Who Blacked Out the Screen?

A Trustee for Halk TV: The Process, the Grounds and a Class Reading

October 14, 2026 at 09:03 AM54 min readAuthor: Oğuz Demirkapı

Who Blacked Out the Screen?

A Trustee for Halk TV: The Process, the Grounds and a Class Reading

Dear Young Comrades,

At 05:15 this morning, one of Turkey's most-watched opposition news channels went dark.

By midday, the screen is still under the trustee's control; the channel's owner is saying from abroad, "We will take our channel back," and journalists are gathering outside the building in solidarity with their colleagues. Meanwhile in Silivri, İmamoğlu has begun his defence in the İBB case.

This article is being updated as events unfold; hour-by-hour developments are in the Updates section below.

We first set out the day's developments and the reactions, followed by a short summary; then we turn to the prosecution's claims, the background and the class meaning of the event.

Updates

Last updated: 14 October 2026, 12:00. Newest first. Times are when each development was announced or first reported.

Shortly after 11:53 — According to Medyascope's reporter, the İBB hearing began: İmamoğlu took the defendant's stand and, after his identity was confirmed, began his defence. Asked his occupation, he said, "I am the Mayor of Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality" (Medyascope live, in Turkish).
11:53 — Police locked the entrance to the Halk TV building; no one other than the channel's employees can get in. Among those turned away was YENİ Party Istanbul MP Gökan Zeybek. According to Medyascope's reporter, hundreds of police officers are deployed around and in front of the building (Medyascope live, in Turkish).
11:47 — YENİ Party leader Özgür Özel, who has come to Silivri: "Today, for the first time, after 589 days, İmamoğlu will exercise his right of defence, and this morning they shut down Halk TV. This is a sign of this government's exhaustion, desperation and impotence." According to Özel, the government has reached the point of "Let me silence it so that the fund affair is not discussed, let me silence it so that İmamoğlu's defence is not heard"; he said the opposition would break out of this vice "by setting up new channels through new collective efforts" (Medyascope live, in Turkish).
11:31 — Halk TV reporter Gamze Altunay, who has followed the İBB trial for 97 days, is not in Silivri on the day İmamoğlu is due to make his defence: "In the trial I have followed for 97 days, I cannot be there just as Ekrem İmamoğlu is about to make his defence. This is the reality of journalism in Turkey." Journalist Zafer Arapkirli, who is following the trial, wrote that the desk where Altunay sat in the courtroom was empty (Medyascope live, in Turkish).
11:27 — Nazmi Bilgin, President of the Journalists' Association: "Turkey has woken up to a pitch-black day for democracy and press freedom." Bilgin drew attention to the trusteeship coinciding with the day of İmamoğlu's defence: "After the banning of a book that has not even been printed yet, is the reporting of the defence now to be prevented too?" The association called for the trustee decision to be ended (ANKA, in Turkish).
11:24 — According to the EngelliWeb project of the Freedom of Expression Association (İFÖD), access to the official X account of the Workers' Party of Turkey (TİP), which has 582,000 followers (@tipgenelmerkez), was blocked under Article 8/A of Law No. 5651. According to EngelliWeb, X has not yet withheld the account in Turkey. Access blocks have thus reached the official account of a party represented in parliament (Cumhuriyet, Evrensel, Karar, all in Turkish).
11:23 — KESK (Confederation of Public Employees' Trade Unions): "The trustees will go, the will of the people will win." According to the confederation, the interventions against the opposition press while the fund corruption is on the agenda indicate "a wish to cover up the corruption and prevent it from being discussed in the opposition media"; KESK called on "all labour and democratic forces" to join a common struggle. The Mülkiyeliler Birliği (an association of Ankara University political science graduates) also said: "The press is the people; the people cannot be silenced" (Medyascope live, in Turkish).
11:05 — Journalists gathered outside the Halk TV building in support of their colleagues. Hilmi Hacaloğlu: "A black Wednesday for press freedom in Turkey, and we will remember it for many years, just as we have not forgotten the day a trustee was appointed to TELE1." And: "The people watch Halk TV; those who want freedom and equality watch it. So who is here beside the journalists? We are. Sadly, amid such a crowd, journalism is lonely" (Medyascope live, in Turkish).
11:02 — One of the citizens who came to the building told Medyascope: "We are at the point where words have run out. Whatever is to be done, it will be done through action. I did not come to protest the government; I came to protest the opposition. They just talk and talk" (Medyascope live, in Turkish).
10:43 — DEVA Party Chair Ali Babacan: "It is not possible to cover up the truth by restricting press freedom and silencing the media. Silencing the press means trying to cover up their own wrongdoing" (Medyascope live, in Turkish).
10:42 — YENİ Party MPs attended a meeting of parliament's Planning and Budget Committee with black tape over their mouths and eyes in protest at the trustee appointment (Medyascope live, in Turkish).
10:41 — bianet's updated round-up of press organisations added a statement from the Dicle Fırat Journalists Association (DFG): "Journalism is not a crime. The public's right to receive news cannot be obstructed" (bianet, in Turkish).
10:35 — Saadet (Felicity) Party Chair Mahmut Arıkan: "The silencing of different voices and opinions, and the daily shrinking of the outlets through which those voices can be heard, is not acceptable" (Medyascope live, in Turkish).
10:33 — BBC Türkçe: "Ekrem İmamoğlu begins his defence in the İBB case." On the most anticipated day of the trial, Halk TV's screen is dark (BBC Türkçe, in Turkish).
10:02 — The President of the Ankara Bar Association, Elçin Özge Şimşek Çağlayan, said the measures were "a grave intervention" against the freedoms of expression and of the press guaranteed by Articles 26 and 28 of the Constitution (ANKA, in Turkish).
09:54 — Mahiroğlu, who is reported to be abroad, released a video statement on social media: "Today is a dark day for Turkey. The public's right to receive news is being obstructed for political motives. […] Right now we cannot control our broadcasts." He said the allegations against him based on MASAK reports were "baseless" and that seven members of his family had been detained; he called on the government to "step back from this wrong move" and said: "We will take our channel back." He also said Kılıçdaroğlu had "fired the signal flare for today" (halktv.com.tr, in Turkish).
09:45 — Details of the detentions emerged: among the 11 people detained are Halk TV's former deputy chair of the board and a former board member. Mahiroğlu is one of the 4 suspects abroad; the suspect already in prison was reported to be Doruk Bulut, the CHP's Silivri district chair (Aksiyon, in Turkish).
09:40 — According to Sözcü's round-up, Le Figaro, CNN Greece and Svenska Dagbladet reported the raid as breaking news. For the Reuters, AP and BBC News reports, see the Reactions section (Sözcü, in Turkish).
09:34 — According to Milli Gazete, a previously recorded programme is running on screen instead of live broadcasting; according to NTV, it is a rerun of a programme called "Görkemli Hatıralar". No decision to close the channel permanently has been announced, and it is not known when live broadcasting will resume (Milli Gazete, NTV, in Turkish).
09:30 — Ali Mahir Başarır, deputy parliamentary group chair of the YENİ Party, spoke outside the building under police cordon: "It is not Halk TV that is under blockade; it is our democracy, our freedom of thought and our press freedom that are under blockade" (GazeteKalem / ANKA, in Turkish).
09:26 — The Istanbul Bar Association declared the operation "clearly contrary to the norm of the rule of law" and called for the broadcast to be resumed and the TMSF's seizure decision to be withdrawn (ANKA, in Turkish).
09:25 — Tahsin Tarhan and Necdet Saraç, deputy chairs of the CHP under Kılıçdaroğlu's leadership, called the trusteeship "unacceptable" (Cumhuriyet, in Turkish).
08:58 — TGS: "We do not accept this tyranny! The press is free and cannot be censored!" (ANKA, in Turkish)
08:50 — The police search ended; Halk TV employees were able to enter the building (Medyascope, in Turkish).
08:24 — The Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office announced the bribery, bid-rigging and money-laundering investigation into Mahiroğlu: detention orders for 17 people, 11 detained; 4 suspects abroad, 1 already in prison, 1 being sought. The TMSF was appointed trustee of companies linked to Mahiroğlu (Yeniçağ, Cumhuriyet, in Turkish). The statement named neither Halk TV nor the seized companies.
08:09 — DİSK Basın-İş: the decision targets "the sweat, jobs and futures of hundreds of press workers" (ANKA, in Turkish).
07:53 — ÇGD: "It has become clear once again that no press organisation in Turkey has any guarantee that it can keep broadcasting" (ANKA, in Turkish).
Shortly before 07:00 — Halk TV's official account announced the police operation at its headquarters, the trustee appointment and the suspension of broadcasting (BGNES).
06:42 — According to Karar's first report at this time, the channel's owner Mahiroğlu had announced the raid on social media ("The 'nullity' leader Kılıçdaroğlu and his team can be happy. The police are at Halk TV"), and YENİ Party chair Özgür Özel had given the first political reaction: "Dawn raid on a television channel, appointing a trustee: only dictators would do such a thing" (Karar, in Turkish). According to Halk TV, Mahiroğlu was the first to announce the raid; his first post did not address the financial allegations against him (halktv.com.tr, in Turkish).
06:31 — During the programme "Parantez", while presenter Gizem Çetin and economics journalist Erdal Sağlam were discussing an investment-fund scandal under the headings "455,000 fund victims" and "Who is behind the funds politically?", the live broadcast was cut and the 1973 Turkish film "Canım Kardeşim" was put on screen. The board of trustees headed by İbrahim Paşalı then arrived with the police. Editor-in-chief Suat Toktaş asked for the live broadcast to continue for the sake of the public's right to receive news; when the meeting produced no result, the broadcast was stopped entirely. Toktaş rejected the board's offer to work together, saying "something unjust and unlawful is happening here right now"; the head of the board replied: "We are carrying out the public duty assigned to us" (Karar, Karar, dialogue, in Turkish).
05:30 — According to Medyascope, police arrived at the channel at this time. Hundreds of police officers and vehicles closed the road where the building stands and employees were not let in; Halk TV reporter Gamze Altunay posted that the police were inside and staff were being kept out (Medyascope, Euronews, bianet, in Turkish).
05:15 — According to Halk TV presenter Deniz Bayramoğlu, the board of trustees took over management at this time; financial crimes, organised crime and counter-terrorism police searched the building (Milli Gazete, in Turkish).

