Legitimizing crime is one of the oldest and most destructive strategies in human history. This process prepares the ground for the commission of new crimes by making crimes acceptable on political, ideological or social grounds. Throughout history, authoritarian regimes have used this method to maintain their oppression and erode societies“ sense of justice. The events of 2025 in Turkey - especially the CHP's whitewashing rallies for Ekrem İmamoğlu and corruption detainees, and its embrace of Sadettin Saran - are a contemporary reflection of this legacy. In this text, let us first ground the issue by examining historical examples and then move on to contemporary cases. These examples show how legitimization creates a cycle: When crime is normalized under the guise of ”victimization", the conscience of society atrophies and the freedom to commit crimes increases.
From a historical perspective, the roots of criminal justification go back to antiquity. For example, in Ancient Rome, political crimes were justified in the name of protecting the interests of the state; emperors justified executions by declaring their rivals “traitors”.
In more modern times, in Nazi Germany, the Holocaust was legitimized by the ideology of Aryan racial superiority and “Lebensraum” (living space). Adolf Hitler and his regime presented genocide as a “defense mechanism” by labeling Jews and other groups as “enemies of the state”, which led to the deaths of millions of people and gave rise to the concept of “crimes against humanity” in international law.
Similarly, in the Soviet Union, Josef Stalin's Great Purge (1936-1938) was justified by accusations of “counter-revolutionaries” and “Trotskyists”. Millions of people were executed or sent to Gulag camps, but the regime justified it as “the protection of the socialist revolution”, a classic example of how authoritarian leaders defend repression.
In Turkey, the 1990s are a historical example of impunity: Disappearances and killings in the Southeast were legitimized under the name of the ’fight against terrorism“, but state officials were not prosecuted and this left deep wounds in the justice system.
These historical cases reveal the common feature of legitimization: The crime is hidden for the sake of a greater “cause”, society remains silent and the cycle continues.
Today, this legacy is alive and well in the Turkish political arena. Ekrem İmamoğlu's corruption investigation is a clear reflection of this process. Imamoğlu has been detained for 277 days over allegations in the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality; the indictment covers deals that resulted in public damage.
Describing the detention as a “political coup”, the CHP organized rallies across the country. Demonstrations with the theme “The Nation Claims Its Will” were held in 77 squares demanding freedom and early elections; Özgür Özel tried to legitimize the detention in an economic context by bringing up inflation and pensioner problems.
These rallies, similar to the ideological justifications of the Nazi era, present the crime as a conspiracy of an “enemy” force and create the perception of a “victimized hero” in society.
A similar legitimization applies to those arrested in corruption operations against CHP municipalities. In 2025, there were events such as the arrest of Muhittin Böcek and the detentions of Zeydan Karalar and Abdurrahman Tutdere.
The party has organized rallies and hardened its action plans by portraying them as “victims of the coup”; Özel's words, “We are waiting for the indictment to put them on trial,” reflect an effort to postpone and whitewash the accusations.
This approach is reminiscent of Stalin's purges: The accusations are turned into a tool for political struggle and public expectations of justice are undermined. The internationalization of the protests is a continuation of historical impunity.
Sadettin Saran's drug scandal shows how legitimization operates at the intersection of sports and politics. Fenerbahçe President Saran tested positive, his house was searched and he was detained, but released with judicial control. The CHP was quick to embrace the case: Özel called the procedure “provocative”; Erdem Kara published a message of support and linked the crime to the IBB investigation. Critics say the party is turning a blind eye to drugs because of its “love of secular capital”; this normalizes the crime as “on our side”, similar to the racist justifications during Apartheid.
Historical and contemporary examples prove that legitimizing crime is a recipe for the decay of a society. From Nazi Germany to Stalin, from Turkey in the 1990s to the CHP rallies of 2025, this line offers the same warning: Legitimization increases the freedom to commit crimes and erodes justice. For Turkey's future, it is imperative to break this cycle; otherwise, history will repeat itself and we will all be victimized.
Crime cannot be legitimized. The criminal is favored. This creates a new crime.