Interior Ministry’s announcement on ousted İlgezdi

In an announcement made by the Interior Ministry, it was said, “Decision was taken by our ministry concerning Ataşehir Municipality officials, as in procedures having to do with all municipal officials, taking the objective rules of law into consideration and in accordance with justice and fairness.”
 
The Interior Ministry announced yesterday that it had removed Ataşehir Mayor Battal İlgezdi from office.
 
The full announcement made by the Interior Ministry was as follows:
 
“Included in a press statement concerning the removal from office of Ataşehir Mayor Battal İlgezdi made by Battal İlgezdi’s lawyer Ömer Faruk Hansu in opposition to the decision taken by our Ministry was the accusation that the removal from office decision was taken for political motives and there were decisions denying authorisation for investigations and to discontinue the proceedings over the matters that constituted the basis for removal from office.
 
In connection with the matters in the files that constituted the basis for removal from office, our Ministry passed decisions to grant investigation authorisation into 32 matters and, conversely, to deny investigation authorisation into 28 matters. As will be seen from these decisions, decision was taken by our ministry concerning Ataşehir Municipality officials, as in procedures having to do with all municipal officials, taking the objective rules of law into consideration and in accordance with justice and fairness.
 
In keeping with this, the basis for the decision to remove Ataşehir Mayor Battal İlgezdi from office was, as with other removal from office decisions concerning mayors, the matters of corruption, impropriety, unjust acquisition of property, bid rigging and abuse of position featuring in investigations and prosecutions currently being conducted by the judicial authorities under investigation authorisation decisions passed in response to reports compiled by Civil Service Inspectors.
 
CONCERNING BUZ REZİDANS
 
Taking into consideration that the courts issued their rulings in accordance with the documents in the file and, thus, in the event of there being fresh information and documents, there existed no legal obstacle that would prevent the reconducting of a preliminary investigation and the fresh information and documents that had reached our Ministry in this regard, a fresh preliminary investigation was launched involving different matters from the preliminary investigation that is referred to in the statement and as a consequence the “Investigation Authorisation Granting” decision number 2016/387 of 20.09.2016 was passed by the Ministerial Authority. The statutory period with respect to this decision continues. Hence, there exists no final Council of State ruling on this decision.
 
CONCERNING ERGUVAN BARIŞ PARK
 
The subject matter of ruling number E: 2012/1438, K: 2012/1848 of Chamber No 1 of the Court of State to which the interested party’s lawyer has made indication was the allegation, “The tender for Erguvan Barış Park recorded at Ataşehir Küçükbakkalköy, sheet 232, block 1937, plot 7 was conducted contrary to legislation and unsightly development was caused with a blind eye turned to the construction of buildings not in conformity with the development plan on the park.” However, in the light of fresh information and documents, a fresh preliminary investigation was launched into the matter of, “The affording of protection to the contracting and undertaking companies in respect of practices contrary to the law and due procedure and profiteering at the site rental, construction and operation stages in connection with the Erguvan Barış Park construction works carried out by Ataşehir Municipality at Ataşehir sub-province Küçükbakkalköy Quarter block 1937, plot 7” and, as a consequence of this preliminary investigation, the “Investigation Authorisation Granting” decision number 2016/387 of 20.09.2016 was passed by the Ministerial Authority. Hence, there exists no final Council of State ruling on this decision.
 
CONCERNING THE UNJUST ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY
 
Even if Battal İLGEZDİ’s lawyer has stated that a decision to discontinue the proceedings was taken by the relevant judicial authorities in connection with his assets, as they have also subsequently indicated in the statement they made, a trial with the case number 2017/443 was filed at the Penal Court of First Instance within Anatolia Republic Chief Prosecution’s investigation number 2015/100639 into Battal İLGEZDİ over this matter, and the trial is pending. Hence, there exists no decision to discontinue the proceedings or acquit in the trial being heard against the concerned party under case number 2017/443 at the Penal Court of First Instance. Moreover, the case file also encompasses the offence of bid rigging along with the unjust acquisition of property. Apart from these, in other matters constituting the basis for removal from office, there also exist matters into which investigation authorisation has been granted and over which the judicial authorities’ procedures are ongoing.
 
As will also be apparent from the above remarks, our Ministry’s removal from office decision dated 06.12.2017, fully contrary to the imputations made by Battal İlgezdi’s lawyer, is based on legal procedures that are being conducted by our Ministry and the judicial authorities and remain ongoing in response to various allegations and complaints of corruption, impropriety, unjust acquisition of property, bid rigging and abuse of position that have been conveyed to our Ministry and the judicial authorities. The public is respectfully informed.”