Reactions

Bar associations and legal organisations:

Elçin Özge Şimşek Çağlayan, President of the Ankara Bar Association: "Resorting, on the grounds of criminal investigations, to measures that may directly affect the broadcasting activities and editorial independence of one of Turkey's most-watched news channels is a grave intervention against the freedoms of expression and of the press guaranteed by Articles 26 and 28 of the Constitution." She added that disregarding the principle of proportionality in such measures upsets "the balance on which a democratic social order rests" (ANKA, in Turkish).
Istanbul Bar Association: Declared the operation and the trustee appointment "clearly contrary to the norm of the rule of law". According to the Bar, the intervention violates Articles 26 (freedom of expression and dissemination of thought), 28 (freedom of the press), 48 (freedom of work and contract), 49 (the right to work) and 35 (the right to property) of the Constitution. The statement said: "The TMSF … must not become an instrument of the usurpation of property. RTÜK, a constitutional body, has been sidelined and rendered dysfunctional in safeguarding press freedom." Its demand is clear: "The unlawful interventions against Halk TV must end immediately, the broadcast must be resumed and the TMSF's seizure decision must be withdrawn" (ANKA, in Turkish). The Bar also drew attention to the operation coinciding with the day İmamoğlu was expected to make his defence: "Placing the press under police blockade on a day when the voice of the defence was expected to be heard is incompatible with the principles of a democratic state governed by the rule of law." It also called on public officials, under Article 137 of the Constitution, not to carry out unlawful orders (Diken, in Turkish).

