İsmail Arı and an indictment like a detective novel

In the last month alone, two of our colleagues who were simply doing journalism have been arrested. Alican Uludağ, an expert in the field of judiciary, was detained at his home on February 19 in front of his children and hastily taken to Istanbul on charges of “publicly insulting the President, publicly disseminating misleading information to the public, and degrading the institutions of the state.” The next day, he was arrested for “insulting the President.” İsmail Arı, who has made a name for himself with his investigative reports on corruption, was detained on the evening of the second day of the holiday in Tokat, where he had gone to celebrate with his family, brought to Ankara after an overnight journey, and arrested on charges of “publicly disseminating misleading information to the public.”

The “evidence of crime” presented to İsmail Arı, whom the prosecutor referred for arrest without even bothering to take his statement, included a video he shot three months ago about foundations and a photo of the Minister of Culture and Tourism, to whom the Yunus Emre Foundation is affiliated, in a post about corruption within that foundation.

Let us recall that after Arı’s reports on the corruption at the Yunus Emre Foundation, the former President Şeref Ateş and numerous foundation employees were arrested and lawsuits were filed against them; meanwhile, the spouses of Family Minister Mahinur Göktaş and MHP member Semih Yalçın, who were vice presidents at the foundation, resigned from these posts, and Arı won the Uğur Mumcu Investigative Journalism Award for these very reports.

It is a bizarre irony that currently, both İsmail Arı and the Yunus Emre Foundation executives who were arrested due to his reports are in the same prison in Sincan!..

Another issue: Not a single one of the media executives who frequently meet with Minister of Justice Akın Gürlek asked why either Alican Uludağ or İsmail Arı were arrested. Let us assume they could not deal with these matters because they had more important issues or responsibilities. When I heard that Justice Minister Gürlek had received judicial reporters for the holiday, I thought, “At least as press workers who have been walking the same corridors for years, they must have asked.” I learned that the holiday greeting took place on the condition that no questions be asked!..

DEVELOPMENTS IN THE BORA KAPLAN CASE

Although not among the “evidence of crime,” two reports İsmail Arı made before his arrest were about the Bora Kaplan case. For this reason, we must first summarize the Bora Kaplan case, in which he was sentenced to 68 years in prison on charges of being the leader of a criminal organization.

It will be remembered that the operation against Bora Kaplan soon began to be discussed through the relationships in the mafia-politics-judiciary triangle. While the operation was linked to the power struggle between the teams of Süleyman Soylu and Ali Yerlikaya, both former Ministers of Interior, the connections of Bora Kaplan with Yüksel Kocaman, the then-Chief Public Prosecutor of Ankara and current member of the Court of Cassation, also came to the agenda.

The event evolved into something completely different after Serdar Sertçelik, both the number two defendant in the case and the secret witness codenamed M7, made statements after fleeing abroad, alleging that the police who carried out the Bora Kaplan operation wanted him to include the names of certain politicians in his testimony. After Devlet Bahçeli, the leader of the MHP and partner of the People's Alliance, characterized Sertçelik’s allegations as a “coup” against the MHP, AKP, the People's Alliance, and Turkey, the police officers were arrested this time.

Ultimately, the Board of Presidents of the Criminal Chambers of the Regional Court of Justice decided to overturn part of the sentences given in the Bora Kaplan case and decided to merge both the cases separated regarding Serdar Sertçelik, who was a fugitive at the time, and the case in which the police were tried with the main case. While it was expected that Bora Kaplan, who is stated to be the leader of the criminal organization, his men, and the police who conducted the operation against them would be tried together in this case, which is set to begin on April 6, another surprise development occurred.

THE STORY OF FINDING THE FOUND PHONE

The surprise development was this:

On September 12, a phone and a note were found in a bag left at the door of the office of Recep Öksüz, the lawyer for Şevket Demircan, the then-Deputy Branch Manager of the Organized Crime Bureau (KOM) who took part in the Bora Kaplan operation. However, an application was made to the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office regarding the phone in question 12 days later, on September 24; it was delivered on September 26. Subsequently, a new investigation was launched, and some names were detained and arrested.

