In the 1989 local elections (then under the name SHP), the Republican People’s Party (CHP) ran its campaign under the slogan of “political ethics” and promised voters “clean local governance.” In those elections, it won six of the eight major metropolitan municipalities.
But not long after, in 1993, the Istanbul Water and Sewage Administration (ISKI) scandal erupted in Istanbul – one of the biggest corruption cases in Turkish history.
The scandal came to light when the wife of ISKI General Manager Ergun Göknel went to the press, unable to stomach what her husband had done and exposed his corrupt dealings. During his tenure, Göknel had arranged for shell companies to be established. These companies participated in chlorine procurement tenders issued by ISKI and falsely reported massive purchases at inflated prices, generating substantial illicit profit. Investigations later uncovered secret accounts in Switzerland and the United States.
I’ve analyzed the long-term effects of this corruption case on CHP’s politics – and, by extension, Turkish politics – in earlier writings. The reason I bring it up again is this: the process that led from a promise of “clean governance” to the ISKI scandal wasn’t an ordinary corruption case. It was widely studied and analyzed. To this day, when the CHP’s approach to local governance is discussed, the ISKI scandal is remembered as a historic turning point.
Now, let’s fast forward to today...
In both the 2019 and 2024 local elections, the CHP again emphasized slogans like “clean municipalities,” “political ethics,” “avoiding favoritism” and “merit-based governance.” Following its election success, there was talk of a return of the “1989 spirit” to the CHP. This phrase was mainly used in public discourse to capture the energy and excitement surrounding the victories.
Although the “1989 spirit” was publicly portrayed in a positive light – especially after the 2019 local elections – some within the party were privately concerned. And there’s no need to spell out what those concerns were. As a party that has not held long-term national power, the CHP risked internal conflict over rent and resource distribution in local governments.
To prevent such scandals, then-CHP leader Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu gathered all newly elected mayors at a retreat in Afyon on July 26, 2019. The public-facing part of the event included a list of “7 rules” that CHP mayors were expected to follow.
These seven rules included principles like “You will account for every penny you spend to the public,” “You will ensure transparency in all matters, especially tenders” and “You will adhere to merit-based appointments.” These were shared publicly. But we don’t really know what else was discussed in the two-day closed-door retreat. Were they told behind closed doors, “Don’t fight among yourselves over rent distribution”? We don’t know. Even if such a warning was issued, we can clearly see today that it hasn’t been followed!
There is currently an ongoing legal investigation centered around the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IBB) and its CHP-affiliated mayor. More than 100 people have been detained. Some have reportedly fled abroad. The prosecutor’s statement includes very serious accusations – ranging from “rigging tenders” to “aggravated fraud,” from “colluding with businessmen for unlawful gain” to “extorting money from businessmen.” The legal process is ongoing, and we don’t yet know the full contents of the case file. Naturally, this issue will be debated from various angles in the public sphere. There’s nothing wrong with discussing it or even objecting to certain aspects of it.
However, it is problematic for the CHP to label this process a “coup” and call people to hit the streets. Matters that fall within the purview of law and justice are not resolved on the streets. If there is any miscarriage of justice, sooner or later, the truth will come to light. After the elections, the CHP’s leadership had explicitly set out the seven principles that mayors were expected to follow – principles like “meritocracy,” “transparency,” “clean governance” and “avoiding favoritism.”
Therefore, there is no reason for the opposition or the CHP leadership to panic. If the mayor and his administration abided by these principles, the judicial process will exonerate them. And if they are exonerated, they will emerge politically stronger. However, if they violated those principles and the judiciary’s allegations are proven true, the political cost of the CHP’s excessive defense of this scandal will be significant. The party’s previous leader had, from the outset, promised to “grab by the ear and expel” anyone who failed to uphold those rules. In institutions, continuity is key.
