Control for Capital, the Blast for Us

A Class Balance Sheet on the Fourteenth Day of the Fund Crisis: Those Detained, Those Rescued, Those Kept Waiting

The Door That Opened, the Door That Locked

Dear Young Comrades,

At a press conference held around noon today at the Istanbul provincial office of the Workers' Party of Turkey (TİP), a heavy claim was added to the questions asked about the fund crisis for two weeks. Ahmet Şık, TİP's Istanbul MP, said this:

"I claim that this controlled demolition was carried out by the Ministry of Treasury and Finance. (…) If we do not carry out this controlled demolition, this loss, which is a little over 20 billion dollars today, could rise to 100 billion dollars in six months. (…) Seeing that a much larger avalanche would fall, a controlled demolition was carried out."

On Şık's account, then, the crisis did not burst of its own accord. Once the robbery was noticed, and before the loss could grow large enough to threaten the system as a whole, it was detonated by the state. The main claims and demands put forward at the meeting are these (BirGün, dokuz8haber):

• Who protected Ömer Gönül? According to Şık, Mehmet Şimşek "insistently" wanted to dismiss the former chair of the Capital Markets Board (SPK), İbrahim Ömer Gönül, but was blocked. "If you find who blocked him, you can reach the name inside this robbery, and the brain trust as well." While the meeting was still going on, news came that Gönül had been summoned to give a statement as a "suspect".
• The SPK saw it and did not intervene. Months before the crisis the SPK fined Tera Portföy 8.8 million lira for manipulation, then did "nothing". According to Şık, the SPK's managers "must be suspects in this file and defendants in the case that will be opened."
• Conflict of interest. The spouse of the Minister of Justice, Akın Gürlek, sits on the SPK board. Gürlek's being at the head of the investigation is "to entrust the henhouse to the fox."
• The investigation grows sideways; the vertical line is blocked. Yachts, villas and famous names are discussed; the line that runs to politics and the bureaucracy is stopped. Şık claims that the Sayan Kaya documents were leaked from inside the Ministry of Justice bureaucracy, and that this was a "pre-emptive move".
• Offshore shell companies. The real owners of companies in Luxembourg, Finland and the United Kingdom "masked as foreign investors", and the shares held in Tera funds in the name of foreign institutions, should be disclosed: "The bulk of the plunder was done this way."
• Erdin Özel, the "economic mind". If the chair of Tera Portföy's board is properly investigated, "we will see a great many more Fatma Betül Sayan Kayas."
• "A matryoshka bubble." According to the economist Nazır Kapusuz, the funds are nested inside one another, and even the number of shares has been multiplied. The liquidation desk "will see 150 partners when it tries to liquidate 100 units of stock." Finance's own protective mechanisms (a haircut, a margin call) were never operated.
• Demands. Two parliamentary commissions announced by Sera Kadıgil (the "Tera–Pusula–Ankara" network, and the assets of MPs and ministers of the last five terms); a "de facto commission" of opposition figures, economists and lawyers, as Şık called for; the opening of Takasbank records and portfolio breakdowns; the list of large investors who left the funds before 28 August.

In the same days as the meeting, another move draws attention: the former Minister of Family, Fatma Betül Sayan Kaya, and her husband deposited 2.2 billion lira into the "effective remorse" account, and then their assets were frozen. Under the law, this payment, made after the investigation had begun, does not cancel the trial. But with the language of "they returned it, the matter is closed", what is being built is the appearance of a file closed without a trial, that is a de facto amnesty. We open this in detail in section 4.

All of these claims are claims. Proving them, or disproving them, depends on a transparent investigation. But the "controlled demolition" thesis, whether true or false, names in a single concept the picture we have been looking at for two weeks. Controlled demolition has a rule: the building is emptied before it is brought down. The question is this: who was taken out of the building, and who was left inside? This piece looks for an answer in the figures of fourteen days.

---

What Is in This Piece? A Short Summary

This is a long piece. Let us first take the whole of it in a few paragraphs, then go into the detail.

Two figures, two doors. The 28 million lira of maintenance-fee savings of a 1,200-flat housing estate in Istanbul is locked in Tera's money-market fund. The residents do not know when the money will return, or how much of it. On the other side it is written that the former Minister of Family, Fatma Betül Sayan Kaya, and her husband, on the allegations, took 2 billion 170 million lira out of Özata shares in four or five months, then returned 2.2 billion lira to the Treasury under the "effective remorse" provision. The owners of the first figure are waiting at the door. The owners of the second left through the door long ago, and are now looking for a way out through another door, the door of the courts.

The meeting and its background (sections 1 and 2). We report today's TİP meeting in detail, then set out in date order the parliamentary questions Ahmet Şık has tabled since 21 September, the case Gürlek opened, and the statements of Erkan Baş and Sera Kadıgil. Our assessment: by putting the mechanism behind the names on the table, the meeting took an important step. The worker is still not mentioned. There is still no concrete demand for restitution of how the small investor's money will come back.

The Labour Party (section 3). The 18 September statement of Seyit Aslan, general chair of the Labour Party (EMEP), reads the fund crisis together with the housing crisis and the fuel price rises as "a robbery from two directions". While rent is one and a half times the minimum wage, the savings of the wage-earner who put the dream of a home onto the paper of the "merchants of hope" have burned. The warning that the bill would again be charged to the worker through the public banks was confirmed eleven days later. TİP looks at the upper floor of the crisis, EMEP at the lower floor. The two approaches complete each other.

The attempt at a de facto amnesty in the Sayan Kaya file (section 4). With the former minister and her husband depositing 2.2 billion lira in the Treasury, the impression "they returned it, the matter is closed" is being built. Yet under Article 107/3 of Law No. 6362, effective remorse is an admission of the offence. Impunity is granted only to whoever pays before the investigation begins. Whoever pays during the investigation gets only a reduction by half. And twice the benefit is required. The money deposited is about half of that. While 56 people are detained in the same investigation, for the former minister there is neither a detention nor news of a statement, only a temporary freeze of assets. The door of remorse opens to whoever has the money. And the money deposited goes not to the victim but to the Treasury.

The chronology of fourteen days (section 5). 131 funds are in liquidation, the period has been extended from three months to six, 56 people are detained, a "Fund Coordination Board" has been set up at Beştepe, and the State Supervisory Council (DDK) has been assigned. In the same two weeks the measures on 45 companies and 19 funds were lifted, and three participation institutions were transferred to a public bank.

The figures (section 6). Money paid to the wage-earner in the fund: zero. One household's alleged gain equals the entire savings of about 20,000 small investors: 11,000 lira a minute, that is, one family's monthly hunger line every three and a half minutes. While Özata was making a loss, its share rose 32 times. At Gündoğdu Gıda, 2 of 217 workers remain. The assets seized are about five per thousand of the size of the funds in liquidation.

What the left press wrote (section 7). The news and articles of BirGün and Evrensel over the last three days. The sharpest, from the workers' side: while Smart Solar's management told 1,227 workers "we cannot give a rise", it bought its own shares out of the collapsing exchange for 79 million lira, almost twice the workers' six-month wage demand. TÜRK-İŞ and DİSK-AR figures published the same day show that the saving pushed into the fund is the child of the pressure on wages.

The class reading (sections 8 and 9). Four doors opened in two weeks: the large companies taken out of the measures, effective remorse opened to whoever has money to return, the collateral cut granted to leveraged capital, and the umbrella of the public bank. The only door that stayed locked is the door of the wage-earner in the fund. We set the official narrative ("there is no systemic risk", "we do not defend those who devour rights", "we are protecting the real sector") beside the class reading, and discuss what is not spoken: the worker, the class difference among the victims, and in whose hands the information sits.

Parliament and the tasks (sections 10 and 11). Parliament opens tomorrow. What has to be done so that the commissions are not stalled on the government's timetable; what we can do for the person we know who is in a fund, for gathering documents and information, for our own collective funds; which demands should come to the front, from a legal priority for small savings in the liquidation to sending the returned money directly to the victim.

Our thesis in one sentence: Control was control for capital; for those left inside, the blast was a blast.

This piece is the balance sheet, fourteen days on, of the collapse we told on 17 September under the title The Fund Earthquake. That day we asked "whose money, whose crisis". Today we sharpen the question:

1. In two weeks, whose door opened, and whose door stayed locked?
2. Whom do the boards the state has set up, the billions returned, and the measures lifted protect?
3. What does the "controlled demolition" thesis make visible in the picture, and what can it not yet see?

Every piece of investigation in this article is at the stage of allegation. There is no final conviction. The presumption of innocence applies to everyone. But the subject of the piece is not persons. It is the structure. The structure does not wait for the court's decision.

---

1. Today's Press Conference: "A Controlled Demolition Has Been Carried Out"

Let us now report in detail the meeting we summarised at the start. It was held around noon today at TİP's Istanbul provincial office. Those who spoke were Ahmet Şık, TİP's Istanbul MP; Sera Kadıgil, the party spokesperson and Istanbul MP; and Nazır Kapusuz, an economist who sits on the Party Council and the Science Board. The full text of Şık's speech was published in BirGün; the speeches of Kadıgil and Kapusuz in dokuz8haber. Below we pass on what was said at the meeting, heading by heading, as far as possible in the speakers' own words.

The main thesis: who carried out the demolition?

Şık's most striking claim at the meeting was that the crisis did not burst of its own accord, that it was detonated. Recalling that the crisis reached the public through the report of an international financial institution, Şık said:

"So I am saying it here: who carried out this controlled demolition? I claim that this controlled demolition was carried out by the Ministry of Treasury and Finance. Nazır explained why it was set up, but once the robbery in the later stages was noticed, the Ministry of Treasury and Finance saw this: if we do not carry out this controlled demolition, this loss, which is a little over 20 billion dollars today, could rise to 100 billion dollars in six months. When you also connect it to the economic crisis that is being lived, a controlled demolition was carried out, seeing that a much larger avalanche would fall."

But Şık also added that this does not acquit the Ministry. The manipulation had been known for months. Why the intervention was not made earlier had to be explained.