Unions and press professional organisations (Cumhuriyet round-up, in Turkish):

TGS (Journalists' Union of Turkey): "A trustee has been appointed to Halk TV! The lawlessness that the political power has used in recent years to get past every problem has struck press freedom once again today. By an arbitrary decision, Halk TV was raided by police in the morning and its broadcast was interfered with. We do not accept this tyranny! The press is free and cannot be censored!" (ANKA, halktv.com.tr, both in Turkish)
DİSK Basın-İş: "The appointment of a trustee to Halk TV and the suspension of its broadcast is an unacceptable intervention directly targeting press freedom and the public's right to receive news. What was done to TELE1 last year is being repeated at Halk TV today. This clearly shows that the media in Turkey no longer have any legal guarantee. This decision has not only stopped a broadcast; it has directly targeted the sweat, jobs and futures of hundreds of press workers, from the kitchen to the screen. We stand with our hundreds of colleagues and with the workers of Halk TV." (ANKA, GazeteKalem, both in Turkish) Halk TV reported the same text as a statement by DİSK (halktv.com.tr, in Turkish).
ÇGD (Progressive Journalists Association): "The appointment of a trustee to Halk TV and the suspension of its broadcast is a grave intervention against freedom of the press and of expression. This decision, which disregards constitutional rights and the public's freedom to receive news, is unacceptable. Exactly a year ago a trustee was appointed to TELE1, a black stain on our press history. Today, with this decision against Halk TV, it has become clear once again that no press organisation in Turkey has any guarantee that it can keep broadcasting. We stand with the employees of Halk TV, our colleagues." (ANKA, GazeteKalem, both in Turkish)
Journalists' Association (Gazeteciler Cemiyeti): Its president, Nazmi Bilgin, said, "Turkey has woken up to a pitch-black day for democracy and press freedom." Recalling the jailing of journalists who reported on the fund scandal and the access blocks, Bilgin added, "it is clear that the media is meant to be intimidated and forced into silence and submission"; the association called for the trustee decision to be ended (ANKA, in Turkish)
Kültür Sanat-Sen (KESK): According to the union, the intervention is "an open blow not only to a television channel but to the public's right to learn the truth and to freedom of thought and expression." The union said it stands "shoulder to shoulder" with Halk TV's employees (ANKA, in Turkish)
KESK (Confederation of Public Employees' Trade Unions): "The trustees will go, the will of the people will win." The confederation said that "Halk TV has become the latest target of the policies of trusteeship, censorship and bans that stretch from municipalities to democratic institutions and from digital platforms to the opposition press", and declared its solidarity with Halk TV's workers (Medyascope live, in Turkish)
DFG (Dicle Fırat Journalists Association): "Going to the doors of press organisations with the police, obstructing broadcasting and interfering in the management of media institutions is unacceptable. We remind once again: truths cannot be silenced by pressure on the press. Journalism is not a crime. The public's right to receive news cannot be obstructed." (bianet, in Turkish)
Mülkiyeliler Birliği (an association of Ankara University political science graduates): "The press is the people; the people cannot be silenced." According to the association, the trusteeship is "an intervention not only against a broadcaster, but against independent journalism, pluralist democracy and society's right to free access to information" (Medyascope live, in Turkish)

These reactions did not come out of nowhere. On 30 September, 13 professional organisations, among them TGS, DİSK Basın-İş, ÇGD, the Journalists' Association, the Press Council, KESK Haber-Sen, MLSA (Media and Law Studies Association) and the International Press Institute (IPI), called for the access ban on T24 to be lifted (MLSA, in Turkish). Just one day before the raid, on 13 October, 21 organisations including IPI, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), ARTICLE 19, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, PEN International, MLSA, P24 and ÇGD warned of a "severe escalation" of censorship in Turkey (IPI; halktv.com.tr, in Turkish). International organisations had not stayed silent over earlier sanctions against Halk TV either: in April 2023, 20 organisations including RSF, CPJ, IPI, EFJ and IFJ condemned RTÜK's fines on Halk TV, TELE1 and Fox TV as a tool for silencing critical reporting (IFJ), and IPI later called for the reversal of a 10-day broadcast suspension imposed on Halk TV (IPI). As of 11:46, we have not found a statement specifically on Halk TV from TGC (Turkish Journalists' Association), MLSA, RSF or CPJ; nor has there been any statement from the government, the AKP or RTÜK. We will add statements as they come.

Politicians (Cumhuriyet round-up, Medyascope round-up, both in Turkish):

Seyit Aslan (Chair of the Labour Party, EMEP): "The Palace regime is strangling press freedom and usurping the public's right to receive news." He said the government also wants "to bring to heel the workers who demand democracy, freedom and justice".
Erkan Baş (Chair of the Workers' Party of Turkey, TİP): "You will not take the people's will or their voice captive." On the same day, access to his party's official X account, with 582,000 followers, was also blocked (Cumhuriyet, in Turkish).
İsmail Hakkı Tombul (SOL Party spokesperson): "The government might as well publish an official bulletin every day and have every media outlet pass it on to the public." (Medyascope round-up, in Turkish)
Kemal Okuyan (General Secretary of the Communist Party of Turkey, TKP): "Everyone knows Halk TV was not seized because of its boss. We are talking about a channel that has been hit with broadcast bans again and again, whose employees have been jailed." And: "Under these conditions, we invite those who begin with 'but its boss…' to the struggle for a Turkey without bosses!" (halktv.com.tr round-up, in Turkish)
Özgür Özel (Chair of the YENİ Party): "Raiding a television channel with police at dawn and appointing a trustee is something only dictators would do." He went on: "We stand with Halk TV, with press freedom, and with the hundreds of workers employed there and their families" (Cumhuriyet, in Turkish). In Silivri, he described the raid as "a sign of this government's exhaustion, desperation and impotence" (Medyascope live, in Turkish).
Mansur Yavaş (Mayor of Ankara Metropolitan Municipality): Citing Article 28 of the Constitution, "Press freedom is the guarantee not only of journalists, but also of the public's right to receive accurate news."
Burhanettin Bulut (Deputy Chair of the YENİ Party): "Those who seize with trustees the municipalities they could not win at the ballot box have now, after Tele 1, appointed a trustee to Halk TV…"
Tülay Hatimoğulları (Co-Chair of the DEM Party): "Appointing a trustee to Halk TV in a dawn operation is an open political intervention aimed at silencing the opposition media." And: "Withdraw the decision immediately; end the pressure on the press and press workers."
Tuncer Bakırhan (Co-Chair of the DEM Party): "The mindset that appoints trustees over the people's right to elect and be elected is now interfering with the people's right to receive news by the same method."
Ali Mahir Başarır (deputy parliamentary group chair, YENİ Party), outside the channel's building under police cordon: "It is not Halk TV that is under blockade; it is our democracy, our freedom of thought and our press freedom. I call on our nation from here: come, let us all stand by one another" (GazeteKalem / ANKA, in Turkish).
Tahsin Tarhan and Necdet Saraç (deputy chairs of the CHP under Kılıçdaroğlu's leadership): Tarhan said, "The press that falls silent today is the democracy that falls silent tomorrow"; Saraç wrote, "Appointing a trustee to Halk TV is wrong and unacceptable" (Cumhuriyet, in Turkish).
Buğra Kavuncu (İYİ Party spokesperson): "We stand with Halk TV and the press workers. You are losing, and you will lose."
Ümit Özdağ (Chair of the Victory Party): "Opposition journalists are in prison and being imprisoned. Opposition social media accounts are being blocked." And: "The fund corruption, meanwhile, is meant to be covered up and normalised."
Ali Babacan (Chair of the DEVA Party): "Silencing the press means trying to cover up their own wrongdoing" (Medyascope live, in Turkish).
Mahmut Arıkan (Chair of the Saadet Party): "Turkey deserves to wake up to better days and better mornings" (Medyascope live, in Turkish).

