Göksel Göksu wrote: Ekrem İmamoğlu's "diploma case" | Surprised by the judge's dominance and the groundbreaking

CHP presidential candidate and Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IMM) Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu appeared before the judge as part of a lawsuit alleging his university diploma was forged. The hearings, held at the Silivri Prison campus and held in a manner resembling a public hearing, have been well-attended since the first day. The courtroom is always packed, with his family, CHP Chairman Özgür Özel—whom he refers to as "a leader who makes history," party officials, an army of lawyers, members of the press, and a large audience. But this time, it was literally packed.

İmamoğlu climbed the stairs in the center of the courtroom to defend himself in the first hearing of the case, in which he is being tried on charges of "forgery of official documents," a chain of events related to his revoked university diploma. As in previous hearings, despite the barriers, he reached out to every corner of the courtroom, touching almost everyone with his eyes and greeting them. I'm sure neither İmamoğlu, nor the approximately 250 lawyers who took their seats in one of Istanbul's two largest courtrooms with a capacity of 330, nor the audience, nor the press, ever imagined that the presiding judge would surprise everyone throughout the hearing.

But Ali Doğan, the 59th High Criminal Judge of the First Instance, surprised everyone…

And he did so simply by following the "normal" approach. Throughout the hearing, which began at 11:30 a.m. and continued until 7:30 p.m., his tone, calmness, effective communication, his conciliatory approach during moments when it seemed "tensions would escalate now," his courtesy, and most importantly, his acceptance of Ekrem İmamoğlu's incarcerated lawyer Mehmet Pehlivan's request to attend the hearing and his swift implementation of the interim decision, surprised those in attendance. It wouldn't be an exaggeration to say that everyone in the courtroom said "Ah-ah!" at least once. Many reacted as if they were in a surreal courtroom. Some thought, "There's a Çapanoğlu behind this," others wondered, "I wonder what's coming next?" A significant number approached the situation with skepticism, thinking, "If Çapanoğlu isn't there, the judge will be changed at the next hearing." Those who were cautious, especially Ekrem İmamoğlu, were saying, "The important thing is the court's decision." During the hearing, I asked İmamoğlu what he thought of the presiding judge's stance. He maintained his cautious stance by replying, "This is how a judge should be; decisions should be fair."

Yes, this is how a judge should be… The defense lawyers were of the same opinion, “Look at our surprise,” they said among themselves. “Isn’t the surprise of a judge doing his job properly enough to explain the process we’re going through?” another defense lawyer asked…

In this respect, the first hearing of the case opened following the revocation of Ekrem İmamoğlu's diploma was one of the most interesting hearings I have observed in my long career.

The courtroom began with a long, resounding round of applause, accompanied by frequent chants of "President İmamoğlu," "There is no salvation alone, either all together or none of us." So far, nothing had changed.

The difference was evident in the presiding judge's indirect communication with the audience. Those who follow trials know that political trials are particularly well-attended, and in many cases, presiding judges often warn spectators not to disrupt court order, sometimes adjourn hearings, sometimes expel spectators from the courtroom… chaos ensues, and so on.

This hearing, however, experienced no such tension. During İmamoğlu's defense, which lasted over two hours, the presiding judge intervened during the frequent chants of slogans and applause, but his method was noticeably different. Without escalating tension and maintaining courtesy, he explained that the noise in the courtroom made it difficult to record the audio accurately and the importance of silence in the courtroom so that İmamoğlu's defense could be recorded verbatim in the minutes. No one tensed, no one reacted, and the court quieted down after each warning.

So it's happening!

During the identification process, İmamoğlu was asked about his education. Despite having a revoked diploma, he replied, "Master's degree." The hall erupted in applause. The atmosphere in the hall remained unchanged.

This means that the courtroom, which lawyer Hasan Fehmi Demir described as "September 2025, when the shadow of the fascist coup of 45 years ago fell" during his defense, was managed without any tension in an environment where everyone's nerves were as taut as a bowstring.

