Key figure in İmamoğlu case speaks out: 'I didn't receive a single penny'

Within the scope of the investigation into Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu, a report sent to MASAK had alleged that a total of 10 million 329 thousand TL in consulting fees had been paid to Erkan Karaarslan by the Avcılar, Beylikdüzü, and Sarıyer municipalities.

The same report also included a 1 million 754 thousand TL consulting agreement made with Karaarslan during İmamoğlu's tenure as Mayor of Beylikdüzü. However, the MASAK report emphasized that no records regarding these payments could be found and that no payment was made to Karaarslan.

Karaarslan made a statement to the Sözcü newspaper regarding these allegations, stating the following:

"I DID NOT RECEIVE A SINGLE PENNY"

"There is talk of consulting fees being paid to me by the Avcılar, Beylikdüzü, and Sarıyer municipalities. However, not a single penny was paid to me. These amounts are the contract values between the municipalities and my company. However, since these contracts were terminated due to my arrest, no payment was made. On the contrary, the guarantees we deposited were recorded as revenue, and not only did we not receive a single lira, but we were forced to pay money to the municipalities."

"I DID NOT RECEIVE EVEN A LIRA FROM THE TERMINATED CONTRACT"

Regarding the 1 million 754 thousand TL consulting agreement made during İmamoğlu's tenure as Mayor of Beylikdüzü, Karaarslan said the following:

"I have not received a single lira in return for this contract either. Because the contract was terminated, we paid money in exchange for the guarantee."

"I HAVE NO CONNECTION TO FETÖ"

Regarding the recent news reports claiming that he was the 'imam' of FETÖ within the municipalities, Karaarslan denied the accusations:

"News reports were published claiming that I was the FETÖ imam of the municipalities. However, I was never tried on the allegation of being a municipal imam. I was acquitted of all charges in the court of first instance. Our file is still under appellate review; the decision was overturned on procedural grounds."