Journalists:

Hilmi Hacaloğlu: "Press freedom trampled underfoot once again… Another black day for democracy and press freedom!" Later in the day he also spoke outside the building: "Sadly, amid such a crowd, journalism is experiencing loneliness" (Medyascope live, in Turkish).
Senem Toluay Ilgaz: "Journalism cannot be silenced."
Gamze Altunay (Halk TV reporter): "In the trial I have followed for 97 days, I cannot be there as Ekrem İmamoğlu makes his defence. This is the reality of journalism in Turkey."
Zafer Arapkirli: "We count Gamze among us. You will not be able to stop her love of and passion for reporting! You will not be able to silence the free press!" (Medyascope live, in Turkish)

International press and organisations:

Reuters: The first version of its report called the raid "the latest blow to media freedom in the country" and noted that there was no immediate comment from the authorities (The Straits Times / Reuters). The updated version added a reminder: Halk TV is the fifth major Turkish news outlet to have a trustee appointed, after Flash TV, Eko Türk, Habertürk and Tele1 (WDSM / Reuters).
AP: Introduced Halk TV as "one of Turkey's few broadcasters not aligned with the government" and reported that press freedom groups and opposition parties denounced the move as yet another step to silence opposition voices. The agency's headline, however, carried the "corruption probe" frame (AP).
BBC News: Described the channel as seen by many as close to the CHP and often critical of Erdoğan's AKP, and linked the story to a court's removal of the CHP leadership in May and to İmamoğlu, in prison for over a year (BBC News).
European press: According to Sözcü's round-up, France's Le Figaro, Greece's CNN Greece and Sweden's Svenska Dagbladet reported the raid as breaking news. Le Figaro wrote that police had taken control of the headquarters of Halk TV, "the main television channel of Turkey's main opposition"; Svenska Dagbladet noted that the channel is close to the CHP, İmamoğlu's party (Sözcü, in Turkish).

The language of the international press mirrors the debate in Turkey: AP put the investigation in its headline, Reuters put press freedom in its first sentence. By the time of this update, however, no international press freedom organisation (RSF, CPJ, IPI, EFJ, ARTICLE 19) and no one from the European Parliament had issued a statement specifically on Halk TV. Yet only a day earlier, 21 organisations, including IPI, CPJ and ARTICLE 19, had warned of a "severe escalation" of censorship in Turkey in the joint statement mentioned above.

We want to draw attention to one distinction among the reactions. Most politicians read the event in the language of democracy and press freedom. DİSK Basın-İş added another layer: the workers' jobs, incomes and futures. The Istanbul Bar Association, too, listed the right to work alongside press freedom among the rights violated. KESK went a step further: it linked the intervention against the opposition press to covering up the investment-fund scandal on the agenda and called on "all forces of labour and democracy" to join a common struggle. This addition is not small. The first language defends a principle; the second defends the people who actually carry that principle. The TELE1 experience showed that the second language can go further.

Summary

What happened? On the morning of 14 October 2026, hundreds of police officers entered Halk TV's building in Zeytinburnu, Istanbul. A board of trustees was appointed to the channel, the live broadcast was cut at 06:31, the road where the building stands was closed to traffic, and employees were kept out until the search ended at 08:50.
What is the state of the broadcast? No decision to close the channel permanently has been announced, but nor is it known when live programming will return. The screen is under the trustee's control; according to NTV, a rerun of a programme called "Görkemli Hatıralar" is running instead of live broadcasting. Towards midday, police locked the building's entrance; no one other than employees can get in (Medyascope live, NTV, Karar, Milli Gazete, both in Turkish).
On what grounds? The Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office is investigating Halk TV's chairman, Cafer Mahiroğlu, on charges of bribery, bid rigging and laundering the proceeds of crime. At the centre of the allegations are tenders of the İzmir Metropolitan Municipality.
Who has been detained? Detention orders were issued for 17 people; 11 were taken into custody in the morning, 4 are abroad, 1 is in prison and 1 is being sought. Those detained include the channel's former deputy chair of the board and a former board member (Aksiyon, in Turkish). Mahiroğlu, for his part, said seven members of his family had been detained (halktv.com.tr, in Turkish).
Who is the trustee? A criminal judgeship of peace ordered the seizure of the companies in which Mahiroğlu is a partner, which he manages or to which he is connected, and appointed the TMSF (Savings Deposit Insurance Fund) as trustee. At the head of the board that arrived with the police is İbrahim Paşalı, who had previously been appointed trustee of Can Media (Habertürk, Show TV) and of TELE1.
What does the owner say? Mahiroğlu, who is reported to be abroad, said in a video statement released at 09:54 that the allegations against him are "unfounded", called on the government "to turn back from this wrong step" and said, "We will take our channel back" (halktv.com.tr, in Turkish).
Why today? The raid fell on the day Ekrem İmamoğlu's defence in the İBB (Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality) case, expected to last four days, was due to begin. In the week the chief defendant in Turkey's biggest political trial was to speak, one of the screens that carried that trial to the widest audience was blacked out. Halk TV's reporter, who has followed the hearings for 97 days, is not in the courtroom in Silivri today. Towards midday, İmamoğlu took the stand and began his defence (Medyascope live, in Turkish).
Who has reacted? A broad spectrum, from the Istanbul and Ankara bar associations to TGS, DİSK Basın-İş, ÇGD, the Journalists' Association and KESK, and from EMEP, TİP, SOL Party and TKP to the YENİ Party, DEM Party, İYİ Party, Zafer Party, DEVA and Saadet (details in the Reactions section). As of 11:46, there has been no statement from the government, the AKP, RTÜK or Kılıçdaroğlu himself.
What else happened the same day? Access to the official X account of the Workers' Party of Turkey (TİP), with 582,000 followers, was blocked under Article 8/A of Law No. 5651; access blocks have thus reached the official account of a party represented in parliament (Cumhuriyet, in Turkish).
Why does it matter? This is the third major media organisation seized by the same method within a year: Can Holding (Habertürk, Show TV) in September 2025, TELE1 in October 2025, Halk TV today. The method is the same every time: a financial investigation into a capital owner, a TMSF trustee for the companies, and the newsroom falls silent. And the same trustee took charge of all three screens. Counting Flash TV and Eko Türk as well, Reuters reported Halk TV as the fifth major news outlet to have a trustee appointed (Reuters).
Our thesis: Whether Mahiroğlu is cleared is a matter for the courts; the presumption of innocence applies to everyone. But if a boss's tender file is used to hold hostage the jobs of hundreds of media workers, the right of millions to receive news and a newsroom's archive, then there is more here than a corruption investigation. What blacked out the screen is the fact that ownership and news are chained to each other.

