parallel structure and its likes that tried to weave the July 15 coup attempt against our state, and who have paid prices for this cause, to take part in an extra-legal structure called a "system," to accept the existence of such a structure, or to serve it.

As a person who has attributed sanctity to the state throughout his life, who observes what is forbidden and what is permissible, who thinks about how history will remember us, and who believes that he will be held accountable in the afterlife; I would like to state that being tried with the accusations directed at me is a heavier price than the restriction of my freedom so far.

Of course, your court will judge me not by my ideological identity but by concrete evidence. However, I would like to express some points.

"HOW MANY JUDGES WILL RETIRE WITHOUT SEEING THE RESULT OF THIS FILE, WHO KNOWS HOW MANY DEFENDANTS WILL PASS AWAY"

12 springs will pass... Who knows how many judges will retire without seeing the result of this file, who knows how many of the hundreds of defendants will pass away without seeing the final verdict of this case.

That is why, while I have the opportunity, I wanted to put it on the record briefly without testing anyone's patience. While I have found the opportunity to express myself for the first time in months; I want to state for the record with great inner peace and peace of mind that I am innocent.

A person is innocent until the alleged crime is proven with definitive and convincing evidence and the verdict rendered against them becomes final. This universal principle, called the presumption of innocence, is guaranteed by Article 38 of our Constitution. The same principle is also expressed and applied in Islamic law as "the presumption of innocence is essential."

I have worked in different fields throughout my life. I worked in baking, I served in the Regional Forestry Directorate, and I ran my own business in the private sector. Ultimately, I found the opportunity to serve Istanbul as a manager at Ağaç AŞ, a subsidiary of the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality.

I had previously expressed my view of the state. The late Alparslan Türkeş is the one who taught us this understanding the most. Despite remaining in prison for years unjustly after the September 12 coup, he did not hold a grudge against the state; on the contrary, he continued his love for serving the nation and the state.

As someone who has passed through his training, I carried out the public duty entrusted to me with great love and enthusiasm, knowing that serving the people is serving God. I believe that we will be remembered for the services we have provided.

REBELLED AGAINST THE TESTIMONY OF SECRET WITNESS GÜRGEN

There was actually a process that started before the IMM operation. There was an organization on social media—troll accounts, anonymous accounts, people working in some media outlets, commentators under the guise of commentators on some television channels—constantly cursing and insulting our family, our child, our person, our son, everything we have, morning and night with political motivation, political affiliations, or other reasons. We sent corrections many times; they did not publish them.

We filed a criminal complaint with the prosecutor's office, but we did not get any results. Now I want to talk a little bit about this (secret witness) Gürgen. Since my profession is forestry, I actually love the hornbeam (Gürgen) tree very much, but the situation here is a bit different.

Now, whatever kind of creature this being is, it has sat on my shoulder like the recording angels, watched me 24 hours a day, watched my driver, watched Ertan Yıldız, watched Ertan Yıldız's driver, there are about 50 people in managerial positions, it watched 50 people. It watched the firms doing business, it watched those who do business with the firms doing business. It didn't settle for Turkey. I thought about this, I mean, is there such a creature? I said, could it be a saint? No, that wasn't it. While I was wondering if it was a jinn or a demon, I decided on the devil. Because it is the devil that spreads sedition and gossip. I mean, no other created being has taken on such a task.

13.30 | THE HEARING HAS BEGUN

The detainees were brought back to the courtroom. The hearing has begun. Ali Sukas is testifying.

12.24 | THE HEARING WAS ADJOURNED

The hearing was adjourned for one hour. While adjourning, the presiding judge announced that family members of the people being tried would be admitted to the empty seats in the hall.

The judge announced that an arrangement would be made regarding the lawyers and that a loudspeaker would be placed in the hall so that members of the press could hear what was being said.

11.30 | CROSS-EXAMINATION OF MURAT OR

Murat Or's testimony has been completed. Cross-examination for Or has begun. The judge asked Or about the contradiction between his prosecutor's statement and his current statement.

