Historic Trial Puts CHP on the Brink: Özel’s Leadership Hangs by a Thread

Turkey’s main opposition party, the Republican People’s Party (CHP), is navigating a pivotal legal battle over the validity of its 38th Ordinary Congress (Nov. 4–5, 2023) and the 21st Extraordinary Congress (Apr. 6, 2025). Plaintiffs allege bribery, vote-rigging, and violations of the Political Parties Law, seeking annulment and a leadership reset. The case could have far-reaching consequences for the party’s leadership and internal governance.

Today’s Outcome: Interim Measures Rejected, Hearing Postponed

At the fifth hearing, the court rejected interim requests from the plaintiffs’ side and adjourned proceedings to October 24 at 10:00. The panel also ruled to request the reasoning of the Ankara 3rd Civil Court of First Instance’s earlier rejection of a related attempt to annul the CHP Istanbul Provincial Congress, and to seek delegate lists and consolidation records for the Sept. 21 Extraordinary Congress after that congress is held.

Key Moments — Minute by Minute

11:15 – Interim Ruling Announced: Hearing Postponed
The court:

• Will obtain the reasoned decision from Ankara 3rd Civil Court (which had rejected the Istanbul Provincial Congress annulment).

• Found no grounds to rule on an interim injunction at this stage.

• Will request delegate lists and consolidation minutes for the Sept. 21 Extraordinary Congress once it has taken place.

• Next hearing: Oct. 24, 10:00.

11:10 – Plaintiff’s Counsel Seeks to Halt the Process
Onur Üregen (for former Hatay Metropolitan Mayor Lütfü Savaş) criticized prior rulings as “a legal travesty,” urging the court to halt the Sept. 21 extraordinary congress if the case is accepted or adjourned. The judge reminded counsel to keep arguments concise and relevant to the current case.

10:50 – CHP Counsel: “They Want the Court to Decide Who Runs the Party”
CHP lawyer Çağlar Çağlayan opposed demands for a call committee and reiterated the jurisdiction argument:

“Due to lack of standing, we request that the application be rejected. The Supreme Election Council (YSK) has clearly stated it is competent in election jurisdiction. It is beyond dispute that the YSK is responsible for the continuation of congresses, future party activities concerning congresses, and the annulment of congress elections. Accordingly, this court lacks jurisdiction. The ‘organized crime’ narrative is not even in the indictment; the plaintiffs are trying to obtain through fiction what they could not obtain through law. They want the court to decide who governs the party.”

Çağlayan also asked the court to transmit related appeal files (including the merged 31st Civil Court case) and to add the Ankara 3rd Civil Court’s decision rejecting the Istanbul Provincial Congress annulment to the current file.

CHP lawyer Mehmet Can Keysan added:

“We request completion of the missing elements by fulfilling the points demanded.”

10:40 – Intervention Request: “Decisions by Kılıçdaroğlu Are Null”
Intervenor Fahri Taşdemir argued Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu exceeded the legal tenure allowed by the Political Parties Law, claiming:

“All decisions taken by Kılıçdaroğlu are null because his term had ended. The Party Assembly’s term also expired; a new PA should have taken the party to an extraordinary congress within 45 days. The current administration only became legitimate through the extraordinary congress.”
He requested appointment of a call committee to convene a congress within 45 days.

10:30 – Plaintiffs Seek Precautionary Suspension of Özel and Team
Üregen requested the precautionary removal of CHP Chair Özgür Özel and central organs (MKYK, PM, YDK), arguing the prior congress was vitiated by “absolute nullity.” He also asked the court to declare all post-congress decisions taken by Özel and his administration null and void.

10:20 – ‘Courtroom Size’ Dispute
Defense lawyers objected to the courtroom’s limited capacity. The judge remarked:

“We were used to larger halls; now it isn’t so. We made a mistake—what can we do?”

10:10 – Plaintiffs Contest Timeliness Arguments
Üregen argued the YSK’s competence is confined to ballot-box issues, and disputes that extend beyond the ballot box fall within judicial review. He rejected claims of time-bar and forfeiture, stating:

“Our case concerns public order and absolute unlawfulness; such cases can always be heard.”
He alleged vote manipulation through cash, benefits, job offers in party-run municipalities, and illicit tender promises, claiming this corrupted the congress will.

His references to a “criminal organization” sparked protests from CHP ranks.

• CHP Deputy Chair Murat Emir: “What do you mean? You are the organized crime!”

• Defense lawyers objected to the judge not intervening, arguing: “Is there a crime here? The lawyer is committing an offense with these words.”

10:05 – Precedents and Opinions Filed
CHP submitted opinions by constitutional law scholars Prof. Kemal Gözler, Korkut Kanadoğlu, and Şule Özsoy Boyunsuz, as well as expert reports by Prof. Adem Sözüer and Volkan Aslanlar. Decisions from Istanbul 45th and 72nd Civil Courts were also added to the file.

10:00 – Hearing Opens; Larger Hall Requested
The session opened at the Ankara 42nd Civil Court of First Instance. Due to the small hall, some attorneys could not enter. Uğur Poyraz asked for adjournment to a larger hall; the judge kept the hearing in the current room, asking observers to exit if necessary.

09:30 – Tense Hours at CHP HQ
Özgür Özel arrived at CHP headquarters to track developments with senior staff, as the case continued to command nationwide attention.

Background: Why the Case Was Filed

Former Hatay Metropolitan Mayor Lütfü Savaş and several delegates filed suits in multiple courts, alleging the 38th Ordinary Congress was tainted by bribery and manipulation, with delegate votes allegedly purchased. These suits were consolidated at the Ankara 42nd Civil Court of First Instance. Plaintiffs demand:

• Annulment of the 38th Ordinary Congress as void (absolute nullity),

• Precautionary removal of the current leadership headed by Özgür Özel,

• Reinstatement of Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu and the Party Assembly elected at the prior congress,

• Annulment of the 21st Extraordinary Congress (Apr. 6, 2025).

Recent Procedural Timeline

• May 26, 2025: Court rejected the request to provisionally remove the current leadership; hearing moved to June 30.

• Before June 30: Ankara Chief Prosecutor opened an investigation into alleged cash/phone/house inducements to delegates; the indictment went to the 26th Criminal Court, which declared lack of jurisdiction and sent it to the 3rd High Criminal Court; the prosecutor appealed.

• Civil court awaited the outcome, pushing the hearing to Sept. 8, then to Sept. 15 due to CHP’s anniversary events.

Possible Court Paths (Explained)

• Annulment denied: Status quo remains.

• Precautionary measures: Court could appoint a trustee (kayyım) or call committee to convene an extraordinary congress (typically within 45 days if a call committee is appointed).

• Absolute nullity ruling: Current leadership could be deemed void; Kılıçdaroğlu and the prior Party Assembly might be reinstated—though CHP argues no return before a finalized judgment. Any decision is appealable, potentially prolonging the process.

Political Messaging Around the Case

Ahead of the hearing, Istanbul Mayor and presidential candidate Ekrem İmamoğlu criticized attempts to “redesign the opposition at the table”, saying:

“Those who think they can design the opposition at the table and still win elections have never understood this nation!”

Conclusion

The court denied interim measures sought by the plaintiffs, rejected precautionary requests, and postponed the case to October 24, 10:00. With legal opinions, prior rulings, and election-law jurisdiction questions now front and center, the next session will further test whether a courtroom—not party delegates—will decide the CHP’s leadership trajectory.