Note one detail: no court ruling or RTÜK (Radio and Television Supreme Council) decision stopping the broadcast has been announced. The court seized the companies; what stopped the broadcast was the board of trustees that took over the company's management. In other words, a news channel was silenced not through a broadcast ban but through a corporate management decision. The Chief Prosecutor's statement does not even name the channel. Keep this distinction in mind; the class reading in this article is built exactly on it.

One more detail: when the live broadcast was cut, the programme on screen was discussing an investment-fund scandal that left 455,000 people out of pocket, and that scandal's "political side". On a screen blacked out on the grounds of one capital owner's financial file, the last thing being discussed was whom another financial scandal protects.

Now let us look at each point in turn.

What Does the Prosecution Say?

According to the statement of the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office, the investigation covers the following. Let us underline it: these are allegations, not established facts.

Charges: Bribery, bid rigging, laundering assets derived from crime.

Basis: According to the Chief Prosecutor's Office, data obtained from MASAK, statements by secret witnesses, suspects' statements and other documents in the file were assessed together (full text of the statement, halktv.com.tr, in Turkish).

The bribery and tender allegation:

It is alleged that Mahiroğlu used his relations with the İzmir Metropolitan Municipality to have BUSTECH Araç Bakım Onarım Hizmetleri A.Ş. (a vehicle maintenance and repair company) set up, and then had the company transferred to people of his choosing.
It is alleged that 14,464,000 lira in off-the-books bribes were paid in connection with the tenders.
It is claimed that the company invoiced far above the tender prices and that the resulting income was transferred to Mahiroğlu or to connected companies.

MASAK (Financial Crimes Investigation Board) data:

Item	Amount
Total transaction volume of companies he owns or manages	30,352,037,389.15 lira
459 inflows to personal accounts	1,062,260,003.28 lira
564 outflows from personal accounts	1,118,591,033.88 lira
Other	Large SWIFT transfers abroad; a mismatch between declared income and assets

(Source, in Turkish: Cumhuriyet — the Chief Prosecutor's statement)

Let us add a small but instructive note here. Part of the pro-government press splashed this figure across its front pages as "30 billion in money traffic" (Yeni Şafak, in Turkish). The phrase used in the prosecution's text, however, is "transaction volume". The sum of all account movements of a group of companies over the years is not the same thing as suspicious money flows; as the same lira moves from one account to another, the transaction volume grows. The size of a figure is not the size of a crime. Comrades, when you read a figure, first ask what is being counted.

A separate file: According to the statement, Mahiroğlu is also wanted on a bid-rigging charge in the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality investigation; the prosecution states that he left the country on 10 March 2025. Mahiroğlu, for his part, said in June 2025 that he had been living abroad for thirty-five years (Diken, in Turkish). According to BBC Türkçe, this arrest warrant was issued on 11 June 2025, and the prosecution had stated that it was based on the statements of the businessman Aziz İhsan Aktaş. Halk TV, for its part, reported that the warrant was based on the statements of people Mahiroğlu says he does not know (BBC Türkçe, Euronews, both in Turkish). In his earlier defence, Mahiroğlu had said he did not know Aktaş, rejected the allegations of interference in tenders and maintained that Halk TV's financing was transparent; those remarks predate the new allegations announced today (N24). In a video statement released today at 09:54, however, he said the allegations based on MASAK reports were "unfounded" (halktv.com.tr, in Turkish).

Seizure: A criminal judgeship of peace ordered the seizure of the companies in which Mahiroğlu is a partner, which he manages or to which he is connected, and appointed the TMSF as trustee.

Background: What Was Said Five Days Earlier

This raid did not happen in a vacuum. Let us look at the political calendar:

