IMEAK Chamber of Shipping Elections: Tensions Rise After 61-59 Vote Split

The distribution of the assembly, as reported in the IMEAK Chamber of Shipping elections, stands at 61–59, carrying the presidential race into the second phase by a narrow margin. In footage related to the tension in the hall, current President Tamer Kıran can be seen addressing the crowd, while reports indicate that a riot police intervention occurred. The lottery application is stipulated in the legislation; the legality of the concrete process can be evaluated through minutes and other evidence.

The elections for the professional committee and assembly membership of the Istanbul and Marmara, Aegean, Mediterranean, and Black Sea Regions Chamber of Shipping (IMEAK DTO), held on Sunday, October 11, at the Haliç Congress Center, have come to the forefront due to a neck-and-neck competition and the tension in the hall. It has been reported that Recep Düzgit's Blue List won 61 assembly memberships, while Şadan Kaptanoğlu's Yellow List secured 59. These figures do not yet constitute official final results. The announced election date for the board of directors is Friday, October 16.

The voting on October 11 did not directly determine the president of the DTO board of directors. The assembly formed in the first phase will separately elect the president and the board of directors. Therefore, according to the reported provisional distribution, Düzgit's list has gained a two-seat advantage in the assembly. An assessment stating that the presidency has been finalized does not align with the official election schedule.

Tamer Kıran stated, 'Everyone should disperse. The election is over now.'

In a 1 minute and 57 seconds long footage of the incident, a dense crowd with blue and yellow scarves can be seen around the stairs. Current President Tamer Kıran addresses the participants with a microphone and gestures towards the crowd with his hand. In the later parts of the footage, people can be seen touching each other's arms and shoulders around the stairs, indicating that the crowd is becoming more animated.

In his speech, Kıran stated, 'Everything will be clear within the next week.' While asking for the crowd to disperse, he added, 'Everyone should disperse. The election is over now.' He then mentioned the calling of law enforcement. In this part of the recording, the sounds of the crowd mix with the speech; the words do not constitute an announcement from a board that finalizes the election results.

According to incoming reports, Kıran wanted the crowd to disperse and warned that he would call the police. While uncertainty continues regarding some assembly memberships, it was reported that both sides claimed to have obtained a majority. It appears that there are differing assessments regarding the results in the hall before the official finalization; however, it has not been confirmed which ballots are disputed.

Riot police intervention was reported by the press.

According to incoming reports, the discussion in the hall on the evening of October 11 escalated into a fistfight; Tamer Kıran, Recep Düzgit, and Şadan Kaptanoğlu attempted to calm the participants. It has been reported that riot police were called to the hall and that the tension was alleviated through their intervention.

The warning to call law enforcement and the police intervention are separate pieces of information regarding the evidence at hand. Distinct riot police intervention could not be identified in the frames extracted from the examined footage. The information about the intervention relies on incoming reports. As of the evening of October 11, public sources scanned have not yielded a statement from the Police or the Governorship confirming the time of police arrival at the scene, who made the official call, or the number of injured or detained individuals. It is not possible to provide a definitive number or name regarding these details.

The expression '120 committees' is incorrect.

In the election, the number of professional committees and the number of assembly memberships need to be distinguished. The announcement published by the Beyoğlu 1st District Election Board states that there are 48 professional groups. Two assembly members are elected from groups of five-member committees, and three assembly members from groups of seven-member committees. Therefore, the expressions '120 committees' and 'one assembly member from each committee' are incorrect. The numbers 61–59 refer to the reported distribution for assembly memberships.

It has also been reported that the 48 committees were shared 24–24 between the two lists. This information has not yet been confirmed by the official ballot count. However, the existence of equality in the committees due to the groups sending different numbers of members to the assembly does not mean that the assembly seats will necessarily be shared equally.

Lottery debate: What does the legislation say?

It has been reported that a lottery was drawn in some committees due to a tie in votes, which caused tension. However, the committee numbers, names of candidates who received equal votes, and vote counts could not be verified through the lottery minutes. Therefore, it cannot be independently determined how many lotteries were drawn, which memberships were affected by the lottery, and the contribution of the 61–59 distribution. Attributing all the causes of the scuffle solely to the lottery goes beyond the existing documents.

The legal basis for the lottery is clear. Article 19 of the Regulation on the Elections of Chambers and Commodity Exchanges of Turkey stipulates that the ranking of candidates who receive equal votes is determined by a lottery drawn by the chairperson of the ballot box committee in front of the election committee. Main and substitute candidates are ranked separately. The candidate who loses the lottery in the last position is considered not elected. Therefore, resolving actual vote equality through this method does not, in itself, constitute a violation of the law.