When it began to be discussed during that process that the phone belonged to Serdar Sertçelik and was sent by him, Sertçelik, who made a statement from Hungary where he was a fugitive, said, “The phone is not mine, I did not send it.” Later, in his statement to the Prosecutor’s Office when he came to Turkey of his own volition on January 31, he claimed that the WhatsApp correspondence on the found phone, which was stated to have taken place between himself and Bora Kaplan’s fugitive lawyer Cengiz Haliç, regarding “leaking Bora Kaplan’s testimony to Cevheri Güven and making a statement against the police to Erk Acarer,” was manipulated and montaged, and that M.Ö., whose fingerprints were on the bag, was someone close to the Police Department.

As for the research and investigation process regarding how the phone was found;

The Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office tasked the Ankara Provincial Gendarmerie KOM Branch Directorate “to investigate whether the mobile phone and SIM card, which have the quality of electronic evidence, were left at the law firm on September 12; and if so, by whom.” Meanwhile, the phone was sent to the Gendarmerie Criminal Laboratory for body and fingerprint examination.

On September 30, Gendarmerie KOM teams first looked at the security camera recordings of the law firm where the phone was left and the 5-story building where the office is located. It was understood that there was a security camera on the floor where the office is located, but it was not working. It was determined that there was no recording from September 12 because the security camera of a business on the second floor of the building records for 15 days, and likewise, there was no security camera seeing the apartment entrance and its surroundings. While the building attendant said that he had no knowledge or observation regarding the incident, that the building entrance door was closed around 19:00 in the evening and opened around 07:00 in the morning, and that the businesses and residents in the building opened and closed the door with keys and automatics, it was learned that the security camera of the opposite apartment, which sees this entrance door, had not been working for about 3 months. In short, no footage was reached regarding who left that phone and when.

On November 14, the testimony of Ü.D., who works at the law firm and was the first to find the phone, was taken as a witness. Ü.D. summarized the following:

“On September 12, I came to the workplace alone around 08:45 - 09:00 to open our office. When I arrived, I saw a bag hanging on the door of the workplace. It was hanging on the door by its handle. Since time has passed, I don't remember its color exactly, but it was not a grocery bag. When I looked into the bag, I saw a paper and a wrapped object. I learned later from the conversations that the wrapped object was a phone. I did not read the note. I took the bag and left it on the lawyer’s desk. I did not check the inside. When the lawyer came to the office around 09:30, I asked, ‘Your bag has arrived, is it yours?’ He said, ‘What is that?’ Later, he checked the inside of the bag. We have had cases where we found cargo and bags at the door like this. Since I didn't know what was in the bag, I thought of it as a bag that came this way. I don't remember at the moment whether Şevket (Demircan) Bey and Murat (Çelik) Bey came that day.”

In the expert report of the Gendarmerie Criminal Laboratory Directorate dated November 13, which was delivered to the Prosecutor’s Office on the same day, it was reported that fingerprints of M.Ö. and Şevket Demircan were found on the bag, in addition to public officials who touched it due to their duties.

The Prosecutor’s Office concluded that “considering the statement of witness Ü.D. and the document prepared by the complainants (police officers), it is an expected phenomenon that Şevket Demircan’s fingerprints would appear,” and decided to take M.Ö.’s statement as a witness.

However, on January 26, the statements of Şevket Demircan and former Ankara Deputy Police Chief Murat Çelik were taken, in addition to M.Ö.

