ISTANBUL — The judicial proceedings concerning the high-profile Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (İBB) case continued on Tuesday at the courtroom situated opposite the Marmara Closed Penitentiary Institution. Presided over by the Istanbul 33rd Heavy Penal Court, the latest session brought forward a series of significant developments, including the completion of cross-examinations for key non-detained figures, fresh defense statements from municipal personnel, and formal requests for release submitted by detained defendants linked to an expanded supplementary indictment.
The day’s proceedings commenced with the continuation and eventual conclusion of the cross-examination of Murat Abbas, the former General Manager of Kültür AŞ, an affiliate of the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality. Abbas, who is currently being tried without detention, answered questions from the court regarding his tenure and operational decisions during his time leading the municipal cultural enterprise. His testimony has remained a focal point of ongoing scrutiny as the court seeks to untangle various administrative and financial actions taken under past municipal leadership.
Following the conclusion of Abbas’s cross-examination, the court turned its attention to another non-detained defendant, Hakan Karali, who served as a Field Control Chief for Kültür AŞ. Karali presented his formal defense statement to the judicial panel, addressing the specific allegations brought against him within the framework of the case. After Karali completed his statement, the court announced a midday recess to allow participants and court officials a break before resuming the intensive schedule in the afternoon.
When the courtroom reconvened for the afternoon session, the judicial focus shifted toward a group of detained defendants whose cases were integrated into the primary trial through a subsequently prepared supplementary indictment. During this segment of the hearing, six detained individuals presented their formal statements and legal arguments seeking their release pending trial.
Among those requesting release were Aytekin Karaarslan, Assistant General Manager of Ağaç AŞ; Nilgün Cendek, Head of the Ağaç AŞ Parks, Gardens, and Green Areas Department; Tolga Kılınç, Acting Head of the same department; and Fatih Temür, an employee of Ağaç AŞ. In addition to the municipal officials, two business figures involved in the case, Ayhan Subaşı and Murat Dağdeviren, also formally requested their release from detention through their legal representatives and personal statements. The pleas underscored the defendants’ arguments concerning their ongoing confinement, while legal teams urged the court to evaluate the current evidentiary landscape.
As part of the routine monthly detention review mandated by procedural rules, the presiding court asked the opinion of the public prosecutor regarding the legal status of the defendants. The prosecutor evaluated the ongoing status of the 57 detained defendants involved in the broader trial framework. Citing the nature and legal classification of the alleged offenses attributed to the defendants, alongside the current state of the evidence gathered in the case files, the prosecutor formally requested that all 57 detained individuals remain in custody. The prosecution emphasized that the severity of the charges and the existing judicial conditions necessitated the continuation of their detention measures at this stage of the proceedings.
Following the submission of the prosecutor’s opinion and the conclusion of the preliminary defense evaluations for the afternoon session, the court panel announced that it would take a further recess to deliberate on the requests for release and the comprehensive detention review. The judicial decisions regarding whether any of the detained defendants will be released pending trial are expected to be announced once the court resumes its deliberations. The trial continues to draw significant public and political attention in Istanbul, with multiple related legal strands, municipal contracts, and administrative decisions remaining under close judicial investigation.