"Fonzi": naming the order

Şık began his speech with the terms of the debate. He answered the argument "is it a Ponzi or not" like this:

"This capital is itself a system set up by a gang, composed of a number of people from politics, above all the AKP, from the media and from the state bureaucracy, in order to plunder and to rob. (…) The name of the order the palace regime has built is already Fonzi. It is the name of a system, willed and deliberate, in which the rich are to be made richer and the poor poorer. Before anything else, this swamp has to be drained."

Who protected Ömer Gönül?

Şık's second large question was about the SPK's former chair:

"Who blocked Mehmet Şimşek, who insistently wanted to dismiss Ömer Gönül, the previous SPK chair? Look, this is a question: if you find who blocked him, you can reach the name inside this robbery, and reach the brain trust. There is a minister who wants to dismiss Ömer Gönül, but he is blocked, and that person keeps sitting there until his term ends."

While the meeting was still going on, it became public, according to BirGün, that İbrahim Ömer Gönül would give a statement to the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office as a "suspect". The question turned, in the same hours, into a prosecutor's file.

Şık also stated his personal view of Şimşek openly: "Mehmet Şimşek of course has a responsibility, but I want to believe that he is a name I do not think is inside this robbery gang." And he added: if Şimşek is an honest bureaucrat, as the image he draws for the public suggests, explaining the source of the crisis and those responsible "is his responsibility, his debt, to everyone who lives in this country."

Conflict of interest: "entrusting the henhouse to the fox"

Şık, who yesterday met a criminal complaint and a damages suit from the Minister of Justice, Akın Gürlek, explained today why he was asking about Gürlek:

"I am not picking a fight with Akın Gürlek. I am asking questions about some names who appear as suspects in a robbery. Akın Gürlek's being at the head of this investigation is an error in the first place. I say this for the following reason, and I do not say it in order to accuse: his dear spouse is on the board of the Capital Markets Board."

He then recalled the SPK's record. According to Şık, Şimşek had said "manipulations are being carried out" eleven months before the crisis, and a few months later the SPK had imposed an administrative fine of 8.8 million lira on Tera Portföy:

"You have seen the manipulation, you have said a robbery has been set up, you are a supervisory organ, and you have not made any intervention. Looking at it from there, the managers of the Capital Markets Board, even if there is no relation of benefit, are each responsible for neglect of duty and abuse of office, and must be suspects in this file and defendants in the case that will be opened. If one of them is also the spouse of the Minister of Justice, there is a conflict of interest here. That is what I am trying to stress."

Şık summed the situation up in a single saying: Gürlek's being at the head of the investigation is "to entrust the henhouse to the fox."

An investigation that is vertical, not horizontal

According to Şık, the investigation is growing in the wrong direction:

"Yachts that have been turned into a great deal of magazine talk are discussed, villas are discussed, popular identities, names are disclosed. There is an investigation widened horizontally out of the magazine world. (…) Well then, when an investigation grown horizontally like this begins to be examined vertically, whose names from politics and from the bureaucracy will be mixed in? An attempt is being made to block this."

Şık claimed that the documents concerning Sayan Kaya were sent to Zeynel Emre, spokesperson of the YENİ Parti, "by a source from inside the Ministry of Justice bureaucracy", and he described this leak as "a pre-emptive move" aimed at preventing the investigation from being run vertically: "A message has been given to certain people."

Erdin Özel, Hayrettin Koç, and the shell companies

Şık defined Erdin Özel, chair of Tera Portföy's board, as the "economic mind" of the order:

"If Erdin Özel is properly investigated, if the message records of his phones and every kind of digital communication are investigated as they should be, we will see a great many more Fatma Betül Sayan Kayas."

He asked that Özel's relation with Hayrettin Koç, Koç's connections in the bureaucracy, and the claim that "he also has a relation with a mafia group" be investigated. Recalling the care taken in the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality investigation, he demanded the same care for this file: "Because, friends, this is the greatest robbery in the history of the Republic!"

The perhaps most important question of the meeting was the link abroad:

"Who are the institutions and establishments, linked abroad, consisting of nothing but a signboard but connected to offshore accounts, trading in these funds under the mask of a foreign investor, trading in high amounts? It is very easy to find who owns these offshore shell companies. Will an inquiry be made on this?"

Şık pointed in particular to the shell companies in Luxembourg, Finland and the United Kingdom, and asked that the proportion of shares held in Tera funds in the name of foreign institutions, and the identity of those institutions, be disclosed: "Because the bulk of the plunder was done this way."

A fake identity and a troll network

Şık repeated a claim he had asked in a parliamentary question a few days earlier: a social-media steering network headed by Furkan Torlak, one of Gürlek's advisers, run with a fake identity named "Mehmet Kap" and a single WhatsApp line. Şık's question: after the crisis burst, why did "the number of posts aimed at polishing Hasan Doğan from the Presidency and Akın Gürlek increase?"

"The public was not going to be loaded once"

To the reports that the losses would be met from the Wealth Fund or from other public sources, Şık replied as follows (dokuz8haber):

"It is now thought that the money the poor investor lost is being tried to be covered from the Wealth Fund or from the state's other sources. If you had prevented this robbery, such a thing would not have happened. The public would not have been loaded once."

A single demand: the top of the pyramid

Şık closed his speech with a single demand. This passage contains the meeting's clearest sentences from a class point of view:

"I have one demand. When we set aside the small investor among 450 thousand people, the investors who entered this fund for fifteen days to complete the missing 10 thousand lira of a 100 thousand lira credit card and lost not the shortfall but their principal as well, the names of the most important people in the robbery mechanism at the very top of this pyramid are in the desk records, in the SPK records and in the exchange records. These names must be disclosed."

Bound to this, Şık asked that the following be shared with the public: the funds' portfolio breakdowns, the records of the custodian Takasbank, the detail of the restitution demands, and the list of large investors who left the funds before the regulation of 28 August 2026. "The list of all of them is in their hands," Şık said. "Do these persons have any closeness at the level of the ministry, at the level of the relevant ministries?"

Nazır Kapusuz: "a matryoshka bubble"

The technical side of the meeting was taken by the economist Nazır Kapusuz. Kapusuz named the structure at Pusula the "Matryoshka Bubble System" and described the trap waiting for the liquidation desk (dokuz8haber):

"When the liquidation desk tries to liquidate 100 units of stock, it will see 150 partners in return. (…) Look, I am not talking about the inflation of prices. What is a liquidation desk? It is to say, 'Everyone put in one share, 100 people joined. There are 100 on the desk too, take your one share and go.' But the system here has been set up as an extraordinary robbery that, by also increasing these assets in number, will make it impossible for people even to take their own values, their own shares."

Kapusuz said that even finance's own protective mechanisms were not operated:

"There is an expression called a 'haircut'. That is, the moment the share opposite loses value, the quality of the collateral is cut, so the relation among these funds should have broken at once. But it did not break. There is a term called a 'margin call'. A fund could have seen this collateral shortfall on the other side, demanded all its money at once, and wanted to protect its own fund. But this was not operated either."

And he described the circuit that joins the bank, the funds and the public in a single loop:

"It sets up a relation among itself, sells goods to itself, gives data. In the middle there is the Investment Bank. It takes a 600 million dollar credit from the state, issues a bond, and puts that bond back into this system. A system has been set up in which, to an extraordinary degree, the public banks and the SPK are also inside."

A note: the figure of 600 million dollars appears in the parliamentary question of Murat Emir of the YENİ Parti as the credit that Tera Yatırım Bankası, by selling bonds and borrowing, distributed to its circle. Kapusuz cites the same figure as a credit the bank took from the state. The two accounts may be describing the same circuit from different ends. Until the direction of the money is clear, we keep this contradiction open.

Sera Kadıgil: the "TPA criminal organisation" and two commissions

The party's official demands were listed by the party spokesperson, Sera Kadıgil:

"A commission should be set up within the Grand National Assembly to investigate the criminal organisation we call, in short, the 'Tera–Pusula–Ankara', that is the TPA, criminal organisation. Information and documents concerning the transactions of all MPs who are members of the TPA criminal organisation, of bureaucrats working within the Presidency, of ministry staff, and of the managers of political parties, must be shared directly with the commissions to be set up."

Kadıgil's sentence on the asymmetry of information gathers into one paragraph the question this series has asked from the start:

"Who did which transaction here, how much money they put in on which date, how much money they withdrew on which date, who asked to be released from their posts just before this fund frenzy began, who put billions of lira in their pocket and left just before this collapse began, is fixed. You know this. We do not yet know it."

Kadıgil also proposed a second commission: one that would investigate, with the participation of independent observers as well, the assets of all the MPs of the last five terms and of all the ministers who have served under the Presidential Government System. The party asked that information and documents concerning the fund plunder be sent to ihbar@tip.org.tr. Kadıgil's close: "As people who have not laid a hand on the people's money, on its five kuruş, to struggle against those who have laid a hand on it is a debt upon our necks, as an opposition party, as the revolutionaries of this country."

Şık too made a call without waiting for a commission of the government majority: a de facto commission, made up of members of the opposition parties, economists, lawyers and researchers, "able to expose whoever is in the mechanism of the robbery".

TİP's demands, in a single list

Demand	Who raised it
A parliamentary commission to investigate the "Tera–Pusula–Ankara" network	Kadıgil
An investigation of the assets of the MPs of the last five terms and of all ministers	Kadıgil
Public disclosure of the SPK transactions of senior politicians and managers	Kadıgil
A de facto commission of the opposition, economists and lawyers	Şık
An investigation of the ownership of the offshore shell companies	Şık
The proportion and identity of shares held in Tera funds in the name of a foreign institution	Şık
Portfolio breakdowns, Takasbank records, restitution demands	Şık
The list of large investors who left before 28 August	Şık
Disclosure of who blocked Gönül's dismissal	Şık
Gürlek's withdrawal from the head of the investigation (conflict of interest)	Şık
Investigation of the SPK's managers as suspects	Şık

The class assessment: "controlled" for whom?