The three individuals summarized the following:

Şevket Demircan: “On September 12, I was on rest because I had a back problem and was on medical leave, I was at home. My lawyer called me and said, ‘There is an issue, we need to meet urgently.’ We did not discuss the content on the phone. Upon this, I went directly to the lawyer’s office. He showed me the bag. There was a note inside the bag. As far as I remember, there was a phrase in the note to the effect of ‘this phone will ensure the truth comes out.’ It was a long sentence. This note has already been delivered to the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office. While at the office, we also called Murat Çelik. He was out of Ankara. We said it was an important issue. He asked what the issue was. I said, ‘There is something related to our file, but we don't fully understand it either, you need to come.’ He said he was in Antalya, on vacation with his family, and that he couldn't come at that moment because he had paid for the hotel. If I remember correctly, he came to Ankara on September 14. We consulted all together about the phone. Since it was thought that this phone could have been sent by the criminal organization for the purpose of setting a trap, the issue of whether the phone was real was investigated to eliminate these hesitations. After it was concluded that the phone was real and the correspondence was original, an application was made to the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office with a petition on September 24, and it was requested that the Prosecutor’s Office also investigate this matter.”

Murat Çelik: “On September 12, when the phone was left, I was on vacation with my family in Antalya. Therefore, I have no observation regarding the moment it was left. However, I became aware of it by being called on the phone by Şevket Demircan. He said on the phone that the issue was important and that we needed to meet face to face. The content was not mentioned. When I came to Ankara after my vacation, I became aware that the phone and the note had been left. Since we were exposed to some baseless accusations that would constitute slander regarding the armed criminal organization founded by Bora Kaplan, we were suspicious of this situation at first. Since there was no evidence against us in the ongoing trials and investigation, we thought that the organization might have resorted to a game to save itself from the threat of punishment. We consulted the matter in depth. We wanted to be sure of the reality of the phone. Although we reached a strong conviction that the phone was real, we decided to deliver the phone to the prosecutor’s office to be subject to examination and to be investigated in more detail, in order for public authorities to conduct research on this matter and for the material truth to be revealed with all its reality. Although it carried the quality of absolute evidence that we did not commit the crimes related to the ongoing trials against us, we delivered the phone in accordance with the purpose we mentioned above, and although it constituted evidence in our favor regarding the content, we did not present these in court until the reality was revealed by the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office.”

M.Ö. : “On Tuesday evening, September 23, while I was sitting in my office, Lawyer Recep Öksüz called from my mobile phone. Police Chief Murat Çelik was with him, they said, ‘If you are available, we will come to you to have a coffee.’ About 15-20 minutes later, they came to my office. They came as three people, together with a person named Şevket Demircan, whom I later learned was a Police Chief and whom I met there for the first time. I have known Lawyer Recep Öksüz for 4-5 years and Murat Çelik for 20 years. They are my friends. When they came to my office, they said, ‘My friend, we found evidence, we will give this to the prosecutor’s office. We wrote our report, but we wrote a Turkish ID number incorrectly in the report, we need a computer. Can we use yours?’ While saying this, they had brought a bag that I don't remember exactly now and put it on the table, and I instinctively reached out and said, ‘What is this?’ When they said that this was the evidence they mentioned and would deliver, I immediately pulled my hand back and did not touch it again. I did not look at what was inside the bag. Recep Bey was making corrections to the report they wrote on the computer. He finished his work, took the printout in my office, drank their coffee, and left. I do not know the person named Serdar Sertçelik. We have never met face to face, I have no acquaintance. I only heard his name when I watched the videos that were in the press and related to this investigation.”

The result? In the new indictment prepared on this subject and recently sent to the 32nd High Criminal Court, which hears the case where Bora Kaplan and the police will be tried together as defendants, and which was accepted, it was stated as follows:

“It is concluded that the bag containing the mobile phone, SIM card, and note paper subject to the investigation was left at the law firm by M.Ö. or a third person, and that the mobile phone was sent by M.Ö. or a third person with the knowledge of Serdar Sertçelik...”

However, no lawsuit has been filed against M.Ö. so far.

WHAT WAS FOUND ON THE FOUND PHONE?

