Third wave of corruption at Yunus Emre Institute... Minister's husband and MHP's Yalçın's son back in the spotlight

There are new and significant developments in the investigation and lawsuits regarding the allegations of 400 million lira in corruption through fake invoices at the Yunus Emre Institute, affiliated with the Yunus Emre Foundation, which was brought to public attention by imprisoned journalist İsmail Arı.

Let's start with the most recent news. It has emerged that a third wave of operations was carried out in recent days, with many people detained and arrested. However, due to a confidentiality order in the main investigation, the identities of those arrested have not been disclosed.

The second development: Enes Ateş, the son of the former president of the Yunus Emre Institute, Prof. Dr. Şeref Ateş, who was a fugitive during the first wave of operations, and many other institution employees had been arrested. These individuals were released in recent days under judicial control measures, including a travel ban, as their detention period approached one year.

Disorderly Conduct

Now, let us recall the background of the investigation and the lawsuits filed.

Following the outbreak of the corruption scandal, Rahmi Göktaş, the husband of Minister of Family and Social Services Mahinur Göktaş, who was a Vice President at the Yunus Emre Institute, and Kutalmış Yalçın, the son of MHP Deputy Chairman Semih Yalçın, resigned.

It was understood that the former president, Prof. Dr. Şeref Ateş, who was recently dismissed by Minister of Culture and Tourism Mehmet Nuri Ersoy, had fled to Germany. Ateş, who returned to the country last July, “breach of trust due to service” and “laundering assets derived from crime” were arrested on charges of.

After the cases of those arrested in the first and second waves of operations were heard separately for a while, a decision was made to merge them.

The greatest wish of journalist İsmail Arı, who is still in Sincan Prison along with those arrested in the case in question, was to follow this trial.

Since he is in prison, I followed the second hearing held the other day after the merger.

What happened in the case with a total of 37 defendants, 10 of whom are in custody and several of whom are fugitives?

A.G., who started working as a tea server in 2014, was later assigned to various administrative tasks, and has been a warehouse supervisor since 2016, was heard as a witness.

The presiding judge and defense attorneys asked A.G., who was appointed as a warehouse manager without any training in the field, whether all products purchased by the institution actually arrived at the warehouse and whether they were all properly recorded.

A.G. replied: "I kept records of the purchases that arrived at the warehouse and that I saw... Some companies would deliver directly to the cargo... Transactions were processed according to the invoices received... It was stated that the product was received after it was purchased, and then it was entered into the records... We kept the records manually... There were items I did not see but entered into the records upon the instruction of the department head." giving such answers.

Upon subsequent questions, he then stated, "that he did not make entries based on instructions" When his previous answer was brought to his attention, he replied, "I don't remember." he said.

A.G., again in response to questions, stated that "there was no possibility to determine how much goods entered and left the warehouses." When asked whether the new management had changed this system, he merely replied, "a general inventory was conducted."

During A.G.'s interrogation, the question of whether he had provided a written statement to the inspectors of the General Directorate of Foundations also came up. A defense attorney asked why A.G.'s statement was taken in this manner when no one else's written statement was taken, and whether the signature at the bottom belonged to him. A.G. first said "No," then stated that he had provided a one-page declaration and submitted it to the judge.

When the lawyer explained that he asked this question because A.G. had previously claimed that the signature on some records did not belong to him, that he had signed under pressure from the Department Head, and that no such written statements were taken from other individuals, the Judge, "That should be asked to the inspectors. How would the man know?" he said.

Prof. Dr. Şeref Ateş, the former president of the Yunus Emre Institute, who connected to the hearing via SEGBİS from Sincan Prison, explained that inspectors from the General Directorate of Foundations came to the building in Ulus for an inspection after the 2023 earthquake but did not ask anything about the warehouses, and then, "The president who came after I left terminated the employment of 60 people. They were told, 'Either you speak against them, or you go to prison.' Even though no written statement was taken from us, why was a written statement taken from you?" he asked.

The judge replied that the read portion of A.G.'s written statement was consistent with what he had said, while the prosecutor stated that Ateş's question was leading in nature.

Şeref Ateş, "For example, he said that the signature on the purchase of the drawer lock did not belong to him." Upon being asked, A.G. stated that he did not remember.