Comrade, let us now read this meeting in our own terms.

First, if the controlled-demolition thesis is true, it tells a great deal. In demolition engineering, controlled demolition has a rule: the building is emptied before it is brought down. Read Şık's thesis with that rule. If the Treasury decided that the loss should be cut at 20 billion dollars, and not be allowed to grow to 100 billion dollars, then who remained inside the building was also decided at that moment. Those who left before the 28 August guide, the 159 people of the closed fund, those who had money to return, were outside. The housing estate that had put its maintenance fees into the fund, the wage-earner who entered for fifteen days to close a credit-card debt, the pensioner saving for a home, were inside. Control was control for capital; for those left inside, the blast was a blast.

Engels defines the bourgeois state as "the ideal total capitalist": the office that watches not the interest of capitalists one by one, but the order of capital as a whole. The move Şık describes is exactly this. The state did not stop the robbery. At the point where the robbery would threaten the whole of the system, it limited the loss. And it charged the bill for the limited loss to whoever was inside at that moment. For this reason, Şık's view of Şimşek, "I want to believe he is not inside the gang", even if it is correct, does not change the heart of the matter. The matter is not Şimşek's personal honesty. It is that what even an honest bureaucrat will do is to sacrifice the small accumulation in order to protect the whole of the accumulation of capital.

Second, the meeting closed a gap in the earlier line of questions. TİP's ten-day line of questions (in detail below) was built mostly on names. Names matter. But every time a name is detained, or returns the money, the structure finds a chance to come out clean, and the mechanism stays in the background. Today Kapusuz's account of the "matryoshka", the "haircut" and the "margin call", and the circuit in which the bank borrows with a bond and feeds the funds, put exactly that mechanism on the table. Şık's definition of "Fonzi" named the crisis not as a deviation but as an order in which "the rich are made richer and the poor poorer". This is a strong counter-definition against the Financial Stability Committee's language of "a limited number of companies".

Third, two things are still missing.

One is the worker. The small investor was mentioned at the meeting, but those who lost their jobs in the companies the funds inflated, the Gündoğdu staff that fell from 217 to 2, were not mentioned at all. The Smart Solar news that Evrensel wrote the same day (in detail below) shows the workers' side of the crisis: the boss tells the worker "we cannot give a rise" and buys his own share cheaply out of the collapsing exchange. The fund crisis shows that capital goes on accumulating against the worker even at the moment of crisis.

The other is restitution. TİP's demands are largely demands for exposure and investigation: a commission, a list, a record. These are necessary. But there is no concrete demand on the list for how, and with what priority, the money of the small investor whom Şık, in his own sentence, "set aside" will come back. The order of liquidation is a field of class struggle. A legal priority for small savings; the money returned under effective remorse going not to the Treasury but directly to the victim; compensation out of the assets of the SPK and the fund founders. These are demands for restitution that have to stand beside the demands for exposure. We list them in the section on concrete tasks.

Finally, a proposal on the call for a de facto commission: this commission should be made up not only of opposition parties, economists and lawyers, but also of representatives of the victims and of labour organisations. The unions in the companies the funds inflated, the wage-earner in the fund themselves, should be at the table. In whose hands the information comes together matters as much as who asks for the information.

---

2. The Road to the Meeting: A Ten-Day Line of Questions

Today's meeting did not arrive all at once. From the first day of the crisis, the party that carried the matter to Parliament most insistently was the Workers' Party of Turkey. While Parliament was in recess until 1 October, Ahmet Şık built a line of questions with parliamentary questions and public statements. Erkan Baş and Sera Kadıgil added the political frame to this line. To see where the questions repeated at the meeting came from, let us set this line out by date.

21 September: "Who was there in the closed period?"

Şık's first question to Şimşek focuses on TLY, Tera's flagship fund. According to Medyascope, the value of the fund rose more than 400 times between September 2024 and September 2026. The fund began with 12 founders. In the "closed" period the number of investors rose to 159, and only after that was it opened to everyone on TEFAS, the electronic fund platform.

This detail makes concrete one of the key concepts of this series: the class of information. While the price was rising, the fund was open only to a chosen 159 people. When it was opened to the crowd, the rise was already nearing its end. Among the names the question claims were included in the fund during the closed period are the Minister of Justice Akın Gürlek, the presidential adviser Hasan Doğan, the BTK member Batuhan Mumcu, and the AKP MP Mehmet Ali Çelebi. Today Çelebi told memurlar.net that "in my whole life" he has not made "even 1 lira" of a transaction in a fund or on the exchange. None of these claims has been proved. But the question itself shows a structure that has been proved: a closed fund is a closed circuit of information.

23 September: "Did they get out before the default?"

The second question asks about three names. The text of the question, as reported by ANKA:

"Did the persons named Mehmet Türkoğlu, Osman Dündar Çiftçi and Hayrettin Koç carry out transactions of more than a million dollars within the scope of the robbery of the said fund crisis? Did the said funds, a short time before falling into default, exit the fund with these high-amount transactions?"

Hayrettin Koç's lawyer stated that Koç had not traded in these funds and that he had no exchange or crypto account either. The question still stands, because the heart of the question is not the persons. It is the timing: who got out before the door closed? That was also the title of the fourth piece in the series: Who Got Out Before the Door Closed?

25 September: "Blocking the right to receive news carried water to the crisis"

At the third step Şık asked about the access blocks placed on fund news. According to Medyascope, his question is this: do the members of the judiciary who placed access blocks on the news and the posts, and who made them the subject of an investigation, themselves have a transaction in these funds?

The sentence Şık said on this occasion names the least discussed dimension of the crisis: "Blocking the right to receive news has itself carried water to this crisis."

Read this beside our piece on the censorship. The same week, the accounts of the opposition press were being blocked. If the person who writes the inflation of the price is silenced while the price is being inflated, the silencing is part of the inflation. Access to information is a matter of press freedom, and it is also the small saver's instrument for protecting themselves.

26–27 September: twelve questions and "163 million"

On the night of 26 September Şık published a list of twelve questions, as reported by Gazete Pencere. The questions concentrate on why Erdin Özel, chair of Tera Portföy's board, had not been detained as of that date, to which ministers, MPs and bureaucrats Özel gave investment advice, whether Tezmen filed a criminal complaint against Özel with an embezzlement claim of 14 billion lira, and why investigations were opened against social-media users.

In the statement that reached bianet on 27 September, he turned to the Sayan Kaya family. The figures Şık reported: Fatma Betül Sayan Kaya put 63 million 359 thousand lira into Özata shares and withdrew 1 billion 344 million lira; her husband İlyas Kaya put in 99 million 687 thousand lira and withdrew 826 million lira. Şık, who says the total entry was about 163 million lira, asks a plain question: where did this money come from? Şık also claimed that Sayan Kaya's pilgrimage journey in 2025 was made on the private jet of Muhammed Yarız, the detained chair of Pusula Portföy's board.

The eleventh question in this statement shows the judicial side of the matter directly: how many times, since his period as Deputy Minister of Justice, Gürlek met in certain hotels in Istanbul with the detained suspects Tezmen and Yarız, and with Özel, who is not detained.

28 September: Süzer Plaza

On the evening of 28 September Şık turned to the Minister of Justice with six questions published by BirGün. Şık's claims are these: in Süzer Plaza, where the SPK is also located, a rent of 750 thousand lira a month is paid for a flat registered at the land registry in someone else's name; the 30 million lira cost of the flat's renovation and furnishing was met by Süzer companies; there is a bill of about 250 thousand lira a month at a restaurant in the plaza. Two of the questions:

"Are Akın Gürlek and his spouse Elif Gülşah Gürlek tenants in this flat?"

"Is the flat's monthly rent of 750 thousand lira being paid? By whom? Are there receipts?"

Gürlek's reply came the next day. His lawyer, Abdullah Adır, described the claims as "wholly unreal, baseless, and in the nature of slander"; he said that Gürlek and his spouse live in the lodgings allocated by the Ministry of Justice, and he called on Şık to share with the public the rental contract and the payment document in his hands. Gürlek filed a criminal complaint against Şık and opened a damages suit (T24, Cumhuriyet).

Whether the rent claim is true will be shown by the court and the documents. But one fact is not in dispute: the MP who asked the claims of the fund crisis met a lawsuit, and the minister to whom the questions were addressed met a lawyer's statement. There is not yet an answer to the question that was asked. The possibility that the person who asked it will be tried is on the table. Read this picture with the founding question of this series: in whose hands is the information, and what happens to the person who asks for it?

26 September: Erkan Baş

On the night the Sayan Kaya claims spread, Erkan Baş, TİP's general chair, wrote this on social media (ANKA):

"Yesterday in Ankara a retired citizen of ours ended their life because they could not secure a livelihood with which to live a dignified life. Today a claim emerges that the person to whom Tayyip Erdoğan entrusted the Ministry of Family and Social Policies took more than 2 billion lira out of the fund plunder, and that person has not yet denied it. No one can call what we are living an isolated incident, a coincidence, or fate. The account of all of these will be asked, and whatever has been stolen from the people will be seized."

The strength of Baş's statement is that it joins two pieces of news in the same sentence. One is a citizen who cannot get by on a pension. The other is a former Minister of Family alleged to have made billions in four or five months. The bourgeois press gives these two pieces of news on different pages: one the "third page", the other "the economy". The class view is to put the two pages on the same page. Baş's refusal of "an isolated incident, a coincidence, or fate" argues directly with the Financial Stability Committee's language of "a limited number of companies".

29 September: TİP's question on "effective remorse", and Sera Kadıgil

On the news that Sayan Kaya had returned 2.2 billion lira, TİP put the following questions from its social-media account on 29 September (haberler.com, ANKA):

"Does returning the money she is alleged to have gained in the fund plunder not mean accepting the offence? Under the SPK decision, in order to benefit from effective remorse there is an obligation to return twice the money. Did Fatma Kaya return 4.1 billion lira? If so, where did she find this money? If she returned the money and accepted the offence, will she not be tried?"

