CHP Chair Özgür Özel's 'opposition party AKP scenario': If Erdoğan sees he will lose

Özel made significant assessments regarding the current agenda. Addressing the CHP's stance on early elections, Özgür Özel reminded that neither he nor İmamoğlu has lost an election against Erdoğan, and suggested that there is a possibility Erdoğan might not run and instead prepare the AKP for the opposition.

Speaking to T24, the CHP Chair reminded that the early election period granted to the AKP would expire by April at the latest, emphasizing that after this period, the CHP's acceptance of such a call would depend on the circumstances. "Our final decision is this; they did not come to an early election when we said so," he said.

‘THE PARTY MAKES THE DECISION’

However, not closing the door on such a possibility, Özgür Özel emphasized that they could only accept a call made after this period following discussions with party organs.

Özel made the following statements regarding Erdoğan's plan to prepare the AKP for the opposition and the CHP's stance on early elections from April 2026 onwards:

“We gave them two and a half years under normal conditions at that time. Then we said, ‘come on, it could even be by April this year.’ The New Welfare Party (Yeniden Refah) was also saying April. A few parties had said ‘that would be good’ and so on. We had said ‘that would be fine too’ if they held it this April. But they aren't doing that either. From this point on, I don't have the chance to say ‘we are in for this, we will participate in this’ if there is a possibility of an early election. This would be discussed with the party's authorized bodies. What are the conditions of that day, meaning will this early election decision pass in the TBMM or not? Let's say eight months before the election, what is the benefit or advantage of waiting for an early election, what is it not? But currently, our final decision is this; they did not come to an early election when we said so.

If he takes a step with the intention of running again by pretending it's an early election, I don't have the authority to say ‘yes’ to this. Because we said in the authorized boards, ‘we will accept it if they hold an election within two and a half years, or at the latest by April 2026.’ It is seen that they have missed that opportunity now, meaning for themselves.”

‘WE HAVE NEVER LOST AGAINST ERDOĞAN’

Mr. Tayyip lost a local election. And he is still carrying the trauma of it. This is the reason for his aggression. Because he always thought like this; I have never been defeated, I will never be defeated, they can never defeat me. Thus, he thought there would always be a ballot box that would legitimize the past and the future by winning the election. In fact, democracy is not just about the ballot box, this needs to be explained. First of all, you have to emerge from a free and fair ballot box, and then you have to govern in accordance with the law. It doesn't work by saying ‘I received authority from the ballot box’ and then trampling on the constitution, meaning legitimacy. But these things were done. I think Erdoğan is experiencing a dilemma. ‘He had said that whoever loses Istanbul loses Turkey,’ this is in his ear. On the other hand, he was saying ‘I won this many times.’ There is a difference between me and Erdoğan. He was defeated, I haven't been defeated, for example. So now he goes crazy over such things. I have never lost an election to Erdoğan yet. Mayor Ekrem hasn't lost either, and I haven't lost against Erdoğan.”

‘HE MAY POSITION THE AK PARTY AS AN OPPOSITION PARTY’

“I think that if Erdoğan sees as the chair that he will lose the general election, he has a Plan B to position the AK Party as a strong opposition party instead of losing himself. I mean, just imagine, we have become the government. Apart from newspapers like Sözcü, Evrensel, and BirGün, there is also the Official Gazette. The rest, they are all theirs. All the newspapers, TVs are theirs. If you pull TRT to a neutral ground, you pull it. All the bureaucracy is theirs. The judiciary is theirs. I am not afraid of the AK Party's government, but you know, when they become the opposition, they have a power in their hands that is very worrying for a government at first. I think we will struggle with an asymmetric power they acquired unfairly. I foresee that he might not run in the election by constructing a strong AKP opposition that he would see as secure for himself as well. But if there is a possibility of winning, especially if he sees that it can only be won with himself, he will of course try it.”

The full interview where CHP Chair Özgür Özel touches on many topics regarding the agenda is as follows:

“Absolute nullity, pure political engineering”

-The absolute nullity lawsuit has started to be reheated, do you see a risk of absolute nullity?

Absolute nullity doesn't leave me alone either. The moment I heard it, I said, “This is political engineering.” You are supposedly going and the previous chair is coming back. It is pure political engineering. It is done to discuss the party and have it discussed in public opinion. At that time, I had called for absolute silence against this absolute nullity discussion to my friends. It went on like that for a very long time. But of course, it happens in such a way that everything gets active four days before the hearing, of course. But every time, even some of our friends said, “Chair, this calmness of yours is driving us crazy.” Right now, I have no worries or anxiety either. The problem is here, this ultimately causes damage as it continues to be discussed inside and outside the party. Meaning it keeps someone busy. I mean, I am not talking, our circle is not talking. But someone is talking. That's why I always tell everyone who values my words that this is already something aimed at this purpose. Therefore, don't take these seriously. Discussions sometimes reach such a point that this time, excessive reactions rise on social media, which we cannot control in the party, over a possibility, in our favor. This time, some things happen that will offend the party's previous chairs. This is ultimately planting a mine inside the party. That is also a very disturbing situation.

