Secret witness: How Imamoğlu and many others are incriminated in Turkey
ANKARA — Held in pretrial detention for nearly two months, Istanbul Mayor Ekrem Imamoğlu is currently facing dozens of investigations.
Among his most significant cases is a wide-spanning corruption trial on his municipal work, which is primarily based on allegations by ‘secret witnesses’.
Known as ‘gizli tanık’ in Turkish and alternatively known as ‘anonymous witnesses’ in English, the practice is used around the world to protect witnesses during sensitive legal processes.
In Turkey, secret witnesses have testified in numerous political cases, stretching from jailed Kurdish politician Selahattin Demirtaş to jailed Turkish philanthropist Osman Kavala, the now free American Pastor Andrew Brunson and many others.
Legal experts told Turkey recap that while witness protection is a legitimate precaution for exceptional cases, the routine use of secret witnesses in Turkey has reduced transparency in the judicial system and threatens fundamental rule of law principles.
“There are 500,000 organizational [örgüt] cases in Turkey. Between half and a third of these cases involve secret witnesses,” Kerem Altıparmak, a member of the International Commission of Jurists and a human rights lawyer, told Turkey recap.
“When you look at this picture, you see that the secret witness has ceased to be exceptional,” he added.
Imamoğlu on trial
The details of İmamoğlu’s corruption investigation are not yet fully known due to a confidentiality order on the case file.
However, leaked documents appearing in pro-government media and the questions directed at Imamoğlu during his police and prosecutor statements have revealed the case is based on testimonies by both secret witnesses and unnamed witnesses – the latter being individuals whose names have not been disclosed by the prosecution.
Secret witness statements against Imamoğlu include allegations of bribery, illicit payments and other financial crimes under his leadership. Imamoğlu has denied all charges.
Of the 41 questions Imamoğlu was asked within the scope of the corruption investigation, 31 were based on anonymous witness statements, according to Mehmet Pehlivan, a lawyer for the Istanbul mayor.
“Conducting an investigation based solely on witness statements is a clear violation of the fundamental principles of criminal procedure,” Pehlivan told Turkey recap.
“According to the principles of 'presumption of innocence' and 'evidence must be concrete, definitive and objective' … supporting an investigation solely with witnesses' hearsay constitutes a legal weakness,” he added.
Pehlivan continued by highlighting that many witness statements against Imamoğlu are marked by vague and abstract expressions such as “I heard…”, “according to what I heard…” or “this is being talked about…”. Such phrasing implies guilt through indirect evidence that is difficult to substantiate in a court of law.
Another striking point in the testimonies is the presence of similar adjectives and similar sentences used by different secret witnesses. Pehlivan, additionally noted some of the same witnesses also gave testimonies in the case filed against the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP).
“The fact that witnesses emerge almost systematically as figures who constantly repeat the same allegations in different investigations creates a strong impression that these investigations are designed for political or personal purposes rather than a legal process,” Pehlivan told Turkey recap.
He added, “Such a practice seriously undermines the principle of the rule of law and the impartiality of the judiciary.”
Political implications
Meanwhile, Imamoğlu’s university diploma was officially annulled last week following an investigation launched in March. A university diploma is a requirement to run for president in Turkey and the move has been broadly interpreted as an effort to nip Imamoğlu’s political future.
Before his March 19 arrest, Imamoğlu was thought to be the opposition’s most likely presidential candidate largely due to his appeal across the political spectrum in Turkey. Yet his charisma also drew mounting state investigations over the years.
Imamoğlu's lawyers said the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality was inspected 1,011 times by Interior Ministry personnel since he was elected mayor in 2019.
The rate of audits and inspections, the lawyers said, amounted to “judicial harassment”, a term used to describe repeated legal filings against government opponents in an effort to silence or sideline them.
To date, Imamoğlu and his associates have faced dozens of administrative investigations related to his mayoral duties as both Istanbul mayor, and his former role as mayor of Beylikdüzü, a district in western Istanbul.
Secret witness timeline
The legal framework enabling the current use of secret witnesses in Turkey dates back to the mid-2000s. Regulations were further solidified in 2008, with the Witness Protection Law No. 5726, which was intended to facilitate confidential testimonies and witness protection programs.
This law was especially designed for individuals whose lives, property or relatives could face threats or danger because of their participation in a judicial process. However, secret witnesses have since been used particularly for political trials in Turkey, a practice far removed from their original legal purpose.
Notably, secret witnesses played leading roles in the Ergenekon trials, a series of cases against military officers as well as politicians, academics and journalists that changed the balance of power in Turkey.
In more recent years, secret witness testimonies are frequently used against alleged members of the Fethullah Gülen movement, which Ankara claims was responsible for orchestrating the coup attempt in 2016.
“There is a tragedy here,” lawyer Kerem Altıparmak told Turkey recap. “This secret witness issue was introduced in 2005 by the group that the government defines as FETÖ. At that time, they were very powerful within the judiciary … The secret witness practice now forms the basis of almost all files related to Gülenist structures.”
Court decisions
The sole use of secret witnesses for convictions has been challenged, but Turkey’s Constitutional Court issued a landmark decision in 2022, ruling anonymous testimonies were sufficient grounds for arrest.
Altıparmak underlined the ruling conflicts with precedents set by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), which has ruled a person cannot be convicted solely on a secret witness testimony, and that supporting evidence must also be presented.
While the ECHR acknowledges witness protection is a legitimate aim, the court has also noted excessive reliance on secret witnesses can curtail the rights of defendants, such as the right to challenge evidence.
The practice also erodes the presumption of innocence and heightens the risk of wrongful convictions or intentional political abuse, according to Altıparmak.
“There are many ECHR decisions on this issue,” Altıparmak said. “But the essence of the matter is this: you cannot absolutely revoke secret witnesses. Protecting the testifying person is also important.”
“Of course, in exceptional cases, secret witnesses can be accepted,” he continued. “Although the issue varies from case to case. If you put the defendant in a position where they cannot respond at all, and base the main penalty solely on the statements of the secret witness, this is a situation that makes a fair trial impossible.”
Turkey recap is an independent, reader-supported newsletter that helps people make sense of the fast-paced Turkey news cycle. Contact us: info@turkeyrecap.com.
Subscribe here on Substack (or on Patreon for a student discount). Paid subscribers get full access to our recaps, reports, members-only chat and news tracking tools.
Turkey recap is produced by our staff’s non-profit association, KMD. We are an affiliate of the Global Forum for Media Development and aim to create balanced news that strengthens local media by supporting journalists in Turkey.
Diego Cupolo, Editor-in-chief
Emily Rice Johnson, Deputy editor
Günsu Durak, Turkey recap Türkçe editor
Ceren Bayar, Parliament correspondent