The following took place in the hearing:

Prosecutor: In one of your statements to the prosecutor's office, you said, “After a number of people at AĞAÇ AŞ were taken into custody, Ali Sukas called me to his side. He said that there were some statements against me as well, and if I were called to testify, he wanted me to say that the money in question was collected to be distributed to personnel in need due to health reasons when asked.”... Why did Ali Sukas make such a statement to you?

Murat Or: I don't know. It would be better if you asked him.

Prosecutor: But did such a conversation take place?

Murat Or: Yes, it did.

Presiding Judge: You say there are factual errors in your prosecutor's statements. Then did you not read your statement at all? You are not an uneducated person; you are a chemical engineer. Did you not say, "Let me read my statement"? In your first statement, you say you thought there was money inside the thing left to Ali Sukas in a cargo bag.

10.43 | MURAT OR TESTIFIED

Murat Or, the private secretary of Ağaç AŞ General Manager Ali Sukas, testified.

Or, who is accused of "mediating bribery" within the scope of "Action 122," denied the allegations against him.

It was alleged that Or, who was stated to have made only hearsay statements regarding the bribery allegations in his prosecutor's statement in the file, said in his statement on September 29, 2025, "Although I did not witness with my own eyes that anyone gave money to Ali Sukas during the time I served, I had serious doubts about these matters."

Taking the floor at the hearing, Or drew attention to the inconsistencies between the accusations in the indictment and the accounts of witnesses and secret witnesses. Stating that he did not benefit from effective remorse, Or said, "I did not feel the need to benefit from effective remorse because there is nothing I have seen or witnessed. I have not seen with my own eyes that Ali Sukas gave money to anyone."

Emphasizing that he did not accept the accusations directed at him in his defense, Or spoke as follows:

“Throughout my life, I have neither eaten forbidden food myself nor fed it to my children. My hand would never reach out for the property of my state. I did not request money from anyone on behalf of Ali Sukas. I did not receive money from anyone either. I do not have the authority to open and examine what is brought, or to ask questions about what is brought.”

Continuing his defense, Or, who used the expression, "I did not feel the need to benefit from effective remorse. I only told about the issues I saw and heard. These are not statements based on definitive observation," said, "I do not think it would be right to make an accusation against anyone. I did not witness with my own eyes that money was given to Ali Sukas.”

Stating that he is a chemical engineer, Or explained that he started working in the R&D laboratory of an Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality subsidiary in 2012, and was appointed to the private secretary position during the AKP era in 2017. Stating that he was appointed to this position by the evaluation of the managers of the period, Or said that he met Ali Sukas after the 2019 elections.

Stating that he was deeply saddened to be mentioned with bribery accusations, Or argued that he did not ask for money from any person and did not receive money. Claiming that the allegations in which his name is mentioned in the file are not supported by concrete evidence, Or said that there is no unusual increase in his assets.

Or used the following expressions in this section:

“First of all, I would like to state that I am truly deeply saddened that my name is mentioned in a matter like bribery. Throughout my life, I have neither eaten forbidden food myself, nor fed it to my children or my wife. Together with my wife, we are people who have not even been involved in a lira of interest or forbidden money due to our religious and conscientious sensitivities. Being so, I would never reach out for money I did not deserve, especially for the property of the state. I did not request money from any person for myself, my institution, or on behalf of Mr. Ali; I have never received such money either. If everyone who knows me were asked, they would easily say that I would not get involved in such things.

During the time I served, I did my best to ensure that institutional resources were not wasted unnecessarily. When looking at the allegations in which my name is mentioned in the indictment, apart from the accusations attributed to me by the secret witness and some defendants, as the prosecution also stated, there is no concrete evidence. As can be seen from the MASAK records, there is no unusual increase in my or my family's assets.”

Arguing that the delivery methods described in the allegations are not in accordance with the ordinary flow of life, Or said that the room where he worked was in an open location that everyone could see. For this reason, he argued that it was not logical for a secret money exchange to be made there in the way described.