“No move can achieve results”

Everyone in the Republican People's Party must follow this issue with absolute silence and patience, with a maddening patience. Because you cannot take a legal precaution against this itself. You cannot take it like this; there is no side to this that aligns with reason, logic, or law. Three congresses have been held since that day. One of them is even a congress where every member chooses their neighborhood delegate and chooses the district delegate, the provincial delegate. So many different things have passed over it that neither that delegate exists anymore nor anyone else... We have been re-elected three times on top of it. They did a laboratory study of this issue in Istanbul. They canceled the congress in Istanbul. They appointed a trustee in its place. We also operated the congress calendar. The district election boards in Istanbul and the YSK found the other side unfair in accordance with reason, logic, and the law many times. They said they hold their congress, they choose a new one, the congress that started in its procedure continues. We have done this work three times and this work is finished now. There is nothing that can be done here after this point. Also, when you look at it politically, no move that does not correspond to a political expectation in society can achieve results.

If society already thinks that the party is not being managed well, for example, the management in the party is shaken, wobbles, and is forced to go and refresh its confidence without any need for a lawsuit. The first party in the polls, the chair who received all of the valid votes of the delegates who voted. A blanket list where the key list has not been broken for the first time in history. The blanket list was invented in the late 1960s and there has been a key list since that day. Ecevit's key list was broken, Deniz Bey's key list was broken. İnönü's key list was broken. Baykal's key list, Kemal Bey's was broken. There are two key lists that have not been broken until today. One is the key list we made at the extraordinary congress, and the other is at the last ordinary congress. This is not because of our great success, but because of the great unity within the party. 1,333 people are not voting for Özgür Özel's eyebrows and eyes. I said, “I don't even count three of those 1,333 votes for myself” in the speech I made. We are under the greatest attack in history and the party members are protecting the party. They are uniting against external attack. When the party is so united, neither nullity works for this business nor an atomic bomb from outside. I mean, it's impossible. That's why artificial discussions don't achieve results when the party is on such a solid ground within itself. Legal initiatives that will not achieve results also harm the AK Party, not anyone else.

-The claim that has been circulating in the market for a long time is that you are keeping a party in reserve against this possibility. Is this true?

The party takes precautions, of course. We have a table. Our table is working and taking precautions against all scenarios. For example, the issue of “Are you keeping a party on the side?” This is not a precaution against nullity, we don't have such a concern either. That is not its antidote. If there is nullity, we will go, it will never happen. The antidote to closing a party is to keep a party on the side. How the process regarding the DEM worked and they tried to close it. At least one needs to hold that sword at the top. For example, they might not give the treasury aid and it is important because the CHP has no other income after all.

That's why, meaning there is an issue regarding one or more parties on the side, but this is not the antidote to nullity, the antidote to nullity is something else, meaning. A party is not kept on the side against the possibility of nullity. Am I going to leave my party and go? Did I leave the party in Istanbul, even if there is nullity, I will leave it here, meaning. Did you leave the party today, this is a matter of a flag. The nation has given a flag into your hand. Did you leave the flag? They won't give it to you again, meaning. You will hold that flag to death, if you are going to fall, you will fall with the flag. But one needs to take a precaution against closing a party while heading towards the election. As an antidote to that, friends in the past, like a crisis desk, meaning more precisely we have a crisis desk. A mechanism we call the war room and such a preparation was made when a closure move was made.

-Are the expulsions related to the nullity process?

These expulsions are not expulsions made by the party headquarters. I say this from this perspective. Expulsions made by the Istanbul Provincial Disciplinary Board. That's why if I, as the chair of the party, say something as if these expulsions have happened and finished, it would be unfair to the friends in the high disciplinary board. They will look at these files as a clean authority. Sometimes the province expels, this place turns it into a reprimand, a warning.

“There is a trustee-like organism there; those expelled didn't even come to make a defense”

If you look at what the expelled friends did, they are not being expelled for something related to politics. I mean, they are being expelled over party morality. Among the expelled friends, there are those who directly call Mayor Ekrem and his friends “thieves.” The man tweets, “Don't defend the thieves to me, Özgür.” On the other hand, there is a declaration. It is a very heavy declaration, but none of them were expelled just because of the declaration, they didn't even come to the defense. I asked yesterday what happened. “They aren't even making a defense,” he says. If they come and express regret, the punishment is immediately lowered by three levels. The party doesn't want to lose members, it strives to gain members. But today, there is a trustee-like mechanism in Istanbul. We can't even call it a trustee. There is a trustee-like structure, an organism there. A group that the organism found from the previous period, brought itself and put it in the room, and while shooting a video, talked and talked and insulted and slandered the party, us, Mayor Ekrem, and the imprisoned friends with a mouthful, is the interlocutor to the expulsions there. Still, they have a chance to stay in the party when they defend themselves and with remorse, meaning with regret, say “well, we did this but...” But they didn't even come to make a defense. Because they have very heavy words.

-Do you see a risk of division in the party?

I don't see it at all. Whoever tries to divide divides themselves. There are a lot of people in the party who think very differently. As I said a little while ago, we are putting a ballot box starting from the neighborhood. The party is in a very different perspective. When I took the chairmanship, we had 1 million 250 thousand members, now we have over two million members. At a point where so many different people are concentrated and integrated into one job together, where an 83-year-old party member stands in front of the bus at the rally in the rain, meaning the nation is really going there to act, to resist, to say before history "I also did my part." When I see the state of some, I get sad and say “it would have been fine if he hadn't come either.” That's why a division from the party will not come out at this stage. Only if someone is very adrift, they throw themselves out. Other than that, nothing will happen.