The same day, in a YouTube programme, TİP's spokesperson and Istanbul MP Sera Kadıgil, as reported by Kırşehir Çiğdem, asked the source of the 163 million lira of entry money: "Where did you find this money?"

The common axis of these two statements matters. The debate is shifting from the question "how much did they gain" to the question "where did the first money come from?" And there is also an objection to the institution of effective remorse. We will return to this below, because from a class point of view one of the most instructive details of the crisis is exactly here.

---

3. What Does the Labour Party Say? "The Wreck of the Merchants of Hope"

One of the first comprehensive class responses to the fund crisis came from the Labour Party (EMEP) on the second day of the collapse. The statement published on 18 September under the signature of EMEP's general chair Seyit Aslan, "The government is loading onto the people's back the wreck the merchants of hope created", places the crisis in the same frame as two other robberies.

"A robbery from two directions"

The statement opens with the "hose" dialogue remembered from an MHP rally of an earlier period, and makes this observation:

"The workers and labourers of Turkey are being shaken in recent days by a robbery from two directions. On one side, diesel prices that have reached three-digit figures with a rain of price rises; on the other, stock-exchange speculation that rests on the exploitation of the dream of being a homeowner, which the housing crisis has produced!"

According to EMEP, the crisis seen in the funds is "only the visible part of the iceberg"; the real part "is a direct result of the Erdoğan–Şimşek economic programme and carries with it the risk of larger blasts." This sentence meets, in an interesting way, TİP's "controlled demolition" thesis today. Both parties see the crisis not as an accident but as the product of the programme, and both say that a larger one is at the door.

The housing crisis and the fund crisis are the same crisis

The most original contribution of the EMEP statement is that it reads the fund crisis through the housing question. According to the statement, average rent in Istanbul is 1.5 times the minimum wage. Instead of producing a real solution to the housing problem, the government has contented itself with "social housing" propaganda:

"These projects, which poor labourers will not have the power to pay for, mean new opportunities for the construction companies around the government and for the classes that increase their capital with rent income; while the workers and labourers, whose incomes melt a little more every day, have been abandoned to the mercy of high-risk fields such as the stock exchange for a solution to the housing crisis. (…) In this environment the government has created, savings-finance companies began to find buyers in the market by trading in hope."

And the result:

"At the point that has been reached, the government that has left labourers face to face with the housing crisis has become the architect of the consumption, through these companies, of the savings they acquired over years by shedding the sweat of their brow and by scraping from their tooth and their nail."

This observation should be read together with two other pieces of evidence in this article. The 78-year-old retired woman who spoke in Parliament had saved the money in order to buy a home. Katılımevim and Birevim, transferred to a public bank in the crisis, were, as their names also show, savings-finance companies that worked on the promise of becoming a homeowner. The fund crisis is the housing crisis carried onto the exchange. The wage-earner who could not become a homeowner put the dream of a home onto a piece of paper. The paper burned.

The address of the bill: the public banks

The forecast EMEP's statement made on 18 September came true eleven days later. The statement said this:

"The palace order is announcing that it will load the bill for the stock-exchange plunder, again through the public banks, onto the backs of all workers and labourers, including those whose savings it has descended upon."

At the Beştepe meeting on 29 September, the transfer of Katılımevim, Birevim and İktisat Katılım Bankası to Türkiye Emlak Katılım Bankası was confirmed. Two public banks were already running the liquidation. Today Ahmet Şık touched the same point, saying "the public was not going to be loaded once." The profit of private capital was private. The nationalisation of the loss means that the worker, who pays tax by having it cut from their wage, pays the bill once more, this time through tax.

EMEP's demands

The statement ends with these demands:

• "Let the price rises on diesel and on basic consumer goods be taken back!"
• "Let the special consumption tax and VAT on the diesel the producing peasant uses be zeroed!"
• "Let the fuel used on luxury yachts and boats be taxed, and let a wealth tax be taken from the owners of capital!"

The closing sentence completes the statement's main image: "There is no path other than struggle against this government of capital, which thrusts the fuel hose into one of our pockets, moves to descend upon the three kuruş we have saved with the hose it thrusts into the other, and transfers what it has siphoned into the sewer of capital."

A leaflet on the ground

EMEP's organisations also carried the statement into the street. On 29 September EMEP's Ordu provincial organisation distributed a leaflet against the fund plunder. The reported words of the provincial chair, Yasin Uzun: "The government is flaking off bit by bit. The smell of corruption has begun to grow everywhere. The latest fund plunder is only one of these." Uzun also stressed that this event had shown how independent the institutions called "independent" really are.

Assessment: two parties, two strong sides

The approaches of TİP and EMEP complete each other. TİP looks at the upper floor of the crisis: who knew, who got out in advance, which minister, which bureaucrat, which offshore company? This is the line of exposure and of the struggle over information. EMEP looks at the lower floor of the crisis: why did the wage-earner go into the fund? Because rent is one and a half times the minimum wage, the dream of a home looks possible only with the paper of the "merchants of hope", and diesel has passed a hundred lira. This is the line that shows the material ground of the crisis.

What one lacks is in the other. Housing and wages are absent from TİP's list of demands. Demands specific to the victims of the funds (priority for small savings in the liquidation, the returned money going to the victim, the responsibility of the SPK) are not yet in EMEP's statement of 18 September. The place where the two meet is the demands we propose in the section on concrete tasks in this piece: exposure, restitution and the wage are three legs of the same struggle. The labour and democracy forces building a common platform of demands in the fund crisis may be the most concrete test of the "united struggle" that both parties call for.

---

4. Put the Money Back, Leave the Courts: The Attempt at a De Facto Amnesty in the Sayan Kaya File

Among all the names of the fund crisis, the file of Fatma Betül Sayan Kaya stands in a place of its own. Because in this file there is not only an allegation of plunder. An attempt is being made to build a de facto situation in which that plunder can be closed without a trial. Let us look step by step.

The order of events

Date	What happened
April–September 2026	On the allegation, Sayan Kaya put 63 million 359 thousand lira into Özata shares and withdrew 1 billion 344 million lira; her husband İlyas Kaya put in 99 million 687 thousand lira and withdrew 826 million lira. Total entry about 163 million, total exit about 2 billion 170 million lira. The shares, on the allegation, were disposed of a few days before the fund scandal burst and the operations began.
12–13 September	The fund investigation of the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office begins.
Evening of 25 September	SPK bulletin: a criminal complaint against 11 persons for the transactions in Özata shares, under Article 107/1 of Law No. 6362 (market fraud). The same bulletin reminds that those who want to benefit from effective remorse must deposit twice the benefit into the Treasury account within 15 days (BirGün).
26 September	Zeynel Emre, spokesperson of the YENİ Parti, makes the claims public.
27 September	Sayan Kaya, without denying the claims, resigns from all her party posts, including the AKP deputy general chair.
29 September, noon	News that the Kaya couple deposited about 2.2 billion lira into the account notified by the Ministry of Treasury and Finance (T24, sourced to Ekonomim).
29 September, evening	The Chief Prosecutor's statement: "A letter concerning the freezing of all the assets of İlyas Kaya and his spouse Fatma Betül Sayan Kaya has been written to the relevant institutions" (Bloomberg HT).
30 September	No detention, no news of a summons to give a statement. In the same investigation the number detained is 56.

What does the law say?

Article 107 of the Capital Markets Law No. 6362 provides, for market fraud, imprisonment from 3 years to 5 years and a judicial fine from five thousand to ten thousand days. The third paragraph of the same article regulates effective remorse as follows (the text as reported by BirGün):

"The person who commits the offence defined in the first paragraph, showing remorse, shall pay to the Treasury an amount of money not less than 500 thousand Turkish lira, and equal to twice the benefit they obtained or caused to be obtained;

a) If they pay before the investigation has yet begun, no punishment shall be imposed on them.

b) If they pay during the investigation stage, the punishment to be given shall be reduced by half.

c) If they pay during the prosecution stage, until judgment is given, the punishment to be given shall be reduced by one third."

Read this text carefully, comrade. Three things are clearly visible.

One: effective remorse is an admission of the offence. The article begins "the person who commits the offence, showing remorse". Whoever deposits the money relying on this provision has, in law, said "I committed this offence, I am remorseful." The question TİP asked on 29 September is exactly this: "If she returned the money and accepted the offence, will she not be tried?"

Two: the money paid does not meet the condition. The law requires twice the benefit. On the alleged figures, the couple's net gain, once the 163 million lira put in is subtracted from the 2 billion 170 million lira withdrawn, comes to about 2 billion 7 million lira. Twice that is about 4 billion lira. TİP calculates this amount as 4.1 billion, the YENİ Parti as 4.4 billion lira. The 2.2 billion lira reported as deposited is roughly the whole of the money the couple withdrew from the shares, that is the gross amount including the principal. The money deposited is about half of what the law requires. (The calculation is ours. It rests on the alleged figures.)

Three: the door of "no punishment shall be imposed" has long closed. The law grants impunity only to whoever pays "before the investigation has yet begun". The fund investigation began on 12–13 September. The SPK's criminal complaint was made on 25 September. The news of the return came on 29 September. That is, the payment was made, at best, during the investigation stage. In that case the only possibility the law grants is that the punishment be reduced by half. The trial itself does not disappear. If the condition of twice the amount has not been met, that reduction too is open to argument.

Let us also write one uncertainty openly: who the 11 persons are against whom a criminal complaint was filed in the SPK's bulletin of 25 September is not disclosed in the news we have read. Whether the Kaya couple are on this list has not been officially told to the public. But this uncertainty does not change the picture. It makes it heavier. That someone, about whom it is not even disclosed that an official criminal complaint exists, deposits billions into an "effective remorse" account shows that the file is proceeding not in front of the public but behind closed doors.

How is the de facto situation being built?

