Turkish prosecutors have submitted a request for the removal of opposition leader Özgür Özel’s parliamentary immunity, seeking to pursue a bribery investigation connected to the selection of a candidate for the 2024 local elections.
The Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office announced on August 4 that it had completed separate investigations concerning Özel, the leader of the Yeni Party, and Malatya MP Veli Ağbaba. Prosecutors prepared parliamentary dossiers, known in Turkey as fezlekes, and sent them to the Justice Ministry as part of the procedure required to lift the two politicians’ immunity.
Both men are being investigated on suspicion of “repeatedly accepting bribes,” according to the prosecutor’s statement reported by Turkey’s state-run Anadolu Agency.
The submission does not mean that Özel has been convicted, indicted or formally placed on trial. As a serving member of Parliament, he is protected by legislative immunity. Prosecutors must first secure Parliament’s approval before they can proceed with ordinary criminal measures against him in connection with the allegations.
The dossiers will be processed by the Justice Ministry before potentially being forwarded to the presidency and then to the Turkish Grand National Assembly. Any request reaching Parliament would first be examined by the Joint Constitutional and Justice Committee before lawmakers could vote on whether to lift immunity.
Investigation Originated In Antalya Case
The allegations emerged from a broader investigation conducted by the Antalya Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office into suspected corruption surrounding local government and the selection of candidates before Turkey’s March 2024 municipal elections.
Material concerning Özel and Ağbaba was separated from the Antalya investigation and transferred to Ankara on June 3 because the two suspects were sitting MPs and therefore subject to a special parliamentary procedure.
Turkish media reported that the investigation relied partly on statements given by people questioned in the Antalya case, including suspects cooperating with prosecutors under provisions commonly described as “effective remorse.” The authorities have also reportedly examined witness statements, telephone contacts and location data.
Prosecutors allege that financial benefits were sought or received in connection with political decisions made during the candidate-selection process. The precise evidence supporting the accusations, including any alleged payment records, has not yet been made public.
Özel and Ağbaba are presumed innocent unless proven guilty in court.
Politically Sensitive Proceedings
The move opens another potentially significant legal front against Özel, who leads the largest opposition grouping in the Turkish Parliament.
According to Parliament’s official website, Özel currently serves as the Yeni Party’s leader and as an MP representing Manisa. The new proceedings are therefore likely to intensify debate over the growing number of judicial investigations involving opposition politicians in Turkey.
Government officials and pro-government media have portrayed such cases as legitimate criminal investigations that must proceed independently of the suspects’ political positions. Opposition parties, however, have repeatedly accused the authorities of using prosecutors and the courts to weaken elected rivals and reshape the country’s political landscape.
The latest dossiers are particularly serious because they concern alleged bribery rather than statements made in speeches or political criticism—charges frequently used in earlier immunity proceedings against Turkish MPs.
Nevertheless, the preparation of a dossier does not automatically lead to the removal of immunity. Parliamentary files can remain pending for months or even years, and lawmakers must make a separate political decision on whether the legal process should proceed.
The strength of the case is difficult to assess because the prosecution has disclosed only a broad outline of its allegations.
It remains unclear whether investigators possess direct financial evidence, such as bank transfers, cash-delivery records or other documentation linking Özel or Ağbaba to an alleged payment. The degree to which witness and cooperating-suspect statements are supported by independent evidence is also unknown.
As of Wednesday morning, no parliamentary vote, criminal indictment, arrest warrant or court hearing had been announced in connection with the new dossiers.
The immediate questions are whether the Justice Ministry will forward the files rapidly to Parliament, whether the governing coalition will press for an immunity vote and how Özel will respond to the allegations.
For the moment, the case represents an attempt by prosecutors to remove the constitutional obstacle preventing an investigation from advancing—not the beginning of a criminal trial.