-You said you don't expect a negative result from the nullity lawsuit, but there is a detail being talked about. It is said, “The old management will come and some of the current ones will be expelled.” This situation has been voiced for months. Even if a call committee is formed like the structure you call trustee-like, do you have any work to prevent this?

They did this in Istanbul. Is Özgür Çelik putting the party's wreath? Is the trustee-like structure putting it? Some friends here are opposing Özgür Çelik's expulsions today, aren't they? Does that mean Özgür Çelik is not the provincial chair? Whereas the trustee had disciplined one of our district chairs. That district chair continues his duty. Özgür Çelik is invited to the Istanbul governor's reception. Meaning, these types of legal things that have no response in the public do not yield results. This is a matter of seeing or not seeing legitimacy. I have no problems with Gürsel Tekin in the past in general, personally. He says to me, “It's enough if I drink a tea of yours.” I told the private secretary, “Even you shouldn't answer his phone.” Let them call from the switchboard. This is not because of my personal hostility towards Gürsel Tekin. I have done a world of politics with Gürsel Tekin. But after he goes somewhere else, you can't recognize him, meaning. No matter who does what, when the party is so integrated, the trustee to be appointed here would be in the same situation as the trustee in Istanbul.

The business of “I will do politics despite the nation, the people, the member and I will pretend” doesn't work. Gürsel Tekin was claiming for himself that he was the strongest politician on the street in Istanbul. He experienced very negative things, meaning. He can go out on the street as Gürsel Tekin, but you can't go out on the street as the trustee of the CHP, it doesn't work.

-According to public opinion polls, the CHP is 5 percent ahead of the AKP. As the CHP Chair, do you think this 5 percent is enough for the CHP to win the election?

Now, there are 2-3 questions here that actually seem similar but have very different answers in the first part. The first is the issue of election security. This is an area we work on very specially. This is a question asked 60 days before the election. When we distributed tasks at the first MYK meeting, I told my friends, “If this question is still being asked 60 days before the election, no matter what you answer to this, it doesn't work.”

For example, the criticisms of the last time have justified dimensions, but actually, 90 percent are unjustified. For example, in the last election, the CHP did not enter the election in 7 provinces. When you don't enter the election, you can't give ballot box officials there. That's why there were problems. We have already appointed the ballot box officials. There is a 100-person call center, they are working in the Party Assembly hall. They also registered to the system through an application called “Sandığım” (My Ballot Box) as ballot box officials. We appointed 180 thousand officials of the 194 thousand ballot boxes. So far, 146 thousand people have been called from these officials and they accepted the duty. We aim to increase this to 190 thousand. For the calling part, it will start again on March 9.

We are doing two things related to this. One, we are defining 3-month duties for them. The Sandığım application shows the 320 people in Manisa, for example, who will likely vote with him, to our ballot box official. We are also determining his substitute, that is also there. First, they can see the CHP members marked in green. They call them first and say we are the official of this ballot box, let's work together. I even sometimes tell them, “Work as you work for the neighborhood election.” We want them to separate by saying “We can get this one's vote, we can't get this one's.” They have notes they keep during their visits. For example, if he has met with an AKP member, he takes a note. For example; whether he supported during the signature process or not is noted. If he didn't give it, a lot comes out of the reason. For example, he didn't give it because he is a civil servant. We won't go and fight with him again if he says I am an AK Party member and kicks us out of the door. These are noted. We are planning six visits until the election.

He will call the voter and say “welcome.” He will even say to the MHP member, “This is your member.” The job is finished there already. You have seized the dominance of the ballot box. We are in such a preparation. We are at around 145 thousand here, this needs to be increased to 180 thousand.

We will do something like this in September this year. If there is no early election until September, we will do the 2026 election exercise in September. Our ballot box officials will wake up at six in the morning on the day we determine, they will come to the school at seven. They will scan the QR code. Ultimately, they will send us the wet-signed paper. We will determine who creates a breakdown in the exercise that day and we will change them. This whole team will participate in the exercise. Simultaneously, ballot box officials will go to the ballot box in 81 provinces, 963 districts. Apart from the exercise dimension of this, there will also be a communication dimension. It will be said, “CHP's ballot box officials got up, went. They did an exercise at the school.”

5 percent is not a bad difference. A 5 percent difference cannot be closed by stealing. But differences below 1 percent are dangerous. And a main side of your question is this. The poll cannot measure theft. We saw it in the local elections too. Now, especially in the center-right voter, there is a tendency to vote for the winning side once. For example, you go to ask for a vote, the man says; “Will you be able to win? How is it going?” They are constantly weighing.

In the Manisa elections, Tanju Tosun and his wife said, “Tunç Bey is having research done for us.” We said, “Can we look at Manisa too?” We had elected a deputy with 29 percent in Manisa in the last election. They measured Manisa and it came out as 38 percent. They said, “If you nominate someone who is identified with Manisa and is not a very strict CHP member, they will vote for you. You are a partner in the election.” Then Manisa's vote rate was measured as 41 and 43. We were saying we might come head-to-head in the election, etc. On the election evening, we got 60 percent. It especially comes out in these villages. In the evening, he looks, takes the pulse to see who will win.