However, the hearing's date, September 12th, coincides with both the anniversary of the coup attempt and the date İmamoğlu's transfer from the English-language Business Administration Department at Girne American University in the TRNC, the subject of the case, to Istanbul University, was approved. Therefore, the fact that the hearing was scheduled for September 12th was enough to raise questions in the minds of those in the courtroom. The question lingered, "Was the hearing deliberately moved to September 12th when it was supposed to be on September 11th?"

The judge also noticed this situation and said, "I realized that an explanation was needed, anticipating the perception," and explained step by step that the hearing had been moved to Friday due to the courts being busy on Tuesdays and Thursdays. The lawyers responded by saying that they were not really making any insinuations, but were simply pointing out the coincidence, and the matter was closed.

So, issues can be discussed and resolved!

When Ekrem İmamoğlu asked the judge for permission during his defense, removing his jacket and rolling up his sleeves, just as he did when addressing the crowd at the enthusiastic rally held in Beylikdüzü after winning Istanbul for a second time after the annulled 2019 local elections, I'd be lying if I said I didn't think, "Now a stern warning will come, and the tone we've displayed so far will be reversed." Such a storm of applause erupted in the courtroom that it was almost impossible not to think so, but then calm was restored, and the hearing resumed.

The biggest surprise came when Ekrem İmamoğlu's lawyer, Mehmet Pehlivan, who was imprisoned in Çorlu Prison, was granted a request to attend the hearing. Just as İmamoğlu was finishing his defense, the judge suddenly intervened. He explained that the other defense attorneys, Fikret İlkiz, Tora Pekin, and Hasan Fehmi Demir, had submitted a petition requesting Pehlivan's presence before the hearing—the petition must have been discovered later—and asked İmamoğlu if he wanted him to be Pehlivan's defense attorney. İmamoğlu replied, "Of course I do. He's like a son to me." A rapid phone call began between the courtroom and Çorlu Prison. Everyone in the courtroom testified with their mouths agape. The judge requested Pehlivan's attendance via SEGBİS (Security and Information System), while the officer on the other end requested the decision in writing. The decision quickly reached Çorlu Prison officials via the UYAP system, and lo and behold, Mehmet Pehlivan had entered the door and sat down at a table no larger than two square meters.

He was probably stunned as well. The verdict was delivered within 15-20 minutes, and he was escorted from his cell and seated in the defense attorney's chair. Pehlivan was ordered to present his defense first, and everyone who saw him was stunned into silence, listening intently to what he was about to say. He began his speech by saying, "The judiciary achieved a truly remarkable first today." It was truly a first for a lawyer in custody, not convicted, to attend a hearing and present his defense from prison. Pehlivan invoked the principle of "face-to-face" defense, requested a face-to-face meeting with his client, and, stating that he wasn't wearing a robe and wasn't in the courtroom, he would present his defense at the next hearing.

Although the court ruled in its interim decision that Pehlivan would attend the next hearing via the SEGBİS system, this was not known at the time. Fikret İlkiz, who said, "You're searching for justice with a flashlight in the daytime," summarized the events surrounding Mehmet Pehlivan in a few sentences: If Mehmet Pehlivan were to be brought to court as a lawyer for his defense, he would sit there—pointing to the defendants' chairs—and, like İmamoğlu, be surrounded by gendarmes. He would make his defense under those conditions. This is the system you've created.

The presiding judge listened carefully to the defense, what was said was recorded, but the court continued its normal course.

Pehlivan, who joined the hearing via SEGBİS during a break, chatted with the courtroom by saying, “I wish I were there,” his friends’ response to his friends’ words, “You’ll appear at the next hearing,” was, “Of course we will, but the chairman will appear first,” İmamoğlu’s humorous remark, “Look, he’s still playing into my attorney’s shoes,” Pehlivan’s request for his robe from the first person to visit him… The courtroom hosted many “firsts” in every respect.

