Witnesses have been heard in the trial of imprisoned journalist Merdan Yanardağ, who is on trial for “political espionage.” The court has ruled that all defendants should remain in jail. The trial was adjourned until 23 December

TANSU PİŞKİN, ISTANBUL

The third hearing in the trial of the imprisoned journalist Merdan Yanardağ – who is being tried alongside the suspended and detained Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (İBB) Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu, his campaign director Necati Özkan and businessman Hüseyin Gün on charges of “political espionage” was held at the 25th Istanbul High Criminal Court on 29 September 2026. The hearing took place in the courtrooms at the Marmara Prison Complex.

All the defendants, including Yanardağ, and their lawyers were present at the hearing, which was monitored by P24.

Ekrem İmamoğlu, who was the first to speak at the hearing, requested to present his defense as he had another hearing to attend. Upon the request being granted, İmamoğlu began his defense by commenting on current issues:

“Today, we are all witnessing how citizens’ savings are being protected. Those who are supposed to oversee and those being overseen have squeezed into the same seat. There you have your espionage story. Can prosecutor’s office write this down? Do you have the strength to write it down? Do you have the courage? I know. Do not bother replying. No, you cannot have the courage.”

İmamoğlu addressed Erdoğan: “He demands justice from the world but sends his rival to prison”

In his defense, İmamoğlu also addressed President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan:

“From the United Nations podium, he calls on the world for a just order, sir. In New York, he wants the voice of the righteous to prevail, not that of the powerful. How interesting… He says, ‘There is no law of the powerful,’ yet in Turkey he sends his rival to prison. He demands justice from the world, yet his own country’s presidential candidate is on trial on charges of espionage. He is trying to impose a political ban on his rival over the use of the word ‘fool.’

“Merdan Yanardağ, Necati Özkan and Hüseyin Gün are in prison on the world’s most far-fetched allegations. We are confined to a space of 12 square meters. This is no game; it is captivity. For four months now, I have been asking the MİT (National Intelligence Organization) whether my three fellow defendants on trial here are indeed spies. Let [MİT President] İbrahim Kalın answer: Do you have any concrete evidence? Why has not the mighty MİT told the truth for four months? Let’s say they have not; how much longer will you keep my friends here, deprived of their freedom?”

Witnesses were heard

Following İmamoğlu’s defense, Ümit Deniz Alaçam—who is known to have previously filed three reports against Hüseyin Gün—Berkay Yağlıcı, the former driver of Seher Alaçam (whom Gün referred to as his ‘spiritual mother’ and who is also named in the indictment,) and Zeynep Şen, who served as Seher Alaçam’s personal assistant for a time, were heard as witnesses.

All the witnesses joined the hearing via the judicial videoconferencing system (SEGBİS) from Kocaeli. Zeynep Şen, who spoke first, stated that she had worked as Seher Alaçam’s personal assistant and had met Hüseyin Gün in this capacity. Şen alleged that Alaçam and Gün had made plans to transfer funds from their bank accounts to overseas accounts and had begun preparations to set up a company in the United States.

Hüseyin Gün’s lawyer, Selahattin Ceylan, asked Zeynep Şen who was with her during her statement at the police station and who she was currently working for. It was established that Şen was working for Ümit Deniz Alaçam, the person who had reported Gün. Şen stated that the money identified in her bank account in the Financial Crimes Investigation Board (MASAK) reports did not belong to her either.

Witness Yağlıcı: “I am not a banker”

Following Şen, the court moved on to the testimony of Berkay Yağlıcı, Alaçam’s driver and another witness in the case. Yağlıcı, who stated that he currently worked for Ümit Deniz Alaçam, said he knew the defendants Merdan Yanardağ and Hüseyin Gün, adding, “Mr. Merdan used to come and go to Mr. Hüseyin’s place; that is how I knew him. I used to take money to Mr. Merdan and speak to his assistant, Mr. Tamer. I would withdraw 5,000–10,000 euros from the bank, but Mr. Hüseyin would put it in the envelope. It happened on different days. I handed the money over to Mr. Merdan in person at the turnstile at the entrance to his office. I do not remember the dates.”

Hüseyin Gün’s lawyer, Selahattin Ceylan, asked Merdan Yanardağ, “Did you receive money from this person?” Yanardağ replied, “Absolutely not. It is contrary to the way our channel operates for someone to come directly to me with an envelope and hand over money in front of the turnstile; it is impossible.” Yağlıcı also stated that he had worked alongside the whistleblower, Ümit Deniz Alaçam.

Yanardağ’s lawyer, Bilgütay Hakkı Durna, also put questions to Yağlıcı. Yağlıcı, who had previously stated in his testimony that he had withdrawn the sums he mentioned from the same branch of the same bank, replied to Durna’s question, “Why is there no record of a 5,000-euro withdrawal in the bank’s records?”, by saying, “I am not a banker.”

Alaçam read his statement from a sheet of paper

Ümit Deniz Alaçam, who had previously reported the businessman Hüseyin Gün also joined the hearing via SEGBIS and was called to give evidence as a witness. Alaçam stated that he knew only Hüseyin Gün amongst the defendants, whilst he had only seen Merdan Yanardağ at the funeral of his mother, Seher Alaçam.

Following intervention by the lawyers in the courtroom, it emerged that Ümit Deniz Alaçam was reading out the exact same statement word for word from a sheet of paper containing his statement given at the police station. The presiding judge ordered the paper to be removed. Alaçam then recounted his allegations regarding Hüseyin Gün.