Our village, it used to be a town, now it's a neighborhood. The CHP was getting 100 of the 1,100 votes, the rest was center-right. When I became a candidate, I went. I was explaining family insurance, etc. Someone grabbed the microphone from my hand with anger. “Is there anyone who hasn't seen kindness from his family?” he said. It was said no. “What family insurance, brother? His insurance is his family. We will all vote,” he said. 900 votes came out for us in the village. They sent me off with enthusiasm. I went to the village later to thank them. Funeral house... “What happened?” they say. “A deputy came out of the village,” I said. He came out but they were unhappy because we became “opposition.” They are in the logic that our votes were wasted. “We voted for you, you said we will win but we couldn't win,” they said. When I said I would voice the problems, they said, “Voice the problem, but who will you have pave the asphalt?” There is something strange, meaning. They want to be on the winning side.

In this election, for example, they were convinced that the CHP would win, 60 percent of the votes came out. That's why that 5 percent, I think, will also be 15 in a way that is a bit high in self-confidence, ahead in numbers, showing that it is heading towards winning the election. I have no worries about that. But if the difference starts to fall towards below one percent, even towards below two, they will try everything.

-Do you see the March 19 process as a defeat? How do you think the center-right voter interprets this process?

In the first poll conducted 10 days after March 19, 55 percent said this case is “political,” 25 percent said “legal.” There was also a 20 percent segment of “I have no idea, I am undecided.” They spent the whole summer doing black propaganda. Then the indictment came. There was a new clash in the indictment. Honestly, I think we devastated them in the indictment. Because none of their lies are there. They made a very big tactical mistake. Throughout the summer, they said, “You will see. Look, videos will come out, there are millions of dollars under the parquet. There is footage of money in bags.” Then it didn't come out and when we said “where are these,” it exploded. Currently, the rate of those who say “this case is political” has become 61 percent.

The voter endures many things. Even sometimes, I don't know, he even endures illegal harsh practices. For example, the voter doesn't say; “Well, why is this police so harsh? Why did you do this?” But he reacts very harshly to things done against the ballot box. Meaning, he reacts very harshly to the taking of the ballot box from his hand, the taking of the decision from his hand. They set the state against the nation. They brought the state and the nation face to face. The injustice done by the governors, the provincial chair, TRT, and Anadolu Agency... They made specialist sergeants vote in districts they had never experienced and will never experience. Just think, they take two thousand specialist sergeants to a district. They say, “Vote, let the AK Party win the municipality.” People don't accept this and react seriously. If people see that these things done are not legal but political things, this will not work for the AK Party. I think this business can make them pay a very big price too.

“Mr. Tayyip should pay a political price for not making Ekrem İmamoğlu a candidate first”

The important thing is to catch the voter's emotion correctly. To explain ourselves correctly. For example, the diploma was canceled. What will happen? I say our candidate is İmamoğlu. Why? Mr. Tayyip should pay a political price for not making Ekrem İmamoğlu a candidate first. Let him face the political cost of fearing his rival, putting his rival in jail. If he cannot be a candidate in the end, it will be looked at that day. But until that day, let the nation see, meaning. Isn't he my candidate? Our candidate is İmamoğlu and Mr. Tayyip is keeping him in jail. Some say “Announce a new candidate.” Let Ekrem Bey withdraw from candidacy himself, let someone new come. Okay! Let it look as if there is free competition in Turkey then. Ekrem Bey is not a candidate. We have another candidate. Mr. Tayyip is also competing with him. That's not the situation, meaning.

-Anxious conservative voters are mentioned. Do you have a message on this subject?

In the past, they were saying “If the CHP comes, this will happen, that will happen.” It is clear that nothing happened in local governments. We have discussed this many times with AK Party members too. First of all, I am someone who boycotted against the headscarf ban that was tried to be implemented at school during my university years. I am someone who organized a boycott. Secondly, my own electoral district in Manisa can guarantee to all voters in Turkey on my behalf in terms of respect for lifestyle.

-Aziz İhsan Aktaş is one of the critical names in the operations against CHP municipalities. How do you interpret the fact that the municipalities have worked with a name like Aziz İhsan Aktaş? There were also corruption allegations against CHP municipalities. You also voiced that they were threatened and switched to the AKP. Couldn't you have formed a board, investigated whether there is corruption or not, and created a roadmap?

The party cannot audit a public institution. That municipality is a public institution. If you try to audit a public institution, this is a crime in itself. But we are doing something like this. We assign 2-3 friends and try to understand what the situation is by going there. For example, we expelled the Manavgat Mayor that day. We expelled the kid who took that box in Manavgat that day. The kid who had one hundred thousand liras in his bag in Bodrum, a municipal council member, we expelled that day. But other than that, this Aziz İhsan Aktaş is a very complicated issue.

