An Ankara appeals court annulled the main opposition Republican People's Party's (CHP) November 2023 leadership congress on grounds of "mutlak butlan" (absolute nullity), effectively removing party chair Özgür Özel and provisionally reinstating his predecessor Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu [1][2][4]. The ruling, issued on May 21, voided all decisions taken at and after the 38th Ordinary Congress, citing allegations of irregularities including promises of jobs to delegates [2][21]. The Borsa Istanbul 100 index fell more than six percent, triggering circuit breakers, and Turkey's central bank sold billions of dollars in foreign exchange reserves to stabilize the lira [1][5][23].
The decision opened an immediate fault line between those who see it as a politically motivated strike against Turkey's opposition and those who frame it as a lawful correction of internal party irregularities. CHP deputy parliamentary group chair Ali Mahir Başarır called the ruling "an attempted coup carried out through the judiciary [and] a blow against the will of 86 million people" [1][5]. The pro-Kurdish DEM Party, Turkey's third-largest parliamentary force, described it as a "black stain" on Turkish democracy [1][5]. Özel himself announced the party had appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeals and would approach the Supreme Election Board, declaring (in a statement reported in German translation by Der Spiegel): "Dieser Krieg wurde nicht gegen uns, sondern gegen das Volk begonnen, dieser Putsch wurde nicht gegen uns, sondern gegen das Volk gemacht" (This war was not started against us but against the people; this coup was not carried out against us but against the people) [3]. Euronews reported that the CHP denied any wrongdoing and denounced the move as a "political coup" via the judiciary [12].
The Turkish government offered a starkly different reading. Officials said the ruling renewed Turks' faith in the rule of law [1][5]. TRT Haber, the state broadcaster, presented the decision as a legal process with a clear path to appeal [18]. Former Hatay Metropolitan Mayor Lütfü Savaş, who initiated the lawsuit, stated that both President Erdoğan and Kılıçdaroğlu had publicly questioned the congress's legitimacy, yet the party leadership took no corrective action. "Bu Türkiye'de belki de son yüzyılın siyaset açısından en önemli davasıydı" (This was perhaps the most important political case of the last century in Turkey), Savaş told Hürriyet, adding that the day was one of heightened responsibility rather than celebration [8].
Legal analysts cautioned that the ruling's practical consequences remain uncertain. Lawyer Elvan Kılıç explained in Hürriyet that "Mutlak butlan, bir hukuki işlemin ağır ve asli sakatlık nedeniyle baştan itibaren hukuk düzeninde geçerlilik kazanmamış sayılması sonucunu ifade eder" (Absolute nullity means that a legal transaction is deemed never to have gained validity in the legal order due to a severe and fundamental defect) [4]. Kılıç added that the ruling alone does not automatically restore the former chair to office; the scope, finality, and legal consequences require separate assessment [4]. The German constitutional law blog Verfassungsblog published an analysis questioning the ruling's compatibility with Turkish party law and the principle of judicial independence [22].
Kılıçdaroğlu, for his part, called for calm and said the party would resolve its problems internally. "Our party is a very large party and it will solve its own problems internally," he told reporters [2]. Hürriyet's Ankara representative Hande Fırat reported that Kılıçdaroğlu told his inner circle he had no personal expectations but needed to return through "political nullity" to cleanse the party of a "theft stigma." His plans reportedly include replacing approximately 45 provincial chairs, suspending memberships of those facing legal proceedings, and forming a seven-member central executive board [10]. Middle East Eye reported that CHP deputy chairman Gokan Zeybek called on members to defend party headquarters, highlighting the internal tension between those who accepted the ruling and those who rejected it [14].
German and European officials framed the decision as incompatible with Turkey's stated aspiration to join the European Union. German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul stated: "Die türkische Regierung bekräftigt, dass sie an einer EU-Mitgliedschaft festhalten will, und wir wollen sie dabei unterstützen, aber eine Entscheidung wie die von gestern steht im Widerspruch zu diesem Bekenntnis" (The Turkish government affirms that it wants to maintain its commitment to EU membership, and we want to support it, but a decision like yesterday's contradicts that commitment) [3][6]. SPD foreign policy spokesperson Derya Türk-Nachbaur went further: "Das ist keine unabhängige Justiz, das ist Machtpolitik" (This is not independent justice; this is power politics), describing a pattern that included the earlier arrest of Istanbul Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu [6]. Deutsche Welle's Turkish-language service reported that some German politicians compared the judicial intervention to "Kremlin levels" of authoritarian practice [20]. The German think tank Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik (SWP) published an analysis describing the removal as a symptom of the erosion of judicial independence in Turkey, with direct implications for EU-Turkey relations [24]. Lawfare, a US-based legal analysis outlet, discussed how Turkey's democratic backsliding constrains NATO's ability to influence Ankara on democratic norms [25].
The economic fallout was immediate and widely reported across languages. Reuters noted a sharp bond sell-off alongside the stock market decline [23]. Brazil's InfoMoney linked the ruling to volatility in Turkish markets and government intervention to defend the lira, framing the episode as an example of the costs when justice is used in political disputes [16]. Al-Araby Al-Jadeed reported in Arabic that the Istanbul stock exchange decline was directly triggered by the ruling [21].
The broader press freedom environment in Turkey formed a parallel thread. Deutsche Welle reported that its journalist Alican Uludağ was released after 92 days of detention on charges of insulting President Erdoğan and spreading misleading information, though his trial continues with the next hearing set for September 18 [7]. Erol Önderoğlu, chairman of Reporters Without Borders in Turkey, stated: "Alican Uludag's release brings us joy, yet his detention will remain a 90-day mistreatment inflicted on an investigative journalist" [7].
The CHP's appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeals is pending, and Özel has indicated the party will also seek intervention from the Supreme Election Board [3][9]. No direct statements from President Erdoğan, senior AKP officials, or the judges who issued the ruling have appeared in the available record. No formal assessments from EU institutions or the Council of Europe's Venice Commission have been published. The Independent en Español reported that the CHP plans to exhaust all legal avenues [15].