The concrete subject of the objection may be more about how the lottery was applied rather than its existence. First, it should be examined whether the counting was correct and whether there was indeed equality. Then, it should be determined which candidates were included in the lottery, whether the rankings of main and substitute candidates were separated, who conducted the process, and what was written in the minutes. If the process was carried out by selecting one of the two list colors and collectively assigning all memberships to that list, it should also be evaluated whether this meets the ranking rule on a candidate basis. There is no verified document indicating that such a method was used in the DTO.

On what grounds can an objection be accepted?

In this context, relying solely on the reason that 'a lottery was drawn' by Şadan Kaptanoğlu does not seem sufficient for the acceptance of the objection. Conversely, if a counting error that affects the result, a lottery among incorrect candidates, mixing of main and substitute candidates, or violations of authority and procedure are substantiated, a legal examination ground may arise. These are not violations determined to have occurred in the incident but possibilities that need to be investigated through minutes. Whether the objection will be accepted will be determined by the election authorities reviewing the application.

The criterion for the annulment of the election is that the irregularity or violation of the legislation must be of such a nature that it affects the election results. A fight breaking out in the hall or calling the police does not, by itself, invalidate the entire election. It must be demonstrated how the events affected the freedom of voting, counting, the security of documents, or the determination of the result. Identifying an error related to one ballot does not automatically necessitate the annulment of all the chamber's elections; the scope of the decision is decisive.

Objection period and election schedule

The time for objections to the results is very short. According to Articles 81 and 84 of Law No. 5174 and Article 22 of the Regulation, the period for objections to the results is one day from the announcement. The application is examined by the presiding judge of the competent district election board. The district decision can be appealed to the provincial election board during the announcement period. This period should not be confused with the schedule applied for objections to voter lists before the election.

In the schedule announced for the DTO, the provisional results of the professional committee and assembly are set to be announced on Monday, October 12, with the objections to be resolved on the same day; district decisions are to be announced on Tuesday, October 13, and applications to the provincial election board are foreseen during this announcement period. The announcement date for the final results of the first phase is set for Thursday, October 15. After the election of the president and other bodies on October 16, provisional results are scheduled for October 19, district objection decisions for October 20, and final results for October 22.

In the ordinary objection process, the decision of the provincial election board is legally definitive. However, in the Supreme Election Council's (YSK) decision No. 173 dated April 2, 2005, it was accepted that applications based on the claim of 'complete illegality' could be examined despite this definitiveness. This does not mean that there is a regular third-degree avenue that can be appealed to the YSK in every dispute. Whether a lottery objection falls under this exception depends on the nature of the claim.

Presidential election on October 16

The procedure for the presidential election is also significant. According to Article 13 of the Regulation, the assembly elects the board of directors' president and main and substitute board members on the same list. Therefore, the expression 'the president will be elected first, and then he will form his own administration' is technically incomplete. If there is a tie in the first vote for the presidency, a second round is held between the two candidates with the most votes; if the second round also ends in a tie, a lottery is applied. This two-round rule is different from the lottery for committee and assembly membership rankings.

Even if the 61–59 distribution is finalized, it does not legally predetermine the voting preferences on October 16. The participation of members in the secret ballot and valid votes will be decisive. Simply as an arithmetic example, in a scenario where all members vote for two candidates resulting in a 61–59 outcome, a single vote shifting to the other side leads to a 60–60 tie. This calculation does not contain information or claims that any member will change their preference; it illustrates the sensitivity of the two-seat difference.

Objection to the election venue and objection to the results are different.

It is known from the official announcement that Kaptanoğlu had an objection accepted during the election process: the election venue. According to the DTO's announcement, following an application regarding the equal distance appearance of Piri Reis University to the candidates, the Beyoğlu 1st District Election Board accepted the request for a venue change with its decision numbered 2026/93 dated September 25. The Haliç Congress Center was also approved with its decision numbered 2026/94 dated September 28. These decisions pertain to the election venue; they do not indicate that an objection was accepted regarding the lottery or results on October 11.

For a definitive legal evaluation regarding the election night, it is necessary to view the ballot result minutes of the disputed groups together with the lottery records. It can be understood from these documents which candidate received how many votes, which rankings changed due to the lottery, and how this affected assembly membership. In publicly available sources, no objection petition submitted by Kaptanoğlu regarding the current lottery or results and no decision taken on this matter have been verified. The legal fate of the 61–59 outcome will be determined by these documents and the decisions of the election boards.

Source: SeaNews Türkiye