For example, there is a man who is a tender file consultant. His name is Mustafa Mutlu. Everyone recommended this man to each other. He was hired as someone who knows the tender legislation to do good tenders. This man also works for the AKP and the ministries. When you look at it, he really makes tenders that pass through the Court of Accounts one after another... Everything looks perfect. But on the other hand, this man has contact with Aziz İhsan Aktaş and three-five people like him. I warned my friends, “You are new mayors. We changed so-and-so because there is a lot of talk. Are you paying attention?” They gave this as an example. “There is a man. He knows the legislation, he does it perfectly. The man's tenders have not received criticism from the Court of Accounts,” it was said. Then we learned that the man is describing the tenders that Aziz İhsan Aktaş can take. These are big, big tenders. Asphalt tender, for example. Only 4 companies have taken it in Turkey. They have put it in a turnstile among themselves. This Mustafa Mutlu was also organizing the system here. There are many lessons to be learned from here.

If the party tries to form a board and audit, it has no authority to request a document now. They will say “CHP went to cover it up.” That's why one needs to resist the slander dimension of the business and follow the technical dimension through the file. At the end of this business, trials were held. Our lawyer friends are watching very closely. If it is really unexplainable, bribery, whatever, etc., we as a party cannot walk the path with that mayor or municipal council member anyway. It wouldn't be right for the party to do something by evaluating setups, etc., as a tip-off while under such a heavy attack. But if there is someone who is really involved in big filth, we don't keep them in the party for a day, meaning. We acted very quickly in Manavgat too. I said, “I watched 32 hours of video.” Where does it say 32 hours of video? There is such footage shown to us; he enters the room, says “Take this.” He cuts. He takes the money, it ends. Whereas they had entered and exited the room many times before. For example, the man goes outside. It shows he is there, etc. They talk in the corridor before entering. The bribe-taker comes out. They talk in the corridor. They take the bribe-taker and take him away. The man enters inside. They continue these as if they entered the room immediately on record. Whereas they know beforehand that he was put there. I am not saying “the man didn't take a bribe.” I already expelled him on the first day. They placed the camera here, they worked on this. They caught the man for drug trafficking a month and a half ago. They released him three days later. They worked...

-In the process where mayoral candidates were determined, especially Mansur Yavaş wanted Mesut Özarslan very much. Did you follow the process afterwards?

It is true that Mesut Özarslan was undoubtedly a candidate with Mansur Bey's reference, he is not someone we know. But it is also true that he disappointed Mansur Bey. For example, Mesut Özarslan wouldn't be for Çankaya, wouldn't be for Etimesgut, wouldn't be for Mamak. Mesut Özarslan wouldn't be for any district that the CHP could win with its own power. In fact, when his name was mentioned for Mamak, I had said, “We will win this place with a CHP member.” But it was seen as difficult to win with a CHP candidate in Keçiören, where Mesut Özarslan won. For example, I see this here regarding Mansur Bey. When the transfer of Mesut Özarslan was an issue and then during those controversial days, for example, Mansur Bey gave the file regarding the criminal complaints about PORTAŞ. “Ask, sir, what happened to these?” he said. For example, Mansur Bey has not the slightest concern about himself regarding PORTAŞ. “Ask what happened to this criminal complaint regarding PORTAŞ, it means there is a loophole in this that we don't know, since they caught this,” he said. Ultimately, when one tries to hold Mansur Bey accountable for Mesut Özarslan, then I have to account for the ‘Heel-Shoed Efe’ (Topuklu Efe) then. Or one needs to ask the account of the ‘Heel-Shoed Efe’ from Mr. Baykal, may God have mercy on his soul. One needs to ask the account of Beykoz from Ekrem Bey. One needs to ask the account of Gaziantep from me, it is in my period. That's why this is not a matter of origin, it is a matter of morality, a matter of personality, these corruption businesses...

-Well, were you very angry that evening?

I was angry, of course. Because he came to me, “Look at the sparkle in my eyes, chair, is there anyone who lies to me with my sparkling eyes? I assure you on my honor,” he says, he makes swearing oaths to himself; “Am I like this, am I like that...” But when he attempted this three days later, I was angry, of course. “What happened, you were saying like this?” I said. I have no swearing at him.

-You also called via video. What were you going to do when he opened it when you called via video?

I called him constantly, video or no video. At first, I was going to question him. “Let me see, are your eyes still sparkling?” I was going to say. He was saying to me, “Look at my eye, is there anyone who will leave the party in me? Am I that bad?” he was saying. He wasn't answering the phones, I called and called because he would answer mine. When I called two days ago, he answered on Thursday evening. He made oaths, he said all sorts of things.

-After Mesut Özarslan's departure from the CHP and the process he experienced with you, claims that “They will come to Mansur Bey from here too” came to the agenda. On one hand, the Minister of Justice changed, the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor was appointed as a minister to Ankara. Considering your statement “If there is no İmamoğlu, there is Mansur Yavaş,” do you have such a concern?

If you look at it as the potential of this government to do evil, there is a possibility for everything, but as in this PORTAŞ issue, the self-confidence Mansur Bey put forward and something that the society can also say “He eliminated his first rival, he is doing this to his possible rival too,” I think this is not a burden that this government can carry politically. Secondly, it is not a burden that the Turkish economy can carry. I don't know if they will resort to the same method once more after this time, but if a more innovative evil comes to their minds, they will not spare Mansur Bey from it, they will not deprive him. But I don't think they can subject Mansur Bey to something again that they couldn't convince the citizen of with the same method. But they can do anything. Every evil is expected, meaning.