The law is clear. But politics is trying to put a de facto situation in front of the law. Let us set the pieces of this situation side by side:

1. The language. The news says "they returned it". The word "return" creates the impression that a debt has been closed, that the account has been settled. What is happening, in the language of the law, is a "remorse payment", that is the monetary counterpart of an admission of the offence. The headline "they returned it" hides the admission and puts the closing in front.
2. The political closing. AKP spokesperson Ömer Çelik announced that they had accepted the resignation, and said "the struggle against every kind of wrong, corruption, abuse and irregularity will be given without concession." When resignation and return come one after the other, the message given to the public is this: the price has been paid, the matter is closed.
3. The difference of treatment. In the same investigation 56 people are detained. Fund managers, employees of intermediary institutions, the chair of an insurance company were taken into custody and sent to the courthouse. For the former minister, against whom there is an allegation of a gain of more than two billion, as of 30 September there is neither news of a detention nor of a statement. The only measure is the freeze of assets announced in the evening hours.
4. The temporariness of the measure. A freeze of assets is not a seizure. It is a temporary measure. In the same investigation we saw that the measures on 45 companies and 19 funds were lifted within a few days after the SPK's letter of "reconsideration". The argument "the money has already been returned" can also be used tomorrow for the lifting of this measure.
5. The address of the money. The money deposited went to the Treasury. The source of the gain, on the allegation, was the small investor who bought at the top the share the funds had inflated, and who is waiting today in the liquidation queue. The billions that went to the Treasury do not return to that investor. Thus the file begins to look like a "tax settlement" that has no victim.

These five pieces together are trying to produce this result: a file that looks as if it ended before the trial began. The law does not allow this. But a de facto situation often works faster than the law. Once the impression "the matter is closed" settles, the political cost of a case opened later rises, and its not being opened can be presented as "a legal choice".

The class reading: remorse too is a class privilege

Comrade, let us now read this picture from the place of the wage-earner in the fund.

Effective remorse is a door that opens to whoever has money to pay. Someone who made two billion in four months can look for a way of escaping half their punishment, and perhaps the trial itself, by putting part of the gain back. The wage-earner in the fund has no gain to "be remorseful" about. They have only a loss. In front of them there is not a door of remorse. There is a six-month liquidation queue.

Remember this too: in this country a worker can be taken into custody for striking at the workplace, for joining an action, for making a social-media post. Investigations were opened against social-media users who shared fund news. A case was opened against the MP who asked a question. None of these is told "deposit a sum of money, let your file close." The file that closes with money is the file of whoever has the money. Criminal law itself works here like a class filter: detention for those below, a settlement for those above.

Something Marx said in Capital about the "primitive accumulation" of capital holds here too: dispossession is not always done outside the law. Most of the time the law is the instrument that later records the dispossession. The effective-remorse provision too, if it is operated correctly, is a sanction; if it is bent, it is a mechanism of acquittal: the legal cover for paying part of the plunder to the state and keeping the rest, and one's freedom.

What should we demand?

• Let there be a trial. A payment made during the investigation stage does not, under the law, cancel the trial. Let the same procedure be applied to the Kaya couple as to the other suspects. Let their statements be taken. Let an indictment be drawn up.
• Let the condition of twice the amount be openly audited. Let the SPK and the Chief Prosecutor's Office explain to the public, with reasons, whether the amount paid meets the statutory condition of "twice the benefit".
• Let the list of criminal complaints be opened. Let the identity of the 11 persons against whom the SPK filed a criminal complaint on 25 September, and whether the Kaya couple are on this list, be disclosed.
• The remorse money, to the victim. Let all the amounts deposited in the Treasury under effective remorse be transferred not to the general budget but to a pool set aside for priority payment to the small investors of the funds in liquidation.
• Let the measure not be lifted on the grounds of the return. Let the freeze of assets continue until the trial is concluded. Let it not be lifted on the grounds that "the money was deposited".

---

5. Chronology: Fourteen Days, Four Waves, One Palace Meeting

On 17 September the Capital Markets Board (SPK) had put the funds of seven portfolio-management companies into liquidation. What followed developed like this:

Date	What happened
18 September	It was announced that two public banks would run the liquidation: İş Bankası the Tera funds, Ziraat Bankası the funds of the other six companies. The number of funds is not 130 but 131; total assets 827 billion lira, of which about 498 billion lira is equities (Bloomberg HT).
18 September	The Minister of Treasury and Finance, Mehmet Şimşek: "We have quarantined the troubled area." 131 of 2,038 funds are troubled, about 10–11 per cent of total fund assets (Forbes Türkiye).
18 September	EMEP's general chair Seyit Aslan: "The government is loading onto the people's back the wreck the merchants of hope created"; the warning that the bill would be charged to the worker through the public banks (EMEP).
19 September	The first large wave: Emre Tezmen, chair of Tera Yatırım's board, Serdar Turhan, Alper Öztürk, Emre Alkin and Kerem Alkin from Katılımevim, in custody (Halk TV). They were detained on 22–23 September.
20–21 September	The SPK extended the liquidation period from 3 months to 6 months (SPK announcement).
21 September	Ahmet Şık's first parliamentary question to Şimşek: who was there in the closed period of the TLY fund? (Medyascope)
23 September	Şık's second question: three names, did they make an exit of millions of dollars before the default? (ANKA) The same day JCR Eurasia cut the rating of Tera Yatırım Bankası from A-(tr) to CC(tr) (BirGün).
24–25 September	The second and third waves; the number detained rose to 45, then to 47 (Foreks, NTV). About 750 million lira was frozen; two jets and a yacht were seized (Bigpara).
25 September	Şık asked Şimşek and the Minister of Justice, Akın Gürlek, about the access blocks placed on fund news (Medyascope).
26 September	The assets of 42 persons, 46 legal persons and 18 funds were frozen; including Tera's CEO Emir Münir Sarpyener, the number detained was 51 (Euronews). The same day, in a letter that went to the Chief Prosecutor under the signature of the SPK chair Mahmut Sütcü, it was proposed that the measures on "responsible legal persons" and "responsible funds" be reconsidered (BirGün).
26–27 September	The Sayan Kaya claims spread to the public; Kaya resigned from all her posts in the party (Diken).
28 September	The fourth wave: detentions linked to Destek and Özata. Erdoğan after the cabinet: "Whoever lays a hand on the nation's right, its law, its property, will find us, will find the state, opposite them" (BirGün). A press conference with the victims in Parliament (Cumhuriyet). BIST 100 at the bottom of the last eight months.
28–29 September	The measures on 45 companies and 19 funds were lifted, among them IC İçtaş, the main contractor of the Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant (BirGün).
29 September	A meeting of about three hours at Beştepe: a Fund Coordination Board was set up under the chair of the Vice President, the State Supervisory Council (DDK) was assigned; the transfer of Katılımevim, Birevim and İktisat Katılım Bankası to Türkiye Emlak Katılım Bankası was confirmed (BirGün). Gürlek filed a criminal complaint against Şık and opened a damages suit (T24). All the assets of Sayan Kaya and her husband were frozen (BirGün). BIST 100: 12,290 (AA).
30 September	Six names, including Erdin Özel, chair of Tera Portföy's board, and the CEO Sarpyener, at the courthouse; the number detained 56 (BirGün). Five villas belonging to Yarız and Turhan, registered in other people's names, were seized (BirGün). Nihat Zeybekci, AKP deputy general chair: "Unfortunately there is negligence by the state" (BirGün). It was learned that the former SPK chair İbrahim Ömer Gönül had been summoned to give a statement as a "suspect" (BirGün).
30 September, noon	Press conference at TİP's Istanbul provincial office: Ahmet Şık, Sera Kadıgil, and the economist Nazır Kapusuz, a member of the Party Council and the Science Board. Şık: "Seeing that a much larger avalanche would fall, a controlled demolition has been carried out" (BirGün, dokuz8haber).

Read the table once more, this time looking only at the bold type. 131 funds. 6 months. 45 companies and 19 funds. The Fund Coordination Board. Of the four bold expressions, two are waiting for the small investor, one is freedom for big capital, and one is a new office that will manage the problem. That is the summary of fourteen days.

---

6. The Figures Side by Side: A Figure under Every Claim

Let us not speak in the abstract. The source of the calculations below is stated. The ratios are ours.

Money paid: zero

As of today, 30 September, there is no official announcement that a payment has been made to a single investor from the funds in liquidation. According to the SPK's announcement of 29 September, priority will be given to orders placed before 13:30 on 16 September, executed on TEFAS, but not paid (CNN Türk). That the first payments in money-market funds might begin in the first or second week of October is only an economist's estimate (Uzmanpara). The liquidation rules also changed several times in two weeks. According to sol.org.tr, one change was announced "at 02:30 on a Sunday night".

Those affected: 455,758 accounts

The official figure is now 455,758 individual investors. In the first days the figures of 514 thousand and 350 thousand were circulating. Cevdet Akay of the CHP said in Parliament that there were 1.1 million "direct victims". We do not hide the difference among the figures. Whichever is correct, there are hundreds of thousands of households.

According to Hayri Kozanoğlu's article in BirGün, in one of the funds the average saving of 25 thousand investors is under 100 thousand lira, and in another the average of 48 thousand investors is 110 thousand lira. That is, the typical fund investor is not a "speculator". They are a wage-earner with a few months' wages of savings.

One household's gain, the savings of twenty thousand households

Now let us make our first calculation. Divide the 2.17 billion lira the Sayan Kaya couple are alleged to have taken out by the average saving Kozanoğlu gives (100–110 thousand lira):

The entire savings of about 20,000 small investors.

Let us also set this beside another figure announced today. According to TÜRK-İŞ's September survey, the hunger line for a family of four is 37,801 lira, the poverty line 123,130 lira (Evrensel). A gain of 11,000 lira a minute means one family's kitchen money for a month, every three and a half minutes.

The money one household is alleged to have gained in four or five months equals what twenty thousand households saved over years. This cannot be explained as "luck" or "investment intelligence". Paper does not produce value. One person's gain is another person's loss. In the piece The Fund Earthquake we said "a rise in price is not the creation of wealth, it is a transfer." Here are the direction, the name and the scale of the transfer.