Or noted the following:

“Moreover, the room I worked in was a place that was constantly open. In the working order on our floor, our room was in a position that was seen at first glance and where everyone passed by. As described in the witness statements, it is possible for firms to leave something on the table and leave when Mr. Ali is not available. However, if a forbidden act were being committed as alleged, I submit to your appreciation whether it is in accordance with the ordinary flow of life for this to be done in an open area at the entrance of an executive office that could be seen by everyone.”

Or said he thinks that some of the defendant and secret witness statements in the file were given to get out of prison or not to enter the file. He argued that his name was used specifically because he was someone who worked closely with Ali Sukas.

He used the following expressions in the final part of his defense:

“I think that the defendants and secret witnesses added my name to their statements because I worked in a position close to Mr. Ali, with the motive of being able to ground their own statements on a reasonable basis, to get out of prison, or not to enter at all. Working closely with Mr. Ali as a private secretary made the use of my name functional for them.

As a matter of fact, it had been conveyed to me that some people would say that they brought me money in order to get out of prison. I clearly stated to them that I would not accept anything I had not experienced. Again, a day or two before this, I had become aware that my name was mentioned in the statement of a secret witness.”

10.34 | HOLIDAY CALL FROM İMAMOĞLU TO THE PANEL

According to Halk TV, Ekrem İmamoğlu's request, which he made at 10.34, was accepted by the court panel. Drawing attention to the period before the Ramadan Feast (Eid al-Fitr), İmamoğlu called for the release of the detainees.

Ekrem İmamoğlu stated the following:

"We are entering the Ramadan Feast. Today is the last day. Mutual negotiation and dialogue processes have taken place in some processes that have matured. Unwanted things happened, or there were demands arising from people's own troubles and experiences. In this framework, there is an asymmetry that I observe. There is a real problem being experienced here.

For example, one person is taken from the families. I used my phone right this morning, I talked to my wife for 10 minutes a week. One person from the family... These people's meetings with their families are already very troublesome. There are those who are happy the moment this is rejected and seen, there are those whose hope grows. I do not think it is right for these people to come here with a restriction of "one person".

The second asymmetric situation: 107 detainees are primarily being tried here. You say that three lawyers of these 107 detainees can come. This remains incomplete in this way: People already have meeting days one day a week. They did not change those meeting days. Because I said I have to attend every day on my own behalf, they shift me to a day when this place is not here. I do not think this three-lawyer restriction is correct either.

A very important issue is the media. Facing the monitoring of this place from the back... The monitoring of this place by people in the press would also be a more correct framework for the panels to be recognized.

Yesterday, the IMM Deputy Mayor could not enter. Where does this lead to?

I hold a meeting for 1300 people once a year. Every subject discussed here concerns municipal managers. These are not a gang, they are reputable people.

In the indictment, the CHP is shown as if it were a guilty suspect from the very first sentence; in a position pointed out enough to be complained to the Court of Cassation. Even the entry of CHP members is shown as a favor. This is not right.

Let us not come face to face with the gendarmerie, let us work carefully; this is our effort.

Everyone is ready to take responsibility. We fully commit that please evaluate this well during the holiday. Such restrictions have no contribution to you or the people being tried here. People really need this. There are such exits in history that are unforgettable; it revises all of these. If you keep the door of negotiation open, you will draw a much more reasonable, reputable line here, and the winner will be the supreme Turkish judiciary.

We came to these restrictions while talking about live broadcasting.

This country lost millions of dollars in one year. This court is very big.

We are entering the holiday. May everyone going to the holiday have the best days. Sometimes you make such a move that you send people home, and history changes. I am talking about such a surprise."

10.22 | DETAINEES BROUGHT TO THE COURTROOM

The detained defendants were taken to the courtroom under the escort of the gendarmerie in the morning hours.

09.45 | LIMITED ENTRY TO THE HALL

There was activity at the courthouse before the hearing. In the first stage, only lawyers were allowed to enter the hall, where journalists and relatives of the defendants had not yet been admitted. Dilek İmamoğlu, the wife of Ekrem İmamoğlu, also came to the courthouse to follow the hearing.

News Source: 12punto