-Akın Gürlek's swearing-in as Minister of Justice was protested in the Parliament. Group Deputy Chair Ali Mahir Başarır said that he shook hands with Gürlek in the Parliament on the same day and said, “Today will be a bad day for you.” While you describe the operations against the CHP as “political and state that these operations are carried out through Gürlek,” how do you interpret the shaking of hands with Gürlek?

The handshake happened before the swearing-in, not after. Ali Mahir Başarır said, “I was shaking hands with everyone. He also stood up, I shook his hand.” In the back of the Parliament, on the ground of dialogue, I haven't seen anyone leave anyone's hand in the air yet. If it is known that Akın Gürlek is there, he could not have gone, but while shaking everyone's hand in turn, he didn't say “let me skip Akın Gürlek, let me go to the other.” He didn't make peace with Akın Gürlek in the end. While passing by, he said, “It will be a difficult day for you.” He doesn't find it right that these things are blown out of proportion so much. The back side in the Parliament is a sterile area. There is the Deputy Speaker of the Parliament, there are Group Deputy Chairs. He didn't go and make peace, didn't reconcile, we are continuing the struggle in the end.

-You addressed Akın Gürlek, who was appointed as Minister of Justice, and said “Declare your assets” and gave a one-week deadline. You were expected to make a statement at this week's group meeting, but you didn't, and you stated that the deadline would expire in the evening. Your expected statement did not come in the evening hours either. What is the latest situation, why didn't you make a statement?

Very soon. I gave Akın Gürlek a one-week deadline by saying “Declare this as soon as possible,” I didn't give myself a deadline. I say this for this reason; legally, when they come to duty, they must give a property declaration within one month. His deadline will expire on March 11. I don't know if we will leave it after March 11. Because Akın Gürlek's deadline expired last Tuesday. On Wednesday, there were those who wrote a column saying, “Why didn't you speak at the rally?” I don't want there to be a thought like “Is he entering into a bargain with Akın Gürlek?” or “Did Akın Gürlek threaten the CHP?” at all. That's why I gave a one-week deadline by saying, “I declare to the public as soon as possible.” His legal deadline is March 11. I want to wait for March 11, so that it enters the state's record. Otherwise, what haven't we declared until today, we haven't taken a step back.

-So actually, you are in a position to declare it today too.

If we didn't have it, we wouldn't say it anyway, I already gave the numbers, the number of title deeds, they also know it's true. Akın Gürlek's deadline expired but it is being acted as if my deadline also expired. I will declare this at the most appropriate time, perhaps with a separate press conference, perhaps with another method, we have no state of hiding.

-After the March 19 operations, you had called for a boycott, in the following process you said “We ended the boycott.” However, some of the citizens did not stop the boycott. Do you have a current boycott call, at what stage are the boycotts?

The ongoing boycott, there is no place we officially boycott. There is something like this: The boycott issue has three dimensions. In the first dimension, there was a general boycott demand of the youth. The rate of those who support that issue in society is 21 percent and it is perceived as if it will also harm small tradesmen. We also contributed to the youth's one-day boycott call for one day. The 21 percent who support this there. Even in brand boycotts, the support rate goes up to at most 35 percent. Actually, it is using the power coming from consumption, which is extremely legitimate, but the public doesn't like this business very much in Turkey. There is no such state of seeing 80 percent support. When this loosens a bit, this time it ceases to be a weapon. While we were lifting all boycotts, we said, “Brother, look, we are lifting the boycotts but everyone should pay attention to the news they make, etc., we are following.” Many televisions that didn't give our news at all before the boycott was lifted, maybe they don't broadcast the rallies live now, but they broadcast a four-minute package from the rally. We measure this, we take a look. When there is a structure, brand, firm, institution that does wrong and ignores us, we don't hear back from the boycott, but we wanted to take that weapon and have it recharged again. Because when used constantly, the boycott weapon's charge runs out. Results must be achieved. For example, the thing that caused anxiety at first had stopped causing anxiety. For this reason, we are recharging it now.

In the statement you made recently, you pointed to March 2. Will you announce the election promises in that process?

Not all of them as election promises, but we will announce some of our promises towards the CHP government that are filtered from the suggestions of the policy board presidencies and are also in accordance with the expectations of the society. We will also announce what kind of a big campaign we have started. We are already in the longest-running campaign of our political history. First, we will talk about that we will go to the field with our organizations, deputies, our party organizations and what we will tell. And we will make a call towards participating in the campaign. We have a goal of making the most crowded campaign in world political history. We will strengthen this step by step.

-Can we call it a kind of ‘election start’ for March 2?

We gave the election start on March 19. We had said we would make a thousand-day campaign if necessary. I had pointed to the thousandth day, anyway they were also saying the autumn of 2027. The thousandth day comes to December 13, 2027. In all likelihood, we will either be in power that day or there will be a maximum of four months left to the election to change the government.

-In his new call, Abdullah Öcalan said that the transition to the positive construction phase should be made now, especially through the concept of nation. What he points to actually requires a constitutional amendment. Would the CHP be at a possible constitutional table? How do you find the process continuing now?