Date	Event
28–29 January 2025	Halk TV's Barış Pehlivan, Seda Selek, Serhan Asker, Kürşad Oğuz and editor-in-chief Suat Toktaş were detained for broadcasting a phone conversation with a court-appointed expert witness in the investigations into İmamoğlu; Toktaş was jailed, released after 34 days, and later acquitted together with four colleagues of "attempting to influence judicial officials" (Turkish Minute)
19 March 2025	İBB Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu was arrested; a wave of operations against many CHP-run municipalities followed
11 September 2025	The TMSF was appointed trustee of Can Holding; Habertürk and Show TV were seized (Medyascope, in Turkish)
24 October 2025	Raid on TELE1; editor-in-chief Merdan Yanardağ was arrested and a TMSF trustee was appointed to the channel
April 2026	The TMSF put TELE1 up for sale with an estimated value of 28 million lira (sol, in Turkish)
21 May 2026	The Ankara Regional Court of Appeal issued an "absolute nullity" ruling on the CHP congresses; Özgür Özel was removed from office and Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu returned as party chair
June 2026	Following a lawsuit filed by TELE1 employees, the TMSF halted the sale tender; in the same month the Mayor of İzmir, Cemil Tugay, left the CHP
24 July 2026	Özgür Özel and 91 MPs resigned from the CHP; the YENİ Party was founded (Euronews, in Turkish)
7 October 2026	Cemil Tugay joined the AKP (Turkish Minute); the tenders at the centre of the Halk TV investigation belong to the İzmir Metropolitan Municipality
9 October 2026	Kılıçdaroğlu targeted Halk TV on KRT TV; the same evening MHP deputy chair İsmail Özdemir called on RTÜK to reconsider the broadcast licences of Halk TV and SZC TV
10 October 2026	Mahiroğlu replied: "You are the most unfortunate case ever to befall Turkish politics!" (T24, in Turkish)
14 October 2026	A trustee for Halk TV; on the same day, the first day of İmamoğlu's defence in the İBB case, expected to last four days

The 9 October speech matters. On KRT TV's "Liderler Özel" programme, Kılıçdaroğlu said of Halk TV that "it produces fake news 24 hours a day"; and about the channel's owner he asked: "In which country in the world is there a television channel whose owner is in a foreign country while it broadcasts in his own country?" He also said they had complained about the channel to RTÜK, and that RTÜK had replied that "this does not fall within our remit" (sol, in Turkish).

The same evening a call also came from the government's coalition partner. İsmail Özdemir, the MHP deputy chair responsible for media, claimed the channels' owners were "fugitives abroad" and addressed RTÜK: "It has become essential for RTÜK, with the authority granted to it by the Constitution, to take up the licences of the broadcasters concerned (Halk TV, SZC TV) again as soon as possible." Özdemir also said the views they had shared "last week" had been proved right (Gazete Oksijen / ANKA, in Turkish). In other words, on the same day, the government's coalition partner and the leadership installed at the head of the CHP by court ruling targeted the same channel on the same grounds: that its owner is abroad.

Five days later, a trustee was appointed to the channel. Cumhuriyet columnist Mehmet Ali Güller was among those who drew attention to this timing (Cumhuriyet, in Turkish).

Mahiroğlu drew this connection explicitly in today's statement: "Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu came out three days ago and fired the flare for today. History will never forget you and your slyness" (Medyascope live, in Turkish). As of 11:46, there has been no statement from Kılıçdaroğlu himself; two deputy chairs under his leadership, Tahsin Tarhan and Necdet Saraç, called the trusteeship "unacceptable" (Cumhuriyet, in Turkish).

We are not drawing this connection ourselves; Mahiroğlu's words are an allegation, and it is not our job to write a link we do not have evidence for. But we are putting one fact on record: a channel that a party chair, who had regained his party headquarters through a court ruling, said "does not fall within RTÜK's remit" was silenced five days later not by RTÜK but by the prosecution and the TMSF. A broadcasting issue that could not be resolved through broadcasting law was resolved through property law.

A Telling Calendar: The Screen Went Dark as İmamoğlu Began His Defence

The second, heavier page of the calendar lies open in Silivri.

The first hearing of the İBB case was held on 9 March 2026 at the Marmara Prison complex in Silivri; the second session began in August. There are 436 defendants in the case, 53 of them in detention; for İmamoğlu, the prosecution is seeking prison sentences ranging from a total of 828 years and 2 months to 2,352 years on various charges (Oksijen, in Turkish). Most of the defendants not in detention have completed their defence; now it is the chief defendant's turn. According to Medyascope (in Turkish), İmamoğlu's defence is expected to begin on Wednesday 14 October and to last four days, until Saturday 17 October (T24, in Turkish). According to Medyascope at 11:15, the courtroom was completely full; İmamoğlu's mother and father had come to Silivri to follow the hearing, and YENİ Party leader Özgür Özel came to Silivri to follow the hearing (Medyascope live, in Turkish). Shortly after 11:53, İmamoğlu took the stand and, after his identity was confirmed, began his defence; asked his occupation, he said, "I am the Mayor of Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality" (Medyascope live, in Turkish).

In other words, Halk TV was blacked out at 05:15 on the morning the chief defendant in Turkey's biggest political trial in decades was to take the stand.

Özgür Özel also drew attention to the raid coinciding with this day (bianet, in Turkish); in Silivri he put it more plainly: "Let me silence it so that the fund affair is not discussed, let me silence it so that İmamoğlu's defence is not heard…" (Medyascope live, in Turkish). The Journalists' Association asked the same question: "Is the reporting of the defence now to be prevented too?" (ANKA, in Turkish). We do not claim that this was or was not a coincidence; we have no document showing either. But we put this on record:

Opposition news channels such as Halk TV were among the main outlets carrying the İBB case to a wide audience.
The public impact of a defence is decided not inside the courtroom but outside it. Only a limited number of journalists get into the courtroom; it is the screens that carry the defence to millions.
When one of those screens is shut down in the week the defence begins, the defence is still made, but fewer people hear it.

Today this third point acquired a concrete face. Halk TV reporter Gamze Altunay had been going to Silivri every day for 97 days to report on the trial. On the day the defence began, she was not in the courtroom: "In the trial I have followed for 97 days, I cannot be there as Ekrem İmamoğlu makes his defence. This is the reality of journalism in Turkey." Zafer Arapkirli, a journalist following the trial, wrote that the desk where Altunay sat in the courtroom was empty (Medyascope live, in Turkish).

Let us recall here the line we drew in our Tayfun Kahraman article: we are not defending İmamoğlu; he is a representative of bourgeois politics, and the allegations against him should be assessed in a fair trial by an independent judiciary. But part of the right to a fair trial is that the defence can be made public just as the indictment is. The indictment circulated in the headlines for months; one of the channels that would have carried the defence was silenced on its first morning. This asymmetry is a legal problem in its own right.