In this new indictment of the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office, which concluded that the phone and correspondence definitely belonged to Serdar Sertçelik and Lawyer Cengiz Haliç, and that “it was aimed to open an investigation against police officers and to arrest police officers with a plan designed within the framework of the activities of the armed criminal organization in order to escape the threat of punishment in the case heard at the Ankara 32nd High Criminal Court,” almost all correspondence was included with its date and time, by having the found phone and SIM card examined separately by a forensic informatics expert, the Ankara Police, and the Gendarmerie Cybercrime Combating Directorates. In addition, some statements in the Bora Kaplan case at those dates and developments that took place in that period were placed next to them, and it was emphasized that these also revealed the “truthfulness” of those correspondences.

İSMAİL ARI IS A ''HYPOCRITE''!..

An executive of the pro-government media, whose name is not necessary, wrote the following the day after İsmail Arı was arrested, based on the last two reports Arı made regarding this indictment - even though no accusation was directed against him regarding these:

“He is conducting perception operations with desk-based news, such as ‘an MHP name has been added to the mafia bosses’ investigations’... Is this journalism: ‘There is an allegation in the correspondence of the Ayhan Bora Kaplan gang leaders that they had expressions added in their favor to Bahçeli’s speech text at the MHP group meeting!’ You hypocrite... If the mafia boss has the power to influence the MHP group speech, and if the MHP is so inclined and warm to this name, why is that man in prison right now? Come out and say it, and I will oppose your detention... The mafia boss claiming that he had a sentence added to the MHP group meeting speech in his favor to show off to the men around him... You hypocrites who accept no one above you in twisting the truth... Aren't you the ones who say that no one can be accused with a secret witness? Aren't you the ones who say that no one can be accused with the testimonies of people who have committed crimes themselves?”

CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING BAHÇELİ’S SPEECH

Are those reports allegations invented by İsmail Arı, is that so? Let us explain them one by one and clearly.

MHP Leader Devlet Bahçeli declared the police who conducted the Bora Kaplan operation as “coup plotters” in his group speech on May 14, 2024, based on the allegations brought to the agenda by Serdar Sertçelik while he was a fugitive:

“It is seen that the ignoble and crypto gangs, which have gathered in the internal occupation front these days and at the same time nested within the police and judiciary, are making calculations on Turkey again... We are following all those who use puppets and hide behind the curtain. We are aware of all the illegal connection and relationship networks that are happening. A conspiracy that cannot be passed over with the suspension of a few police chiefs is in motion; indeed, the target is the MHP, the AK Party, the People's Alliance, and ultimately Turkey. If we bow down to those who plan a repeat of the 17-25 police and judiciary-partnered coup attempt, may our stature collapse, if we turn a blind eye, may our eyes go out, if we say okay, may our blood dry up. Whoever protects and serves the conspiracy to smear honorable names with secret witness statements and the search to overshadow the millet’s will that has manifested is a traitor, a FETÖ member, and the extensions of the police, judiciary, and media must be crushed. Let’s see how a clean hands operation is done; showing it to all of them and dragging them all inside is a matter of existence and honor for the state of law.”

Just one day after this speech, the police were detained and arrested.

So, what did İsmail Arı write after the announcement of the additional indictment regarding the found phone?

He reported the following correspondence, which was included in the report of the Ankara Provincial Gendarmerie Command Cybercrime Combating Branch Directorate but not included in the indictment, which is stated to have taken place between Lawyer Cengiz Haliç and Serdar Sertçelik:

- On April 26, 2024, Sertçelik mentions to Haliç a judge “who works in Ankara and whom he stated is from Adıyaman.” Haliç says, “the judge has sources of income, he should not talk about him”...

- On May 4, 2024, Haliç informs Sertçelik in a message he sent; “Sabah newspaper will report on the Ayhan Bora Kaplan operation by characterizing it as a ‘coup’.” After this message, it is seen that Sabah published news with headlines such as “Ayhan Bora Kaplan criminal organization and coup attempt allegation shook Turkey: We are facing a new FETÖ trouble” and “Here is the newest information on the dirty conspiracy”...