While we were sitting at the table, we had talked with all parties and all parties confirmed this; “No constitutional call will come out of this table.” Because I am someone who believes that Turkey needs a constitution; a constitution made by a democratic, civil, elected Parliament and that needs to find a very high rate of support with a referendum under very free conditions, and the constitution needs to reach a great social contract. However, I am also sure that the constitutional amendment that Tayyip Erdoğan will make under these conditions will again be not a constitution like the last time, but a “law for me,” that it will be a constitution serving Erdoğan, and that he will seek either to make his own government permanent or to make it permanent that will protect his existing regime with constitutional power. That's why I am extremely distant from this issue. But I also have to say something like this. In the issue of the commission established in the Parliament, in the discussion of “let the CHP be, let it not be,” we said, “Fear the commission where we are not, not where we are.” Now our justification on that subject has emerged. Even though there was an effort to tear something off through the commission report that came out and wonder if we can create something, it did not see a response. Because the one who looks at the report says, “Come on, dear, this report is not called a betrayal report.” Where the CHP is not, that report could have evolved into other places too. The CHP's supporting, auditing, and regulating role there was also important.

"One shouldn't know Erdoğan for the comfort zone where he will throw the CHP aside"

Also, you heard it from Numan Kurtulmuş's own mouth, he says that the 6th and 7th articles of the report should be implemented intertwined and quickly. While the sixth article refers to the steps to be taken after the disarmament of the organization, the seventh article refers to strong democratic regulations, and if the CHP were not there, that seventh article would not be there. There is now a Parliamentary report aimed at the emergence of democratization steps from here, it has been signed. That's why, although the framework I drew a little while ago regarding the constitution is our general framework, the point I am trying to bring the CHP to as the CHP Chair is this; being a predictable CHP in terms of political interlocutors is not a good thing. “I will do this anyway. When I do this, the CHP will do this. I will fill the place vacated by the CHP with this. I will give the photo with these, I will carry out my business,” such an easy political area, we haven't given it to Tayyip Erdoğan since the day we came to management in the party. I also think that one shouldn't give it. That's why one shouldn't know Tayyip Erdoğan for a comfort zone where he is predictable, where actors can throw the CHP aside and do everything with other actors. For example, whoever expects the most to start a constitutional discussion today, “let regulations be made in the sixth article and let this be done with social consensus,” it harms that person the most. Because today, whoever has the highest expectation for the steps to be taken in case of the disappearance of terrorism or the complete disarmament of the terrorist organization, the constitutional discussion harms that segment the most.

-Comments are being made that there is a leadership discussion within the AKP. As the CHP leader, how do you evaluate the leadership struggle discussed in the AKP in the recent period? Especially the names of Bilal Erdoğan, Hakan Fidan, and Berat Albayrak are mentioned and it is talked about that there is a political competition between them.

According to what those close to Erdoğan say, two chairs call Hakan Fidan “TikToker Hakan.” One is me, one is another chair. He was saying to his team, “Look at what TikToker Hakan did today, let's see.” Mr. Tayyip is extremely uncomfortable with all preparations in the party other than himself. That's why I wasn't surprised that he addresses Hakan Bey with the nickname I gave. Even when you look at social media in the AK Party, we see who intends what, what image studies are being done. But I am busy with this much. I am looking at my own business. Other than that, one cannot become the government by relying on these. We need to be busy with our own candidate, our own walk. But everyone knows that there is no milk-liman (calm) situation there either, that the inside of the party is turbulent. I think the fundamental discomfort, the fundamental discomfort in the AK Party is political beyond the individuals. The Minister of Justice, who comes from the AK Party Youth Branches, who is in politics in the AK Party, was liquidated and replaced by someone who came from the bureaucracy, and there was a serious conflict between them until the last moment. That's why, in the AK Party, the issue that AK Party politics remains indexed to the person, that it can easily sacrifice its own cadres, its own children instead of protecting them, and that no AK Party politician other than Mr. Tayyip is protected, can be sacrificed immediately when necessary, is I think the most striking discussion. “Who are we doing this politics for, what for? Was this much effort for this many years given for Akın Gürlek?” like...

The Bülent Turan issue in the Ministry of Interior... He was the group deputy chair of the party, someone who had been Tayyip Erdoğan's deputy for years was given a duty under the Istanbul Governor. A big conflict broke out there. Even the Minister of Interior tried to throw his own deputy minister in front of the media. Bülent Turan didn't come with this experience here, but this time the Erzurum Governor came. Meaning, I know that AK Party politics discusses this and politics does not easily digest this discussion. You brought the governor, what did he do? Now why are you bringing and putting another governor instead of Bülent Turan, who proved to you that he was right in his struggle with that governor, that that governor set up setups? This is an important thing. The Ministry of Interior, I think, is the most touchstone place of Turkish politics. For example, in a coalition, who the Ministry of Interior remains with is a very important thing. In the coalition within the AK Party itself, will this Ministry of Interior always be these appointees and those who come to eat without effort in politics? They cannot carry this discussion for a long time.

-After the local elections, you had taken a “normalization” step with the President, he had defined this as “softening in politics.” At the point reached today, do you regret taking this step?