And notice where the two files intersect: both the allegations against Halk TV's owner and the İmamoğlu case rest on municipal tenders. The economic circle of the municipalities run by the opposition is being tried in Silivri on one side, while the screen tied to that circle is handed over to the TMSF on the other. The bourgeois opposition's local power, its media and its political representatives are being besieged in the same week, by the same method, with the same family of justifications.

What Is a Trustee, and Why Has the TMSF Become a Media Group?

Let us sum up briefly for young comrades.

A trustee (kayyım) is a person or institution appointed to manage an asset or institution in place of its owner. In Turkey this instrument has been used, ever more widely, in three areas:

In municipalities: Governors or district governors in place of elected mayors. In nine years trustees were appointed to 164 municipalities; the overwhelming majority were municipalities won by the Kurdish political movement (Medyascope, in Turkish). In our Selçuk Mızraklı article we read this instrument in class terms, as the removal of the budget from oversight and the liquidation of the commons.
In companies: A practice that began with the state-of-emergency decrees after 2016 and then settled into ordinary law. The number of companies managed by the TMSF as trustee had reached 770 by April 2025: banks, television channels, a burger chain, an advertising firm and power plants side by side (ANKA, in Turkish).
In political parties: The "absolute nullity" ruling is an intervention that goes unnamed but serves the same function: a court ruling puts a different leadership in place of the one elected by the members at congress.

The TMSF (Savings Deposit Insurance Fund) was originally set up to protect the depositors of failed banks. Today it is one of Turkey's largest media owners. As one politician put it when a trustee was appointed to TELE1: "The TMSF has become a growing media group" (Gazete Pencere, in Turkish).

The man at the head of the board of trustees that arrived at Halk TV this morning is the face of that growth. According to soL's round-up, İbrahim Paşalı, a former Yeni Şafak columnist, had previously been appointed trustee of Flash Haber, of Can Media (Habertürk, Show TV, Bloomberg HT) after Can Holding was seized, and of TELE1 (soL, in Turkish). Medyascope also recalled that Paşalı had been appointed trustee of Flash TV and Ekotürk (Medyascope live, in Turkish). Three separate investigations, three separate justifications, the same manager: ownership changes hands, but the hand that takes over the screen does not.

The method has three stages, and it has been repeated in every case:

Stage	Can Holding (2025)	TELE1 (2025)	Halk TV (2026)
Point of entry	A financial investigation into the capital owner	An investigation into the editor-in-chief	A financial investigation into the capital owner
Legal instrument	Seizure of the companies, TMSF trustee	TMSF trustee	Seizure of the companies, TMSF trustee
Who takes over the screen	İbrahim Paşalı (Can Media)	İbrahim Paşalı	İbrahim Paşalı
Effect on the newsroom	A change in editorial line, resignations	The end of opposition broadcasting	The live broadcast stopped; old programme reruns on screen
Final stop	—	Put up for sale	Not yet clear

Note: in none of them is there a ruling saying "this channel's broadcasts are a crime." The content of the broadcasts is never put up for debate. Because if broadcast content were debated, press freedom, Article 28 of the Constitution and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights would come into play. If ownership is debated, only commercial law and criminal procedure are discussed. Censorship is carried out not as censorship, but as corporate management.

A Class Reading: The Boss's File, the Workers' Bill

Now we come to the heart of the article. The liberal framework reads this event as "an attack on press freedom". That is true. But it is incomplete. Let us ask three questions: In whose hands? Under whose control? For whose benefit?

In whose hands: the ownership problem of the opposition media

Halk TV was the television screen of Turkey's main opposition line. The channel, which began broadcasting in 2005, had brought the 2013 Gezi resistance to a wide audience through its live coverage; Cafer Mahiroğlu bought it in 2020 (Turkish Minute). That screen was the property of a capital owner. According to the prosecution's allegations, part of that capital owner's wealth had grown through companies linked to tenders of municipalities run by the opposition.

The court will say whether the allegations are true. But the structure is visible regardless of the allegations: the bourgeois opposition's media was fed by the economic circle of the bourgeois opposition's local power. This is not a moral problem; it is the ordinary way media are financed in a capitalist society. If pro-government media are in the hands of holding companies that grew on public tenders, opposition media rely on the capital around the municipalities the opposition runs. Both are different teams in the same game, played by the same rules.

The result is this: a newsroom that relies on capital is only as secure as its owner's file. When an investigation is opened into the boss, the newsroom is taken into custody along with him. That is exactly what Halk TV went through this morning.

Under whose control: a change of ownership is a change of editorial line

The link between ownership and editorial line in the media has never looked as naked in this country as it does now. We all watched how Habertürk's line changed after a trustee was appointed to Can Holding. TELE1's opposition broadcasting ended with the trustee.

It is worth recalling here Marx's observation in The German Ideology: the class that has the means of material production at its disposal also has control over the means of mental production. In Turkey today this principle operates through a criminal judgeship of peace ruling and a TMSF appointment, within hours, not weeks. When the ownership of a channel changes hands, what that channel will say changes hands too. Neither the reader, nor the viewer, nor the journalist who made the news has any say in between.

The overall picture confirms this. In Reporters Without Borders' (RSF) 2026 World Press Freedom Index, Turkey ranks 163rd out of 180 countries, down from 159th in 2025. According to RSF, 90 per cent of national media are under government control (Turkish Minute). Halk TV was one of the most-watched screens in the remaining slice.

For whose benefit: who pays the bill?

Now let us look behind the camera.

At Halk TV it is not only the faces on screen who work. There are camera operators, editors, the control-room crew, technical staff, producers, reporters, video editors, security and cleaning workers. The statement issued today by DİSK Basın-İş, the press union affiliated to the DİSK confederation, reminded us of exactly this: the decision directly targets the sweat, jobs and futures of hundreds of press workers, "from the kitchen to the screen" (Cumhuriyet, GazeteKalem, both in Turkish).

The boss's account is alleged to have seen a billion lira flowing in and out. Whether this month's wages will be paid into those workers' accounts is unclear.

And the bill is not paid in wages alone. Today Halk TV's reporter cannot do her job on the most important day of the trial she has followed for 97 days. Hilmi Hacaloğlu summed up the position of the journalists who gathered outside the building for their colleagues: "Sadly, amid such a crowd, journalism is experiencing loneliness." On the same pavement, one citizen turned their anger on the opposition: "I did not come to protest the government; I came to protest the opposition" (Medyascope live, in Turkish). One citizen's words do not prove a trend; but they clearly point to the gap between the abundance of statements and the loneliness on the ground.

