A corruption investigation into former Istanbul Mayor Ekrem Imamoğlu of the main opposition Republican People's Party (CHP) has become the central focus of Turkish domestic politics.
Türkiye’s political scene is rarely quiet. The country constantly faces global-scale issues while wrestling with internal debates. Many observers argue that Türkiye has been trying to make up for two centuries of lag in just the past three decades – perhaps explaining the constant friction and overflow of political disputes.
In theory, political competition is defined by the presentation of ideas – parties articulating their views on the economy, social policies, and foreign affairs. Different political perspectives contend with each other, and politics advances through these debates.
The media, in turn, amplifies the political discourse by turning politicians’ statements and actions into headlines and commentary. This is how a healthy political ecosystem is supposed to unfold.
Yet over the past six or seven months, the focus of national politics has narrowed to corruption and irregularity claims within the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IBB) – Türkiye’s largest local government body, managing a budget of roughly TL 700 billion ($16.5 billion).
Türkiye has faced corruption allegations over the years. But this case appears to be of a different magnitude. Yet, as I see it, such cases were usually limited to a particular department within a ministry or specific municipal directorate – for instance, the former Istanbul Water and Sewerage Administration (ISKI). These incidents were eventually clarified through investigations or court proceedings.
For the first time in the history of the republic, an entire institution is alleged to have been organized around systemic corruption from top to bottom. The scale of the alleged misconduct, observers note, is so extensive that it would be difficult to compare to cases in Western democracies such as Germany, the U.S. or France.
This raises deeper questions: Is this the result of individual misconduct, or does it point to a structural failure that could entrap future political leaders as well?
Since Imamoğlu’s detention, the CHP has launched a political counteroffensive, framing the investigation as a politically motivated attack rather than a legal matter. Yet, according to the indictment, the municipality caused an estimated public loss of about TL 160 billion, with numerous tender setups, earthmoving, and zoning permits allegedly manipulated in exchange for bribes. Some allegations are said to be even more serious.
Another emerging concern involves digital crimes – including claims that the personal data of Istanbul’s 15 million residents was collected and may have been transferred to private companies or even foreign entities – a potential criminal offense that current Turkish legislation does not fully address.
The CHP appears unlikely to mount a detailed legal defense, instead insisting that the investigation is politically driven and intended to weaken its candidates ahead of future elections.
Yet politics and law are separate streams. While politicians may frame events rhetorically, legal processes are shaped by evidence. If an indictment has been issued – covering thousands of criminal charges under nearly a hundred subtitles with major financial losses, and the misuse of public resources – it is unlikely that rhetoric alone will have any real impact on the legal proceedings.
Moreover, it should be noted that these judicial processes were not initiated by a government directive, but rather by complaints filed by the CHP members themselves, who claimed to have been wronged within their own organization.
Both the CHP and the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) could draw lessons from this case. For the CHP, it is a chance to confront internal corruption, take visible steps toward transparency and accountability, and promote cleaner governance. For the AK Party, it highlights the need to address gaps in the legal and administrative systems that enable misconduct – ensuring that ethics do not depend solely on individual conscience and ethics.
It is the duty of the state to take precautions, and the duty of individuals to perform their work with honesty. In the end, it appears that the political and legal debates surrounding Imamoğlu and the IBB will remain at the center of Türkiye’s national conversation for some time to come.