The same atmosphere prevailed in the courtroom as the allegations were read, as the defense was delivered, as Mehmet Pehlivan joined the hearing via SEGBİS, as the applause erupted, as the slogans echoed, as Ekrem İmamoğlu chatted with those around him from afar during the hearing breaks or touched his wife Dilek İmamoğlu's hand from afar, as father Hasan İmamoğlu burst into tears while recounting his childhood and youth, saying, "Everything about me is real," and as he looked the judge in the face during his defense and said, "We button up our jackets in front of you, but there's no one you'd button up your jacket in front of."

So it's happening!

The chief justice surprised everyone with the decisions he made after many years, his style and respectful attitude.

He never failed to show respect to anyone.

He maintained his composure throughout the hearing, which lasted approximately eight hours.

He never offended or hurt anyone; in fact, when he thought he had offended anyone, he enlarged the parenthesis, explained what he wanted and why, and made an effort to clear up any possible questions that arose in people's minds.

He completed the hearing within the limits of politeness, without being rude at all.

Let's come to the echoes of the surprise created by this attitude...

Fikret İlkiz was still one of those cautious. At the end of his defense, he made a veiled reference to where that attitude, which had surprised everyone, might evolve, saying, "I hope we have the opportunity to meet again, I hope we have the opportunity to meet on the same cause."

What this means is that if the 59th High Criminal Court Judge Ali Doğan's stance is solely his own, İmamoğlu and his defense lawyers may face a new judge at the next hearing.

Despite the astonishment they experienced, some people were still being cautious, as I described above, and were saying that no matter how polite they were, the important thing was the decision they would make.

In my opinion, there's another dimension to the issue that needs to be considered: the series of events that have unfolded over the past week and the current situation...

Namely;

In the lawsuit filed on September 2nd at the Istanbul 45th Civil Court of First Instance for the cancellation of the CHP Istanbul 38th Ordinary Provincial Congress, the Provincial Chairman Özgür Çelik and the current administration were removed from office and a committee consisting of Gürsel Tekin, Zeki Şen, Hasan Babacan, Müjdat Gürbüz and Erkan Narsap were appointed as trustees in their place.

In this respect, September 2 was described as a political coup.

But as it happened, traffic jams broke out in Ankara at that very moment. Former Republican People's Party (CHP) leader and Speaker of the Turkish Grand National Assembly (TBMM) Hikmet Çetin visited MHP Chairman Devlet Bahçeli.

While traffic continued, Istanbul raised its hand and on the evening of September 7, the provincial building was surrounded by police, and a ban on demonstrations and marches was imposed in six districts by the governor's office.

Moreover, on September 8, Gürsel Tekin, along with two trustees who accepted the task, entered the provincial building with pepper gas and police escort.

The next day, Hikmet Çetin met with MHP Deputy Chairman Feti Yıldız, whom Bahçeli had indicated as his address.

Two days after the meeting, on September 11, the Ankara Third Civil Court of First Instance rejected the CHP Istanbul Provincial Congress's annulment case on merits.

Although the judicial phase is still ongoing, following the applications made, Gürsel Tekin will have to leave the building as he came.

When the developments are considered, the atmosphere surrounding Ekrem İmamoğlu's trial appears to be rational rather than surprising. However, it's too early to make any pronouncements. Is all this merely a coincidence, or is there a negotiation process underway in Ankara between the CHP and its ruling party, the MHP, and has it begun to bear fruit?

It would be beneficial to read Devlet Bahçeli's message that arrived on our mobile phones during İmamoğlu's hearing from this perspective.

In that message, which also emphasized the need for President Tayyip Erdoğan to run again, Bahçeli said: “If there is corruption or unlawfulness, punishment must certainly be meted out. However, past political views are another matter. If the peace process is to be contributed to, the reinstatement of these individuals will strengthen the sense of brotherhood.”

Whether the negotiations have borne fruit will be seen soon, more or less, on Monday, September 15th; will there be an absolute nullity ruling in the main CHP case or not?

That's the whole point.