This is exactly where the lesson of TELE1 lies. When the TMSF put TELE1 up for sale, the tender specification contained no payment commitment securing the employees' back pay, severance and employment rights. In other words, the channel would be sold and the claims would be left hanging. A group of employees filed a lawsuit at the Istanbul 11th Administrative Court, and the TMSF had to halt the tender (Karar, in Turkish).

This looks like a small event. It is not. For a whole year, politicians' statements, press organisations' declarations and international reports could not stop the sale of TELE1. What stopped the sale was a lawsuit the workers filed for their own claims. When press freedom is defended as an abstract principle, it does not bind the other side; when it is defended as a concrete claim, a concrete right, a concrete lawsuit, it can stop a change of ownership.

The official account	A class reading
This is a corruption investigation; it has nothing to do with the press	The investigation targets the boss, but the broadcast ban is applied to the newsroom
The court seized the companies; it did not interfere with the broadcast	What stopped the broadcast was the trustee that took over the company's management; censorship in the guise of a corporate act
The TMSF manages on behalf of the public	The TMSF is a de facto media group that has run three major channels in a year
A trustee is a neutral administrator	The trustee who arrived at Halk TV is the same man previously appointed to Can Media and TELE1
The figures show the scale of the crime	"Transaction volume" and "money traffic" are not the same thing; a big number is not evidence
Employees' rights will be protected	The TELE1 sale specification contained no employee claims; protection came through a lawsuit
The opposition media is independent	The opposition media is also a capital owner's property, and only as secure as his file
A trustee is a temporary measure	At Can Holding the line changed, at TELE1 the channel was put up for sale; what is temporary is independence

Our Position: We Defend Not the Boss, but the Law and Labour

Let us be clear at this point, because we will hear this question from our comrades: "Are we defending a capital owner?"

No.

We are not defending Cafer Mahiroğlu. We want the allegations against him to be assessed by an independent judiciary in a fair trial; the presumption of innocence applies to him too, but so does being tried.
Nor are we defending Halk TV's editorial line. Halk TV was the screen not of the working class but of the bourgeois opposition. It was a screen that talked more about intra-party fights than strikes, more about congress calculations than workplace deaths. We say this today, and we said it yesterday.
But this is what we defend: a boss's criminal file cannot be grounds for silencing a newsroom. If the investigation targets a person, the sanction must target that person. The jobs of hundreds of workers, the right of millions to receive news and the fate of an archive cannot be held hostage to a tender file.

TKP General Secretary Kemal Okuyan answered the same question today in his own way: "Under these conditions, we invite those who begin with 'but its boss…' to the struggle for a Turkey without bosses!" (halktv.com.tr round-up, in Turkish). Separating the boss's file from the newsroom's fate does not acquit the boss; on the contrary, it is the first step in questioning the order that ties the news to the boss.

The principle we set out in our Tayfun Kahraman article applies here too: we are not defending the person, but everyone needs the law. The method applied today to a bourgeois opposition channel can be applied tomorrow to a union newspaper, a local news site, a workers' bulletin. The law of expansion we showed in our article From Obscenity to National Security holds as true for television channels as it does for social media accounts: once a tool is normalised, the category expands. Proof came the same morning: hours after Halk TV was blacked out, access to the 582,000-follower official X account of TİP, a socialist party represented in parliament, was also blocked under Article 8/A (Cumhuriyet, in Turkish).

What Can Be Done? Concrete Tasks

Put Halk TV workers' rights on record now. Wage, seniority, notice and overtime claims; contracts and payslips. The TELE1 experience showed that employees' claims are not automatically protected during a trusteeship. These documents are the basis for any future objection to a sale specification.
Put union membership for media workers on the agenda. The only guarantee a newsroom has that is independent of its boss is its organised workforce. Membership of organisations such as DİSK Basın-İş and TGS (the Journalists' Union of Turkey) is the difference, on the morning a trustee arrives, between individual helplessness and a collective claim to rights.
Monitor the media assets run by the TMSF. Which channel, on what date, on what grounds, under whose management, put up for sale at what price? This is a public record and should be kept systematically. Keeping records is the most resilient thing one can do while the list grows longer.
Protect the archive. The news, documentaries and programmes Halk TV broadcast over the years are a social memory. Archiving publicly broadcast content by lawful means is a safeguard against its deletion during the trusteeship. For computing workers this is a direct task.
Defend press freedom in the language of labour. When "press freedom" stays abstract, it binds no one. When it is put as "this many workers' jobs, this many viewers' right to receive news, these claims", it becomes a concrete struggle for rights.
Do not make solidarity conditional on category. You may not like Halk TV's line; we often did not either. But staying silent in the face of the method prepares the method for its next target.
Show solidarity on the ground. The journalists who gathered outside Halk TV today said they felt alone amid the crowd. Sharing a statement is easy; being present outside a newsroom, in a courtroom or at a union meeting is what breaks that loneliness.
Build your own communication infrastructure. The voice of a union, an association or a local outlet should not be in the hands of a single boss or a single platform. Cooperative media, subscriber-supported publishing, outlets with their own domain and their own server are the ones that do not fall silent along with a capital owner's file.

Dear Young Comrades,

This morning a television channel went dark. In the news you will read it as "a trustee for Halk TV". But what happened behind the screen was that the question of who owns the news in this country was answered once again.

The news does not belong to those who make it. Nor does it belong to those who watch it. The news belongs to whoever holds the title deed to the newsroom. While the title deed is in a capital owner's hands, the news is only as secure as his file. When the title deed passes to the TMSF, the news becomes the voice of whoever appoints the TMSF.

What will break this cycle is not finding a better boss. It is the organised power of those who make the news, and common ownership of the news. The sale that TELE1's workers stopped with a lawsuit is a small but real rehearsal of this.

Today a reporter's desk in Silivri stood empty; in Zeytinburnu, journalists were left alone amid the crowd. What will fill these gaps is not statements but organised solidarity.

A channel can be blacked out. An organised news worker is not so easily blacked out.

Knowledge belongs to everyone.