Two people gave a name to that process. Mr. Tayyip said “softening.” I said “Normalization, this is the normal.” When an era closes in politics, whatever that name is called by, it has a meaning. If that process had been softening, it wasn't my process. We didn't soften in this process, we did its normal. What normal did we do? The party that came out first from the election turns and it falls to it to open the phone when the holiday comes. When Mr. Tayyip was the first party, he didn't call us once. When I was the first party, I called him. I did this not so that Mr. Tayyip would see, but so that his voters would see. I am not after showing respect to Mr. Tayyip. I have respect for his voter. When the CHP takes the power into its hand, does it become revisionist, or does it return to normal politics, does it do what was done to it? The law holding accountable is something else. The normalization process didn't start with me calling Tayyip Erdoğan or me going to him, him coming to me. The normalization process was with the first press statement we made. I said, “The Republican People's Party is the first party after 47 years. My first expectation from here; let no one touch things like weapons, fireworks, etc., starting tonight. We rejoiced, we were happy but let's go to bed at a reasonable hour. The winner of this election is the CHP, there is no loser.” It was done to us from time to time; the losing mayor's head is drummed until morning in villages, towns, districts. “Don't do this. Never anger the losers. The winner of this election is Turkey, there is no loser,” he said.

"Mr. Tayyip couldn't manage to attach the name 'softening', its name remained 'normalization'"

With such a perspective and especially we said that we will serve the authority given by the nation in a process from now on without separating anyone. Other things may have remained in the minds of the friends who criticized me regarding that process from that process. My concern, that night, what remained in the mind of the voter who didn't vote for us in the election? Because when voting next time, if something remained in his mind like “What did Özgür Özel do on the evening he won the election?” that is important. Or, “If he opened the holiday phone as the first party, when he becomes the first party tomorrow, will he be in an attitude that doesn't exclude, push, shove us, but on the contrary, embraces us too,” will he say, the essence of the matter is this. Despite all his power, Mr. Tayyip couldn't manage to attach the name “softening” to that process, its name remained “normalization.” Because this is the normal. We will continue normal relations with our political interlocutors as a normal government in our government too.

-Along with the economy, there are criticisms towards the judiciary. We also experienced it in the arrest of Alican Uludağ recently. Do you have any work regarding the judiciary, how do you look at it?

There is such a danger. Of course, one shouldn't say that all of those taken in this period are militants of a party, but it is not a small number either. Militants are inside and unfortunately, they have placed them in critical places. At this point, Şule Özsoy Boyunsuz has a duty; the job description I made with her is like this: Professor, when we come, don't work on “how do we seize the justice mechanism, the judiciary?” When we come, work on “how do we establish a judiciary order that no one can seize again?” She also said, “This was the best briefing, direction I have received until now, if you said the opposite, it wouldn't sit well with me either,” she said. Because it shouldn't turn into such a tennis match. That's why we want a judiciary order that no one can seize for the future. First of all, there is the issue of the number of judges and prosecutors in the judiciary increasing a lot. At this point, there is a need for a purification mechanism where selections will be made with the right sieve. This is an effort where militants selected with extremely subjective criteria and placed in certain places will be evaluated in more useful places, where they can get the return of their own labor more, not ours but the independent judiciary of the Republic of Turkey will be established. A huge team is working. This is an important preparation. We are also planning this for the media. Not to seize the media, we are working on a media, press law or practices that will not be seized again.

-You had said that Tanıl Bora's book Cereyanlar was your bedside book, did you change your bedside book?

I said bedside, maybe they will get even angrier, basic reference book... Tanıl Bora's own political thought, approach aside. Tanıl Bora supports Gençlerbirliği, I don't. Tanıl Bora's own political orientation is something else but no one should be unfair to the work and labor he put forward. Whoever writes a similar one, I will take it and put it in my library and refer to it often. There is a strange work that summarizes Turkish political history so well, both in terms of detail and for the curious, even if it is little but too much for someone else, -as he wrote in the preface-. For someone like me who forgets names a lot, forgets abbreviations, it is a very basic reference book. If you look at it, my bedside book is Hemingway, normally. I used to read Hemingway all the time, it was very good before going to sleep. But I referred to it a lot and it is a book that is both in Manisa and Ankara. If you really look, it is a bedside book that is also suitable for knowing, on the one hand. They are doing a great injustice. That book has a host language and while it is going to explain which movement, it hosts that movement seriously while explaining that movement. This is not a bad thing at all, it is something he does without making it an enemy.

-Well, how do you evaluate the discussions made regarding the secularism declaration and Ramadan events in schools?

The matter itself is this: He has tasked the Minister of National Education directly with polarization. Everything the Minister of National Education does by touching the nerve endings; “let someone show a reaction, let's extract a polarization from here, let's do with education at school what we couldn't do with service.” The Minister of National Education is one of the two most unsuccessful ministers in Turkey. One is the Minister of Justice, one is the Minister of National Education. In all polls, even the AK Party female voter is 23 percent satisfied with the education her child receives. The satisfaction rate with education has fallen to 18 percent. That's why those who cannot produce consent with the steps they take in National Education are now trying to extract a polarization by pulling to old fights and also exploiting Ramadan and extract something from here. The place we stand is clear, we know where we stand against what the Minister of National Education does, against all attacks made on the values of the Republic and the Republic, but I am not in the amateurishness to fall into his game and go to the ground he wants and discuss the matter from the place he wants and provide him with the political benefit he wants. Mr. Erdoğan has tasked him with that. We are approaching the matter from a very cautious, correct place. We will continue to approach it like that too.

News Source: 12punto