Gün’s lawyer, Selahattin Ceylan, noted that Ümit Deniz Alaçam had previously lodged three complaints against Gün and requested that Alaçam be recorded in the court minutes as an “informant witness.”

At this point, Alaçam alleged that Gün, whom he claimed had been living in their home as a “boarder,” had ‘murdered his mother, Seher Alaçam, together with his accomplices. Lawyer Ceylan pointed out that a decision not to prosecute had previously been issued regarding this matter, warning, “Let us not make false accusations,” and lodged a criminal complaint against Alaçam.

Yanardağ’s lawyer, Bilgütay Hakkı Durna, asked Alaçam, “Are Zeynep Şen and Berkay Yağlıcı working for you?” Alaçam replied, “They are both currently my employees.”

The prosecutor requested that the defendants remain in detention

The prosecutor, presenting their opinion on the witnesses’ statements during the hearing, stated that they had no further comments regarding the witness testimonies. They requested that the defendants be kept in jail, citing the “nature and characteristics of the impugned crime; the current state of evidence; and the fact that judicial supervision measures would not be sufficient at this stage.”

Yanardağ files a criminal complaint against the trustee

Journalist Merdan Yanardağ, who presented his defense against the witness statements and the prosecution’s submission, filed a criminal complaint against the trustee appointed to TELE1, alleging that they “took over the channel to halt its broadcasts and failed to carry out their duties.” He also explained that the trustee had failed to care for “Güneş,” the dog they had adopted, and that Güneş had been sent to a shelter. Yanardağ said the following:

“TELE1 was seized. TELE1 was a media organization employing 144 people, holding a RTÜK licence in Turkey, operating in accordance with the law, conducting its activities under the Commercial Code, and operating in accordance with the Press Law. Today they shut it down. They cut off the satellite broadcast. They cut off the cable broadcast. They cut off the Digiturk broadcast. The trustee you appointed has destroyed a media organization. You are committing a crime.

“What is the trustee’s role? The trustee’s role is to keep that organization afloat. He failed to do so. Nor can they tamper with the editorial line. Yet they turned a news channel into a documentary channel and shut down TELE1. The reason is this: look, retired police officer Ali Şekeroğlu committed suicide outside the Constitutional Court. But can television channels report on this suicide? No. TELE1 would have reported it. It would have done so even at the risk of a fine from the RTÜK.”

Yanardağ also referred to the witness statements and continued as follows:

“We have just heard the witnesses. There is someone claiming they brought me money. That is a complete lie. Mrs Seher, an elderly, Republican, Kemalist TELE1 viewer, took part in TELE1’s sponsorship campaign and provided support from time to time. That is all there is to it. The witness also claims that I have an assistant called Mr. Tamer. Mr. Tamer is our driver colleague in the transport department. Why are not my assistants here? They do not have the courage to face me. Because they are lying.”

Yanardağ concluded his defense by stating, “This case needs to be brought to a close as soon as possible,” and requested his release and acquittal.

Criticism of the procedure for hearing witnesses

Following Yanardağ, his lawyer, Selin Nakipoğlu, took the floor. In her defense, Nakipoğlu criticized the procedure for hearing witnesses, stating, “Although we did not request that they be heard again, they were not present in the courtroom; they were heard via video link. We could not see their hands. Indeed, we noticed that one of the witnesses was reading their statement from a piece of paper. Had we not intervened, they would have continued. Perhaps the others read theirs in the same way. The quality of the connection, video and audio is well known. We were unable to follow the proceedings properly. We were unable to observe the answers they gave or their reactions. We want these details to be recorded in the minutes.”

Speaking after Nakipoğlu, Bilgütay Hakkı Durna, one of Yanardağ’s lawyers, said, “If you are to decide to continue detention, we request that this decision be issued separately for each defendant. Because we cannot understand from this indictment what our clients are accused of.” Durna concluded his defense by requesting his client’s release.

After all the defense statements had been completed, the court recessed the hearing for one hour and then ruled that the defendants should remain in detention. The trial was adjourned until 23 December 2026.

Background of the case

TELE1 Editor-in-Chief Merdan Yanardağ was arrested on 24 October, 2025, as part of an investigation launched by the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office. In a statement, the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office announced that TELE1 Editor-in-Chief Merdan Yanardağ had been “detained on charges of espionage” and that searches had been conducted at his home and workplace. It was also reported that police from the Counter-Terrorism Unit (TEM) arrived at TELE1’s news center in Seyrantepe, Istanbul, early in the morning to conduct a search.

Later that evening, the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office announced that the Istanbul Criminal Court of First Instance had ruled to appoint the Deposit Insurance Fund (TMSF) as a receiver for ABC Radio Television and Digital Broadcasting Inc., the owner of the TELE1 channel.

Yanardağ was imprisoned pending trial on 27 October by the criminal court of first instance on charges of “espionage.”

The Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office filed an indictment against Yanardağ, imprisoned Istanbul Metropolitan Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu, İmamoğlu’s advisor and campaign director Necati Özkan, and Hüseyin Gün on charges of “political espionage.” In the indictment dated 4 February 2026, İmamoğlu was designated as the “crime ring leader.” Documents seized from Hüseyin Gün also formed the core of the indictment. The prosecution stated that the investigation began following a tip received by the 112 Emergency Call Center. The person who made the tip alleged that Gün was conducting espionage activities on behalf of Israel, the United Kingdom, and the United States, and that he conducted his communications via encrypted phones. However, the investigation against Seher Alaçam, who was alleged to have given money to Merdan Yanardağ and whom Hüseyin Gün referred to as “mommy”, was closed with a decision of no prosecution due to Alaçam’s death