As the loss rose, the price rose

Özata Denizcilik made a loss of 603 million lira in the first half of 2026. In the same period the share went from 159 lira at the end of 2025 to 5,115 lira on 16 September: 32 times. Tera funds held about 96 per cent of the shares in circulation. The company's market value reached 365 billion lira and passed Ford Otosan (270 billion lira). In the summary of the economics writer Muratoğlu, as reported by BirGün: "As the loss rose, the price rose."

Comrade, memorise this sentence. At Ford Otosan, tens of thousands of workers produce cars and trucks. When Özata's value passed it, what did the passing was not a ship. It was the purchase the fund made of itself.

Two workers, zero cows

The latest state of Gündoğdu Gıda, which we have followed since the first piece in the series: according to Gıda Bülteni, the number of employees, 217 at the end of 2024, has fallen to 2. The share fell 87 per cent from its peak. The Halk TV headline says everything: "They milked shares, not milk."

215 of 217 workers have gone. The names of these 215 households did not appear in the statement of the Financial Stability Committee, nor in the written statement of the Beştepe meeting.

A bank's growth of 130 times

In the question Murat Emir put to Şimşek, the asset size of Tera Yatırım Bankası is as follows:

Period	Asset size
End of 2023	550.9 million lira
End of 2024	2.63 billion lira
End of 2025	27.78 billion lira
June 2026	71.72 billion lira

About 130 times in two and a half years; 27 times since the end of 2024 alone. According to Emir's claim, as reported by Evrensel, the bank, which has no authority to collect deposits, borrowed by selling bonds, distributed 600 million dollars of credit to its circle by exceeding the legal limit 8.5 times, and those who took the credit bought the group's funds again with that money. In Emir's words: "A giant happiness chain, inflating its own fund with its own credit!" The question of what the BDDK did while a bank grew at this speed, and what the SPK did while a fund grew hundreds of times, is exactly the question of "ten months of silence" that we asked in the fourth piece of this series.

What was seized, and what disappeared

The assets frozen and seized in the investigation: about 750 million lira in cash, two jets and a yacht worth about 1.8 billion lira, five villas worth about 1.2 billion lira. A total of around 3.75 billion lira. The size of the funds in liquidation is over 800 billion lira. The ratio: five per thousand.

Özgür Özel calculates the total cost ("the robbery of the century") at 90 billion dollars. Figures ranging from 3.5 trillion to 6 trillion lira circulate for the loss of market value on the exchange. We cannot verify these figures. But even if we take the lowest, the assets seized are a drop in the ocean beside the loss.

The exchange: another 9 per cent

BIST 100 had recovered to 13,530 points on 17 September, after the Financial Stability Committee meeting. On 29 September it closed at 12,290 points: a loss of 9.2 per cent, and this after the statement that "there is no systemic risk". The factoring index fell 8–9 per cent a day on 28–29 September.

---

7. What Did Evrensel and BirGün Write? The Last Three Days of the Left Press

Over the last three days the left press offered important material for breaking the mainstream media's frame of "manipulation" and "a few bad actors". First the pieces that stand out from BirGün's publication of 28–30 September, then Evrensel.

BirGün

Even the estate fees went into the fund (İsmail Arı, 30 September). The 28 million lira maintenance-fee example we mentioned at the start of the piece. The value of the news is that it shows the fund crisis swallowed not only the individual investor but also collective small savings. A housing estate's common fund was in the fund too.

A look at fund manipulation from the inside (Kenan Gözlemci, 30 September). The writer, a capital-markets specialist, defines the event openly as a Ponzi order: "It is not possible for these funds to have appeared to make a monthly return of 20–50 per cent without manipulation being carried out in these shares on the exchange and the value of the fund unit being raised fictitiously." According to Gözlemci, the SPK chair and the head of the Market Surveillance Department were warned in September 2025, when the Tera fund was 11 billion lira in size; in October 2025 the problems were told in detail at a sector workshop. The writer's judgement: "It is not an attitude in accordance with reason and logic that Borsa Istanbul and the SPK merely watched all these transactions without blinking, and looking deep." His proposal is that the matter be transferred to the TMSF, the Savings Deposit Insurance Fund.

This testimony also strengthens, with a second source, the point in the piece The Fund Earthquake where we relied on a single source for the promise of "20 per cent a month". We now read from a market professional that 20 per cent may be not the upper limit but the lower limit.

The social dimensions of the fund scandal (Hayri Kozanoğlu, 29 September). Kozanoğlu recalls that financialisation made the citizen both a debtor and an investor at the same time, and he gives the small investor's average saving. His sharpest observation is on the SPK Investment Funds Guide published on 28 August: "market professionals knew down to the detail what was in the Guide." That is, even the change of rule may have worked first as an exit signal for those who knew. Kozanoğlu says the victims are made up of six separate sections whose interests conflict, and he ends like this: "Evaluating this critical breaking point correctly in political terms will also depend on the skill of the social opposition."

Those who audited the fund scandal turned out to be from the AKP (İsmail Arı, 29 September). The political and personal ties with the AKP of the managers of the independent audit firm that audited Pusula Portföy. The "independence" of independent audit is nothing but a label where the auditor and the audited are in the same network.

As long as this order does not change, the country will not come right (29 September). The account of the Kaya couple's gain divided into minutes, the removal of 45 companies and 19 funds from the measures, the appearance of IC İçtaş's name, and this sentence of Şimşek's: "Protecting the investment, employment, production and export capacity of our real sector is our priority."

The SPK's letter to the Chief Prosecutor (28 September). The SPK does not object to the prosecutor's suspicion of fraud, but it proposes that the measures be "reconsidered". The measures were lifted after this letter.

The role of the media in the fund fraud (Faruk Bildirici, 28 September). That the mass media "ignored the manipulations, watched them in silence"; advertising faces, television appearances, partnerships between a newspaper and a portfolio company. Consent was produced on the screen.

As long as the regime exists, the scandals will not end (30 September). The news that places the fund crisis as the latest link in a series running from Deniz Feneri to 17–25 December: "Corruption and irregularities form the cement of today's regime."

One point has to be completed in this last observation. Yes, the crisis grew inside a network organised by political power. But note this: similar fund and share bubbles do not end of their own accord with a change of government. Banker Kastelli in 1982, Korkmaz Yiğit in 1998, the twin crisis in 2001, were lived in the periods of other governments. The regime determined the speed of this bubble and whom it enriched. What made the bubble possible was the capital market itself. The fight has to be given not only against the "regime", but against the order of accumulation that makes the regime possible.

Evrensel

They told the worker "we are making a loss" and put 79 million into the exchange (Andaç Aydın Arıduru, 30 September). The news of the last three days that most clearly shows the workers' side of the fund crisis. The management of Smart Solar, which employs 1,227 workers in Aliağa in İzmir and Gebze in Kocaeli, rejected the demand for an inflation difference of 17.76 per cent and a 2-point welfare share for the second half of the year, saying "We are in a material crisis; if we give a rise we will close the factory." The same management, according to KAP disclosures, bought 14.8 million shares of its own company in four transactions between 15 and 28 September, while the exchange was collapsing, for about 79.1 million lira. By Evrensel's calculation, the total cost of the workers' six-month wage demand is 41.1 million lira. The money spent on the share purchase in one month is 1.92 times that. The purchase of a single day, 28 September (39.1 million lira), alone covers 95 per cent of the six-month wage package. Only when the workers announced that they would set up a resistance tent in front of the factory on 29 September did the management sit back down at the table with the union.

Do not take this news for a side story of the fund crisis. The same collapse took the saving from the wage-earner in the fund and gave the boss on the exchange a cheap share. The crisis is an opportunity for capital too, but only for whoever has the money to buy what has become cheap.

Tera Bank's growth of 27 times is on Parliament's agenda (29 September). The detail of Murat Emir's question: the bank, which has no deposit authority, was funded by bond and money-market borrowing; its credits rose from 17.57 billion lira at the end of 2025 to 30.13 billion lira in June 2026; its equity was 14.24 billion lira. Emir's question: "Who will be left with the bill for the non-performing credits whose collateral has evaporated?"

The fund plunder reached the housing estates (30 September). The 28 million lira maintenance-fee case that BirGün also wrote, on the grounds that it "should not stay idle".

455 thousand 758 investors in the fund crisis (30 September). Through the official number of investors, the question of Özgür Karabat of the CHP: "Why was there no intervention in time?"

Two class figures from the same day. Today, beside the fund news, Evrensel published two further reports. According to TÜRK-İŞ, in September the hunger line for a family of four is 37,801 lira, the poverty line 123,130 lira, and the monthly cost of living of a single worker 48,885 lira (Evrensel). According to DİSK-AR, broadly defined unemployment rose to 31 per cent in August, and the broadly defined number of unemployed rose by 322 thousand in one month to 12 million 608 thousand; 82 per cent of the officially unemployed cannot receive unemployment benefit (Evrensel).

Putting these two reports beside the fund news answers the question we asked in the piece The Fund Earthquake: "why so many small investors?" In a country where the wage remains far below the poverty line, and where twelve million people are unemployed or underemployed, "the fund the state supervises" looks rational as a way of not melting a saving of a few months' wages. The saving pushed into the fund is the child of the pressure on wages.

---

8. The Class Reading: Whose Door Opened?

Now let us leave the news to one side and look at the picture of two weeks with the eye of class. The question is simple: which doors opened in two weeks, and which stayed locked?

Opened door 1: the 45 companies that left the measures

On 26 September the SPK proposed a "reconsideration"; on 28–29 September the measure on 45 companies and 19 funds was lifted. Among them is the main contractor of the state's largest energy project. The reason is in Şimşek's sentence: the real sector's capacity for investment, employment and export.

This reason looks reasonable at first glance. No one wants the wages of a company's workers to be blocked. But let us ask two questions. First: what was the relation of the companies taken out of the measures with these funds, how much money went in and came out? This has not yet been disclosed. Second, and more important: why does the same concern for "capacity" not hold for the wage-earner in the fund? The management of an apartment block that put its maintenance fees into the fund also has wages and bills it has to pay. The 455 thousand households also have rent and a school instalment. The large company's till is counted as "the real economy". The wage-earner's till is "investment risk".

