Turkey’s political landscape was jolted on October 24, 2025, when an Ankara court dismissed a high-profile graft case against the country’s main opposition party, the Republican People’s Party (CHP). The lawsuit, which had threatened the very leadership of the CHP, centered on allegations of vote buying and procedural violations during the party’s 2023 leadership primary and its 38th congress. The court’s decision delivered a temporary but significant reprieve for the opposition, while also triggering a fresh wave of political and legal drama that could shape the nation’s future.
The origins of the case go back to November 2023, when the CHP held its 38th congress. That gathering saw the ousting of longtime leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu and the rise of Ozgur Ozel as the new party chair. Soon after, allegations began to swirl—critics charged that the internal election was tainted by vote buying and procedural missteps. A lawsuit was filed, seeking to annul the congress results, which could have paved the way for Kilicdaroglu’s return or the installation of a trustee chairman in his place. The party, for its part, firmly denied all accusations of fraud, maintaining that the congress was conducted by the book.
On Friday, the Ankara court rejected the case, citing two main reasons: one of the complainants was found ineligible to file, and the issue had become moot after the party’s subsequent internal elections reaffirmed Ozel’s leadership. Ozel had been re-elected in both April and September 2025, solidifying his position at the party’s helm. As the judge read out the decision, the courtroom erupted in applause—a moment that many party supporters saw as a victory for democracy and fairness in an increasingly tense political climate.
The mood among CHP loyalists was jubilant. For them, the verdict represented not just a legal win, but a symbolic stand against what they see as mounting political pressure from President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s government. Party officials have consistently described the legal action as a politically motivated attempt to undermine the opposition through judicial means. According to the Daily Times, Ozel himself declared the ruling a triumph of justice, accusing the government of “targeting democracy and seeking to silence the ballot box.”
The reverberations of the court’s decision were felt well beyond the courtroom. Turkey’s BIST100 stock index jumped 4.45 percent shortly after the verdict, a sign that investors interpreted the ruling as a stabilizing moment for the country’s often volatile political environment. Political analysts, quoted by Daily Times and other outlets, suggested that the decision could boost the CHP’s credibility ahead of upcoming elections and reinforce its role as a key challenger to the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP). Some even speculated that this might energize opposition supporters nationwide, potentially reshaping the political landscape as Turkey looks toward future electoral contests.
But the sense of relief within the CHP was short-lived. Almost immediately after the court’s ruling, prosecutors in Istanbul launched a new investigation—this time targeting Istanbul Mayor Ekrem Imamoglu, a prominent CHP figure and a widely recognized potential contender for the 2028 presidential election. Imamoglu, who had already been jailed in March 2025 on corruption charges he denies, now faces possible charges of espionage. The state-run Anadolu Agency reported that the latest investigation was initiated over alleged links to a businessman arrested in July and accused of spying for foreign countries.
The new probe also ensnared Imamoglu’s campaign manager, Necati Ozkan, and Merdan Yanardag, the editor-in-chief of the pro-opposition Tele1 TV channel. Both were detained on October 24, 2025, as part of the ongoing investigation. The Turkish journalists’ union swiftly condemned the arrests, calling them “politically motivated and an attack on press freedom.” This sentiment was echoed by opposition figures and civil society groups, who see the legal actions as part of a broader crackdown on dissent and a warning to those who challenge the government’s authority.
For many observers, these developments are emblematic of the deepening polarization and rising tensions between Turkey’s ruling party and its resurgent opposition. The CHP, having made significant gains in last year’s local elections, now finds itself both emboldened and embattled. Its controlled municipalities, especially in major cities like Istanbul, have faced waves of arrests and investigations throughout 2025. The arrest of Imamoglu in March triggered widespread protests—the largest since the country’s 2013 unrest—highlighting the high stakes and volatility of Turkey’s current political moment.
While opposition voices decry what they see as judicial overreach, the Erdogan government maintains that Turkey’s courts are impartial and free from political interference. Officials insist that the investigations into CHP figures, including Imamoglu, are solely focused on rooting out corruption and upholding the rule of law. This assertion, however, is hotly contested by critics who point to the timing and targets of recent legal actions as evidence of a concerted campaign to weaken the opposition ahead of crucial elections.
Legal experts and political analysts are divided on what comes next. Some believe that the court’s dismissal of the graft case against the CHP could set a precedent, making it harder for similar politically charged lawsuits to gain traction in the future. Others warn that the new wave of investigations—particularly those involving espionage—could signal an escalation in the government’s efforts to control the political narrative and limit the opposition’s ability to organize and campaign freely.
Meanwhile, the CHP’s leadership is keenly aware that its legal battles are far from over. Party lawyer Ali Yigit Koca noted that while the recent verdict was a relief, the party must remain vigilant in the face of ongoing judicial scrutiny. As quoted by the AP, Koca emphasized that the judge’s acknowledgment of the party’s extraordinary congress and leadership re-election was key to the case’s dismissal, but he also cautioned that new challenges could arise at any moment.
The broader public, for its part, is watching closely. The surge in the stock market suggests that many Turks—at least for now—see the court’s decision as a step toward greater political stability. Yet the rapid succession of new investigations and arrests serves as a stark reminder that Turkey’s political and judicial arenas remain deeply intertwined and highly unpredictable.
As the dust settles from this week’s dramatic events, the CHP appears to have gained a temporary upper hand. Whether this momentum can be sustained in the face of continued legal and political pressure remains an open question, one that will likely define the contours of Turkish democracy for years to come.
