Newsletters
An online turmoil has erupted within Türkiye’s main opposition party, the Republican People's Party (CHP), following new claims surrounding its most recent party congress.
Allegations about judicial interference and internal betrayal have reignited a long-simmering feud between supporters of former party leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu and imprisoned former Mayor Ekrem Imamoglu.
At the center of the controversy is a claim that a public prosecutor offered to close a lawsuit challenging the results of the 2023 CHP congress if Kilicdaroglu agreed to state that there was no corruption in the process. It is alleged that Kilicdaroglu declined to comply. The disclosure, which surfaced on social media and in a YouTube broadcast, has triggered a wave of commentary, much of it sharply worded.
Political analyst Emrah Gulsunar, known for his alignment with Imamoglu, intensified the debate with a harsh social media post on May 26. Quoting the claims, he accused Kilicdaroglu of dishonor for allegedly seeking to regain leadership through judicial channels, branding the move as disgraceful.
Gulsunar wrote that Kilicdaroglu should be expelled from the party and publicly shamed—a comment that immediately drew fierce backlash and laid bare the ongoing power struggle between rival factions within the CHP.
Kilicdaroglu’s lawyer, Celal Celik, was among the first to respond. He called the allegations “entirely false,” accusing those spreading them of targeting public officials and party leadership with slander. Writing on X, Celik targeted prominent journalist Mengu, saying, “Your title may be journalist, but your role is that of a hitman.” He challenged the accuser to reveal their source or admit to fabrication.
Speaking separately, Celik argued that legal procedure cannot be contingent upon personal assurances. “Either there is evidence of a crime or there isn’t. If there isn’t, the case is closed. The claim that a prosecutor sent a private message to Kilicdaroglu is utterly untrue.”
Gulsunar’s remarks sparked uproar among CHP lawmakers. Izmir MP Mahir Polat rebuked the comments, accusing Gulsunar of abandoning all sense of decency. “Tell your masters that Kilicdaroglu is no small target. He has millions of supporters,” he said.
Istanbul MP Engin Altay also condemned the remarks, saying that party leaders are not chosen by “keyboard warriors hurling insults.” He called the attack the “lowest point” of troll-like behavior.
A wave of condemnation followed from Aydin MP Huseyin Yildiz, Bursa MP Orhan Saribal, Ankara MP Semra Dincer, Ordu MP Mustafa Adiguzel, and Artvin MP Ugur Bayraktutan, among others. Ali Oztunc went further, criticizing both the person who made the original claim and Gulsunar for their “disgraceful” language toward the party’s former leader.
Journalist Baris Yarkadas also weighed in, saying the real targets should be those who abuse public resources, not political figures under unfounded suspicion.
These names are alleged to be a faction within the party because they were not previously vocal against the Imamoglu investigation and were quick to rush to Kilicdaroglu's defense.
The backdrop to the dispute is the CHP’s 38th Ordinary Congress, held in November 2023, which resulted in Ozgur Ozel replacing Kilicdaroglu as party chair. The outcome was later contested by former Hatay Mayor Lutfu Savas and several delegates, who filed a lawsuit seeking to annul the results and reinstate the former leadership.
The trial, fueled by accusations of vote-buying during the congress, held its second session on May 26, 2025, at the Ankara 42nd Civil Court of First Instance and was adjourned to June 30.
The recent claims have reignited public interest in the case, with some commentators suggesting the allegations are an attempt to manipulate the legal process for political gain. Others view the episode as a symptom of deeper internal fractures within the CHP.
Gulsunar’s comments have once again underscored the rift between factions loyal to Imamoglu and those backing Kilicdaroglu. Supporters of the former Istanbul mayor appeared to amplify the initial claim, while Kilicdaroglu’s allies strongly rejected both the accusation and the tone used in its defense.
The silence of the current CHP leadership during the controversy also didn’t go unnoticed. Social media users argued that this was a strategic reticence on the part of the party leadership to avoid a split.
The upcoming court date on June 30 may clarify some of the legal aspects of the case, but the internal political damage has already been done. The dispute has not only reopened questions about the integrity of the party's internal processes but has also fed concerns that a ruling coalition could carve out space for itself from a deeply divided leadership.
2 min read
1 min read