The second witness heard at the hearing was A.D., a board member of the cargo company that the foundation worked with, particularly for shipments abroad. Explaining that they were effectively the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' cargo company, that the products to be sent by the foundation came through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, that they delivered them to the consulates, and that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs knew the contents, A.D. stated that the annual cargo cost was 1 million dollars. When asked by the defendants and their lawyers, “It is alleged that no products were purchased at all. Would products that were not purchased be shipped? Did you receive any feedback from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs such as ‘The products did not arrive or arrived incomplete’?” he replied, “No.”

Who Are the Foundation's Water Bills Going To?

The defendants and their lawyers brought up other quite remarkable allegations; however, for now, we will only convey the defense of former president Şeref Ateş.

Claiming that warehouse manager A.G.'s testimony revealed a serious level of deception and manipulation, Ateş summarized his points as follows:

“Two inspectors from the General Directorate of Foundations conducted an inspection for 3 months in 2023. However, the Ministry misled the justice system and made an official notification stating, ‘No inspection was conducted.’ Where do they get the courage to write such a misleading letter? If there were any irregularities, the inspectors would have seen them, or the Minister would not have signed my appointment in September 2023. In his testimony, A.G. stated that they are still working in the same manner. Then why is the same method being continued? In fact, if an audit were to be conducted now, it would be seen that they are working in the same way. Look, the foundation's water bills are still coming to me via the internet address. There is no problem, let them come; but this is how it has to be to work abroad. For justice to be served, those two inspectors, whose names are known and who are citizens of the Republic of Turkey, must come to court. Such a cover-up cannot be done in any country. Even though 50 people are being tried, we were only able to get A.G., who is at the lowest level, to appear.”

Is the Ministry Protecting Those Two Names?

Continuing his defense, Şeref Ateş brought up the names of Rahmi Göktaş and Kutalmış Yalçın and made the following allegations:

“I am not the only one at the foundation; there are 41 administrators. All of them have their signatures on the decisions. Yet, not even one of them was summoned. However, the names of Rahmi Göktaş and Kutalmış Yalçın are even in the ministry's audit reports. No payments can be made without their signatures. All departments report to them, but you do not summon them for testimony. Is their testimony less important than A.G.'s testimony? This justice is just... Anyway, I am keeping silent to avoid committing a second crime. The state has conducted an audit at the foundation, but it is being denied. The state's judiciary is not judging impartially. The cargo company provides clear figures. If an institution pays 1 million dollars in cargo fees, it presumably puts 1 million dollars worth of materials inside. It goes to the consulates. If the materials are not arriving, it should be reported. The foundation administrators are accusing us by obscuring all the records. The Inspection Board's report is also biased and misleading. Two inspectors and two vice presidents must absolutely come. Fine, you don't trust me, the staff, the companies, or the company the Ministry of Foreign Affairs works with; then ask the vice presidents whom the Ministry is protecting.”

Şeref Ateş's lawyer also stated that his client is being treated as if the foundation were a one-man company and that he has not been released for nearly a year on the grounds of a “flight risk,” despite the fact that he bought his own ticket and came of his own free will, adding, “Public institutions are lying and forging documents. Everyone is playing the three monkeys.”

Allegation of “Influenced Will”

One of the defense lawyers said the following regarding Rahmi Göktaş and Kutalmış Yalçın:

“It is not a matter of ‘let them come so we can share the responsibility.’ They are present in the decision-making mechanisms, in the purchasing and payment stages. Mr. Rahmi's characteristic is this: he became a Vice President after working in this institution for years. He knows how the process works.”

Another lawyer emphasized that the Inspection Board report states for these two names that “their will was influenced,” saying, “Were their statements taken as witnesses? We want to at least ask them this,” while another claimed that these individuals, who are requested to be heard as witnesses, should actually be defendants.

At the end of the hearing, the prosecutor, arguing that "the Turkish nation's historical perception of foundations was distorted and destroyed to obtain benefits, and public order was irreparably damaged," requested the continuation of the detention of the jailed defendants and the judicial control measures for the non-detained defendants, while leaving the requests for hearing witnesses to the court's discretion.

The judge decided to evaluate the requests for hearing witnesses in the later stages, to request the report on whether an inspection was conducted in 2023, and to continue the detention of the jailed defendants and the judicial control measures for the non-detained defendants, adjourning the hearing until July.

In short; it is understood that the case will continue to branch out... With the hope that İsmail Arı, whom we expect to be released at his hearing on June 5, will follow the rest from here on!..

Müyesser YILDIZ

May 22, 2026