- On May 13, 2024, Haliç sends a message to Sertçelik saying, “The job will explode at the MHP group meeting tomorrow, Serdar. The house search etc. was started today. Necmi will send the speech text for tomorrow in a bit. Let it come to me, I will send it to you too... İzzet U. is about to complete the text. He will squeeze it in between.” Sertçelik says, “Brother, it won't be a problem, right? Also, let’s not get the MHP members into trouble for us.” Haliç replies, “It wasn't a problem while eating the money, it won't be now either. Brother, he brought down a big one on Necmi.”

- On the same day, in another message Haliç sent, he alleges, “V. Chief Prosecutor had said let’s go from the coup. To İzzet U. He said ‘Let the instruction come from the Chairman.’ He said ‘he will press all the buttons at the group meeting, you will see.’ Y. didn't eat the money alone, if he doesn't do it, the sex tapes will explode.” In the continuation of the messages, it is seen that Haliç sent Sertçelik a photo of a text that is estimated to be Bahçeli’s speech text, and Sertçelik reacted by saying, “Will Bahçeli say these? He won't, I swear by God. He says secret witness.” Haliç replies, “They said listen tomorrow morning. It is clear that they have darkened their eyes. There is a group meeting tomorrow morning. V. Chief Prosecutor will press the button when he receives the message.”

The news published on the morning of the day İsmail Arı was detained was as follows:

“An MHP name entered the file with a mobile phone examined in the Ayhan Bora Kaplan criminal organization case. The file of Necmi Y., former Ankara Ülkü Ocakları President and former MHP MYK Member, was separated for a new investigation to be conducted.”

If these are “desk-based news,” “perception operation,” and “hypocrisy,” why was no accusation directed against İsmail Arı for those reports? While there has been no statement from the MHP even though 5 days have passed since the news, what is the reason for this journalist (!) being more royalist than the king?

SERDAR SERTÇELİK: ''I DID NOT WANT TO BE A CONFESSOR''

Let us convey another development that came to the agenda while İsmail Arı was in custody.

Both Arı and Saygı Öztürk wrote that Sertçelik wanted to benefit from effective remorse, that his request regarding this was recorded in the Prosecutor’s Office, and that Sertçelik said, “It is true that I was made a secret witness by Lawyer Cengiz Haliç.”, “I said the names of the politicians upon the request of Lawyer Haliç. Chief Şevket is innocent.”

However, Sertçelik’s lawyers Ilgaz Teziş and Alper Ekici stated that they met with Sertçelik, that these allegations were absolutely not true, and that they decided to file a criminal complaint, saying, “We were present in all his statements. When the prosecutor said, ‘If you become a confessor, I will not refer you for arrest,’ he did not accept this.”

WHOSE HAND IS IN WHOSE POCKET IS UNKNOWN

Returning to this additional indictment regarding the found phone; let us suffice with asking the following for now:

- While all of the correspondence is accepted as true, was it not included in the indictment because it was believed that the correspondence regarding Bahçeli’s group speech was unreal, or because it contained names estimated to be certain members of the judiciary and politicians?

- Who are the “judge from Adıyaman,” “Chief Prosecutor V,” and “İzzet U.” mentioned in the correspondence, and is there a separate investigation being conducted regarding them?

- Why did the name of the Ankara Deputy Chief Public Prosecutor, and not the prosecutor who conducted the investigation of the main Bora Kaplan case and prepared its indictment and who conducted this new investigation from beginning to end - including taking Serdar Sertçelik’s statement - appear under the new indictment? Was the prosecutor removed from the investigation at the last moment due to some parts related to the MHP during Sertçelik’s statement, or was it desired that it not come to the agenda more?

In short; as journalist Tolga Şardan said, there is an “investigation that should be a lesson in police academies,” and it is understood that the Bora Kaplan case will branch out and grow even more in the context of the “mafia-judiciary-politics” triangle...

If an extraordinary development does not occur, a grave picture, the likes of which have never been seen before, will emerge in the case that will begin to be heard on April 6: both Bora Kaplan and secret witness Serdar Sertçelik, as well as the police who conducted the operation, will sit in the defendant’s chair together. In addition, the police will also be complainants!..