Opened door 2: effective remorse

(We gave the legal detail in section 4. Here we only recall the class core.)

The effective-remorse provision of the Capital Markets Law gives a person faced with an allegation of market fraud the possibility of escaping punishment, or of having their punishment reduced, by returning the benefit they obtained. The objection of TİP and of the YENİ Parti is that the return should be twice the gain. Let us leave the legal argument to the lawyers, and look at the class structure.

Effective remorse is a door for whoever has money to return. Someone who made billions in four or five months can look for a way out of the courts by putting the gain back. What can the wage-earner in the fund do? They have no "unjust gain" to return. They have only a loss. The door of remorse opens to the one who gained. No door opens to the one who lost. The only door in front of the one who lost is the six-month queue of the liquidation.

One thing more: the money returned goes to the Treasury. That is, not to the victim, to the state. If the source of the gain is the small saving in the fund, does the money that comes back not also have to go there? No official statement asked this question.

Opened door 3: the cut in collateral

On 17 September the SPK had lowered the minimum equity ratio in margin transactions from 35 per cent to 20 per cent, until the end of the session on 2 October. The large position carrying shares on debt had been told "you will not be forcibly sold". This decision ends in two days. Whether it will be extended is not clear as of today. The date that has to be watched is this: if the breath given to leveraged capital is extended, we will have a concrete comparison with which to demand that the waiting period given to the wage-earner in the fund also be shortened.

Opened door 4: the umbrella of the public bank

The transfer of Katılımevim, Birevim and İktisat Katılım Bankası to a public bank, Türkiye Emlak Katılım Bankası, was confirmed at the Beştepe meeting. Two public banks, İş Bankası and Ziraat Bankası, are also running the liquidation.

These transfers may protect the customers of those institutions from a sudden collapse. This should not be underestimated. But the class question is this: public resources are being brought in to clear the wreck of a structure that private capital built, profited from, and sank. The profit was private; the loss is being nationalised. The Labour Party had foreseen this result as early as 18 September, saying that the bill would be loaded onto the labourer's back "through the public banks". This is the same order we lived in the banks transferred to the TMSF in 2001. That day too, the wage-earner who pays tax paid the loss. Where will the bill for the load transferred to the public bank today be charged? This too has not yet been disclosed.

The locked door: the wage-earner in the fund

Against this, the picture for the investor in the funds in liquidation is this:

• Payment: none.
• Period: six months, with the note that "the whole of it does not have to be used".
• The liquidation price: the shares will be sold while they are still falling. No one can say today the loss in the unit value.
• Priority for the small investor under 1 million lira: only corridor talk. It is not in an official text.
• Where to apply: the SPK, the TSPB, the e-petition, scattered Telegram groups.

Rahime Yüceer, the 78-year-old pensioner who spoke at the press conference in Parliament, told, according to Cumhuriyet, that she had lost the money she had saved for years in order to buy a home. She said she had trusted a fund the state supervised.

Underline this sentence: "the fund the state supervised." What pushed the small saver into the fund was not greed. They trusted. While the deposit melted against inflation, while housing was out of reach, trusting a product "the state supervised" was rational. What emptied the trust was not only a few company managers. It was the audit order that certified that trust.

Table: the official narrative and the class reading

The official narrative	The class reading
"We have quarantined the troubled area" (Şimşek, 18 September)	What is in quarantine is not companies. It is the savings of 455 thousand households. The first to leave the quarantine were 45 companies and 19 funds.
"There is no systemic risk"	After the statement "there is no systemic risk", the exchange fell another 9 per cent; three participation institutions were transferred to a public bank.
"We are protecting the capacity of the real sector"	The real sector that is protected is the till of the large contractor. The real sector that is closed is Gündoğdu's 215 workers.
"We do not defend those who devour rights" (Erdoğan)	For the former minister alleged to have devoured a right, what is on the agenda is not a trial. It is return, and effective remorse.
"Payments will be fair and as soon as possible"	The money paid in fourteen days is zero. The liquidation period has doubled.
"Fund Coordination Board", "DDK inspection"	Where supervision has collapsed, the solution is presented as a new supervisory office. There is no victim, no worker, no labour organisation on the board.
"Manipulation", "fraud"	The free fund, the privileged share, the related-party transaction and the closed fund are each legal. The chain was built inside the legal frame.
"It will be followed to the end"	The investigation grows horizontally with yachts, villas and famous names. The vertical line that runs to politics and the bureaucracy is, in Şık's words, being tried to be blocked.
"The problem is temporary and manageable"	According to TİP, the crisis was not managed. It was detonated in a controlled way so that the loss would be cut at 20 billion dollars. The bill stayed with whoever was in the fund at that moment.
"The opposition is running the country down"	A case is opened against the MP who asks a question. An access block is placed on fund news.

The left column is the way capital tells its own crisis: persons and deviations. The right column is the structure of the same crisis: transfer and protection.

---

9. What Is Being Covered Over?

In the noise of two weeks, some things are not spoken. Let us note a few.

First, the worker. How many workers in total lost their jobs in the companies the funds inflated? At Gündoğdu, from 217 to 2. What is the state of employment at Destek, at Katılımevim, at Özata? No official institution disclosed this number. It is on the agenda of no board. The Fund Coordination Board coordinates the funds, not the worker. And the crisis hits not only those who were dismissed, but also those who go on working. As in the Smart Solar example, the collapsing exchange gives the boss, at the same time, both the excuse "there is a crisis" and the cheap share.

Second, differentiation inside the class. Not all the victims are the same. Kozanoğlu's finding of six sections is correct. On one side, the housing estate that lost its maintenance-fee money, the woman who lost her retirement bonus; on the other, the employer who put the company till into the fund, even an AKP deputy general chair whose money from his own four companies is stuck in the TP2 fund. Zeybekci's saying "there is negligence by the state" is an important confession, but this confession does not put him in the same rank of victimhood as the 78-year-old pensioner. The order of liquidation is also a field of class struggle. The large investor will try, with their lawyer and their connection, to move the queue forward. The small investor's not being organised means remaining at the end of the queue.

Third, the rule-maker's information. The guide that came out on 28 August showed market professionals the way three weeks before the crisis. There is news that one of the members of the government left a company post a short time before the crisis. The question of who knew what, and when, is the real question of this crisis. In the paper market, information is capital itself.

Fourth, international capital. Gözlemci reports the warning that MSCI could remove Turkey from the index if the structure is not corrected. The confidence of the foreign fund manager stands, in the government's priority, in front of 455 thousand households. As we said in the piece Circuit Breaker: the bourgeoisie's exchange does not even trust itself; and the moment it does not trust, the first thing it protects is its own reputation abroad.

---

10. After 1 October: As Parliament Opens

Parliament opens tomorrow. It is said that the AKP will bring its own motion for an inquiry. It has been announced that the YENİ Parti has prepared a 15-article bill. The İYİ Parti wants an inquiry commission.

Care is needed here. A parliamentary inquiry commission, where it is set up, is most of the time an instrument for stretching the matter. A commission set up with the government majority can cool the agenda with meetings that last for months. For this reason the labour front's demand in Parliament should not stay limited to the setting up of a commission. It should turn into demands that are concrete, measurable, and dated. We list these in the next section.

The two commissions TİP proposed today (the TPA network, and the assets of the last five terms) and the call for a de facto commission that does not wait for the government majority are important from this angle: they show that the commission can work on the timetable of those who ask for the information, not on the government's timetable. Representatives of the victims and labour organisations should also be at this commission's table.

TİP's parliamentary questions should be followed in this period as documents whose written-reply periods will expire. Every question that is not answered is a data point: silence is also an answer. Record it.

---

11. Concrete Tasks

Comrade, this section is for you.

This week

1. Do not leave the fund investor you know alone. If a relative, a neighbour, a workmate has money in a fund, reach them. Tell them to keep in writing all the transaction documents, the receipts, and how they were steered into the fund (a bank branch, an adviser, an advertisement, social media).

2. Let it not stay scattered. Let it be organised. There is a difference between the petitions of 455 thousand people one by one and the joint application of a group of a hundred. But take care: do not give a power of attorney, do not pay money, to groups whose identity is not clear. Prefer solidarity networks that rest on a bar association, a union, a labour organisation.

3. Ask about the estate management, the union fund, the cooperative account. If the maintenance fees went into the fund, other collective funds may have gone too. Ask where the common money of every organisation you are a member of is kept. Asking this question is not a shame. It is a duty.

4. If you have a document, share it. If you have a document or information about fund transactions, early exits, shell companies, pass it to those who are asking the question. TİP announced the address ihbar@tip.org.tr for this today. As long as information stays scattered it is capital's. When it comes together it is ours.

Reading and recording

5. Keep the chronology. The table in this piece closes today. From tomorrow, payments, liquidation prices, the collateral decision, the replies to parliamentary questions will come. Keep your own table: date, event, figure, source.

6. Look at the number of workers on KAP. Set out the change over the last two years in the number of staff at the companies whose shares the funds bought heavily. If you find the fall from 217 to 2 at Gündoğdu in other companies as well, you will be the first to write the workers' balance sheet of this crisis.

7. Watch the replies to the questions. Şık's questions of 21, 23 and 25 September, and the questions of the other MPs, are on the Parliament site. When the reply period expires, record whether a reply has come, and if it has, what it says.

Demands

8. A legal priority for the small investor in the liquidation. Not corridor talk: an official regulation. Savings below a certain amount should be paid first. The priority that insolvency law gives to the worker's claim should be given to small savings in a fund liquidation.

9. The money returned, to the victim. The billions returned under effective remorse should go not to the Treasury but into the liquidation pool, directly to the victim. Wherever the source of the gain was, the return should go there too.

10. Let the reasons for lifting the measures be disclosed. Let the reason for taking 45 companies and 19 funds out of the measures, and the records of money in and out between these companies and the funds, be opened to the public.

