Turkey: İmamoğlu, the trial and the restrictions on journalists

Translated by Martina Marino

The court set to try Ekrem İmamoğlu, mayor of Istanbul and a presidential candidate, has imposed arbitrary restrictions on lawyers, journalists, and members of civil society, preventing them from following the trial involving Erdoğan’s opponent from the back of the courtroom. This reduces their ability to hear what is being said and, consequently, to report the facts. If there is no lack of space in the courtroom, why limit access to a hearing centered on a public official, whose transparency is not only in the public interest but also constitutionally fundamental?

Who is Ekrem İmamoğlu

Ekrem İmamoğlu is the mayor of Istanbul, and on the very day he was elected as his party’s presidential candidate, the Republican People’s Party (CHP), the court ordered his arrest. The timing makes it difficult not to suspect that the detention may be politically motivated. The court is reportedly seeking evidence of corruption involving İmamoğlu and other members of his party. From an analysis of documents prepared by prosecutors, some researchers have found that the accusations against the mayor center on the alleged creation of a “criminal organization for illicit profit,” aimed at enriching himself and ultimately taking control of the CHP in order to run for the presidency. On this basis, his potential sentence could reach up to 1,929 years in prison, according to Human rights Watch.

The denied right to a fair trial

Of particular interest is the data concerning the witnesses cited by the prosecutors: 15 of them are “secret,” while another 76 agreed to testify in order to obtain a reduction in their own sentences. This, combined with the recent arrest of İmamoğlu’s defense lawyer, suggests that the fundamental principle of a fair and just trial—central to civilized nations—is being violated. In a recent article, Human Rights Watch identified, alongside broader human rights concerns, several problematic aspects: the lack of detention and prosecution based on just cause, the presence of prejudicial statements, barriers to an effective defense, the reliance on “secret” witnesses, and the detention of İmamoğlu’s defense lawyer.

New orders: journalists and lawyers at the back of the courtroom

The decision of the 40th Istanbul Assize Court to confine journalists, lawyers, and members of civil society to the back of the courtroom, while imposing heavy security measures, fits within the broader set of concerns outlined above. The courtroom is large enough to comfortably accommodate everyone, yet observers are kept at the margins.

On March 16, the judge adjourned the hearing before it even began because three CHP members of parliament, along with lawyers and observers, had not complied with the order to move from the front to the back of the courtroom. Shortly afterward, the court ordered the exclusion of lawyers and further restricted access for the media and even the defendants’ own relatives.

The Turkish Constitution and the ECHR

The Turkish Constitution, in line with international standards, states that trials must be open to civil society, and any decision to make part or all of a trial private may be applied only in cases concerning public morality. In 2023, the Constitutional Court declared the publicity of trials a fundamental requirement and barred restrictions on the exercise of this right except under the conditions specified by the Constitution itself. Similarly, the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) affirms in Article 6 that the right to a fair trial includes the guarantee of a “fair and public” hearing. Although the European framework allows for limited restrictions, arbitrary impositions are never permitted. The result is a loss of trust in the justice system and public institutions due to the lack of transparency: confining journalists and lawyers to the back of the courtroom is not merely a logistical decision.

Mondo Internazionale APS – All Rights Reserved ® 2026