11. Let the closed-fund list be opened. Let the lists of participants in the closed period of the funds in liquidation, the large exits before 28 August, the portfolio breakdowns, the Takasbank records, and the real owners of shares held in the name of a foreign institution be reported to the public by the investigating authorities, with personal data protected, but with the names of politicians and public officials open.

12. Labour representation on the boards. Let representatives of the victims and labour organisations take a place on the Fund Coordination Board and on every parliamentary commission to be set up, including the de facto commission. Let the minutes of the board's meetings be published.

13. Let a workers' balance sheet be drawn up. Let the employment lost in the companies the funds inflated be officially reported. Let the severance and notice claims of the workers dismissed from these companies be counted as a priority claim in the liquidation.

14. Let the person who asks a question not be tried. Let the access blocks placed on news about the fund crisis be lifted. Let the cases and investigations opened against the journalist, the MP, the social-media user who asks a question be withdrawn. Information is the small saver's only shield.

The collective alternative

15. Let us build our own fund. 455 thousand households paid the price of the promise of 20 per cent a month. It is time to talk about the collective, auditable, member-run forms of small savings: solidarity funds, cooperatives, union mutual-aid funds. These do not promise 20 per cent. But every member knows where the money is. When information is common, the fund becomes common too.

---

Dear Comrades,

Fourteen days ago it had been said that "there is no structural risk". The picture today is this: 56 detained, a new coordination board, a DDK inspection, a resignation, two billion returned, 45 companies taken out of the measures, and three institutions transferred to a public bank. And the money paid to the wage-earner in the fund: zero.

At TİP's press conference today a name was given to this picture: controlled demolition. The thesis will be proved or it will not. But the picture itself already carries all the signs of a controlled demolition. Those who got out before the blast got out. Those who remained inside after the blast were told "wait".

The state has been very active for two weeks. It makes detentions, it sets up boards, it makes statements, it opens cases. But all this movement has a common direction: it opens the doors one by one for big capital, and it keeps the door locked for small savings. This is not an incompetence. It is a priority. Şimşek said it with his own mouth: the priority is "the capacity of the real sector". Whose capacity it is, the list of companies that left the measures shows.

Young comrades, there are two kinds of door in this crisis. Through one, those who gained are leaving: those who knew first, those who sold first, those who can declare remorse and put the money back. In front of the other, there are those who wait: the estate resident who pays the maintenance fee, the pensioner who saved for a home, the worker whose factory closed.

In the paper market, the doors do not open for everyone at the same time. Information, connection and capital determine whose door opens when. For this reason our work is not to force the doors one by one. It is to ask who holds the key of the door, and to make that key common.

Parliament opens tomorrow. The questions are ready. We will record the answers.

---

Sources

Official statements and the process

• Time regulation on the funds subject to liquidation — SPK, 21 September 2026
• SPK press release, 18 September 2026 (PDF)
• The payment and liquidation process of the funds was set — Bloomberg HT, 18 September 2026
• How will the money be paid to the investor? — Uzmanpara
• SPK statement on the fund liquidation: which investor can get their money early — CNN Türk, 29 September 2026
• Şimşek: there is no systemic risk, we have quarantined the troubled funds — Forbes Türkiye
• Written statement after the fund summit at Beştepe — Uzmanpara, 29 September 2026
• Erdoğan's statement on the fund crisis — Euronews, 28 September 2026

The investigation

• A new wave in the fund investigation: 5 critical names in custody — Halk TV, 19 September 2026
• The total number detained in the fund investigation rose to 45 — Foreks, 25 September 2026
• The third wave in the fund investigation — NTV, 25 September 2026
• 750 million lira frozen — Bigpara
• The fund-crisis investigation: the assets of 42 persons frozen — Euronews, 26 September 2026
• The former minister Fatma Betül Sayan Kaya, accused of fund dealing, resigned — Diken
• Fatma Betül Sayan and her husband returned 2.2 billion lira — T24, 29 September 2026
• In the exchange/fund scandal the Pusula file was opened; Tera's file is next — Yetkin Report, 26 September 2026
• The latest state of the fund crisis — sol.org.tr
• The political dimension of the fund crisis: which steps the opposition is waiting for — Euronews, 29 September 2026

TİP, Ahmet Şık, Erkan Baş, Sera Kadıgil

• Ahmet Şık asked about Akın Gürlek's link to the TLY fund — Medyascope, 21 September 2026
• Şık of TİP carried the fund crisis onto Parliament's agenda — ANKA, 23 September 2026
• Ahmet Şık to Mehmet Şimşek: who made the last plunder? — bianet
• A parliamentary question from Ahmet Şık on the fund crisis: was the involvement of members of the judiciary in the funds investigated? — Medyascope, 25 September 2026
• Twelve critical questions from Ahmet Şık on the fund robbery — Gazete Pencere, 26 September 2026
• Ahmet Şık: where did the Sayan family find 163 million lira? — bianet, 27 September 2026
• Six questions from Ahmet Şık, asking Akın Gürlek to answer — BirGün, 28 September 2026
• A criminal complaint and a damages suit from the Minister of Justice Gürlek against Ahmet Şık — T24, 29 September 2026
• A criminal complaint from Akın Gürlek against Ahmet Şık — Cumhuriyet
• Erkan Baş's statement on the claims about Kaya — ANKA, 26 September 2026
• TİP's questions to the former minister Kaya on the fund plunder — haberler.com (ANKA), 29 September 2026
• Sera Kadıgil told the fund scandal — Kırşehir Çiğdem, 29 September 2026
• Mehmet Ali Çelebi: I have not made 1 lira of a transaction in the funds in my whole life — memurlar.net, 30 September 2026

TİP press conference, 30 September 2026

• Ahmet Şık's statement on the fund plunder: "A controlled demolition has been carried out" (full text of the speech) — BirGün, 30 September 2026
• Ahmet Şık's statement on the fund crisis: a controlled demolition was carried out (the speeches of Kadıgil and Kapusuz) — dokuz8haber, 30 September 2026
• A striking claim from Ahmet Şık on the fund crisis — Baba Ocağı, 30 September 2026
• The fund investigation: the former SPK chair İbrahim Ömer Gönül will give a statement as a suspect — BirGün, 30 September 2026

The Sayan Kaya file and effective remorse

• It was claimed that Fatma Betül Sayan Kaya returned 2.2 billion lira: is the aim "effective remorse"? (the text of 6362/107 and the SPK bulletin of 25 September) — BirGün, 29 September 2026
• The Chief Prosecutor's statement on the assets of Fatma Betül Sayan Kaya and her husband — Bloomberg HT, 29 September 2026
• An objection to Fatma Betül Sayan Kaya's return of 2.2 billion — Karar, 29 September 2026

The Labour Party (EMEP)

• The government is loading onto the people's back the wreck the merchants of hope created — Seyit Aslan, EMEP general chair, 18 September 2026
• EMEP distributed a leaflet of protest on the funds — Orduyorum, 29 September 2026

Evrensel, 29–30 September 2026

• They told the worker "we are making a loss" and put 79 million into the exchange — Andaç Aydın Arıduru, 30 September
• Tera Bank's growth of 27 times is on Parliament's agenda — 29 September
• The fund plunder reached the housing estates — 30 September
• 455 thousand 758 investors in the fund crisis — 30 September
• TÜRK-İŞ announced its September figures — Duygu Ayber Gültekin, 30 September
• The DİSK-AR report: broadly defined unemployment passed 31 per cent — Duygu Ayber Gültekin, 30 September

BirGün, 28–30 September 2026

• Even the estate fees went into the fund — İsmail Arı, 30 September
• A look at fund manipulation from the inside — Kenan Gözlemci, 30 September
• As long as the regime exists, the scandals will not end — 30 September
• Zeybekci of the AKP also turned out to be a fund victim: there is negligence by the state — 30 September
• Tera Portföy's managers among them: 6 names at the courthouse — 30 September
• Villas worth 1.2 billion belonging to Yarız and Turhan were seized — 30 September
• The social dimensions of the fund scandal — Hayri Kozanoğlu, 29 September
• Those who audited the fund scandal turned out to be from the AKP — İsmail Arı, 29 September
• As long as this order does not change, the country will not come right — 29 September
• All the assets of Fatma Betül Sayan Kaya and her husband were frozen — 29 September
• The Directorate of Communications announced the decisions of the fund-crisis meeting — 29 September
• A 15-question motion from Murat Emir to Mehmet Şimşek — 29 September
• The SPK's letter to the Chief Prosecutor in the fund scandal came out — 28 September
• The role of the media in the fund fraud — Faruk Bildirici, 28 September
• Özata Denizcilik rose 654 per cent in the quarter it announced a loss — 28 September
• Erdoğan's statement after the cabinet — 28 September

Companies, workers, victims

• Shares turned upside down at Gündoğdu Gıda, whose two large partners were detained — Gıda Bülteni
• They milked shares, not milk: two workers, zero cows — Halk TV
• The fund victims rose up in Parliament — Cumhuriyet, 28 September 2026
• The exchange closed the day with a fall — AA, 29 September 2026

Theory

• Karl Marx, Capital, Volume I (primitive accumulation); Volume III, Part Five (interest-bearing capital, fictitious capital, the credit system)
• Friedrich Engels, Anti-Dühring, Part Three, Chapter II (the state, "the ideal total capitalist")
• David Harvey, The New Imperialism (accumulation by dispossession)

Earlier pieces in the Stock Exchange Dossier

• The Fund Earthquake: Who Owns the 826 Billion Lira?
• Circuit Breaker: The Bourgeoisie's Exchange Does Not Even Trust Itself
• Who Got Out Before the Door Closed?

Related pieces of ours

• From Obscenity to National Security: The Anatomy of a Forty-Eight-Hour Wave of Censorship
• 12 September: The History, Balance Sheet, and Present of a Class Coup

---

Knowledge Commons — Knowledge Belongs to Everyone. Multiply it.

Every piece of investigation in this article is at the stage of allegation; there is no final conviction, and the presumption of innocence applies. The piece is not investment advice. The figures are those that had reached the press as of 30 September 2026; the ratios and the comparative calculations belong to Knowledge Commons.