The indictment prepared as part of the investigation into festival and organization tenders conducted through ANSET, a subsidiary of the Antalya Metropolitan Municipality, has brought striking allegations regarding the municipality's tender processes and oversight mechanisms to the agenda. According to expert reports included in the file, a public loss of 45 million 386 thousand TL in principal was calculated for organization procurements between 2020 and 2025; it was stated that the total loss, including commercial interest, reached 113 million 426 thousand 440 TL.
The indictment alleges that competition was restricted in the organization tenders for some events, including the Golden Orange Film Festival and the Yörük Turkmen Festival, that high prices were set without conducting market research, and that payments were made without documents showing that some services had been performed.
In the expert reports, the methods by which resources transferred from the municipal budget to ANSET were directed to subcontractors, the application of tender exemptions, and the weakening of competitive conditions stood out. The report specifically assessed that there were deficiencies in terms of work experience certificates, delivery records, and progress payment files in the processes related to the Yörük Turkmen Festival.
ALLEGATIONS OF PRESSURE IN OVERSIGHT
One of the notable sections of the file concerned the structure of the commissions tasked with auditing the compliance of organizations with technical specifications. The expert panel assessed that these commissions were predominantly composed of contract personnel and permanent workers, and that this situation made the audit processes vulnerable to administrative pressure.
According to the report, it became difficult for personnel with more limited job security compared to civil servants subject to the Civil Servants Law No. 657 to resist verbal instructions from senior managers within the corporate hierarchy. The experts expressed the opinion that the audit structure, formed from staff vulnerable to pressure instead of technical expertise and merit, paved the way for contractor transactions to be approved without sufficient questioning.
The indictment also included statements from some municipal employees claiming they were pressured to sign documents related to tenders. A truck driver alleged that he signed documents without knowing their contents out of fear of being fired or reassigned elsewhere. Other employees recounted that they were warned about their commission memberships during Court of Accounts audits, yet were still asked to sign.
It is emphasized that these allegations, which employees conveyed in the capacity of "witnesses," will be evaluated by the court during the trial phase. It was stated that allegations of psychological pressure and mobbing were also included in the statements given by some municipal employees in the capacity of "suspects" in the file.
SUBCONTRACTOR AND MUNICIPAL PERSONNEL ALLEGATIONS
The indictment also included the allegation that some firms that won organization tenders had municipal personnel perform a portion of the work they undertook from the municipality. In a suspect statement, it was claimed that the contractor firm's costs were reduced by using municipal resources through relationships established over digital printing and wrapping works.
In the same statement, it was alleged that some work that the firm winning the tender was supposed to do was carried out with municipal resources, and that additional income was provided for some individuals in this way. These allegations, along with other findings in the file, will be clarified at the end of the trial.
The expert report also contains assessments regarding the responsibility of senior management. The report included opinions that Muhittin Böcek, Cansel Tuncer, Aydın Nalan Borak, Vahdet Narin, and İsmail Oskay had responsibilities within the framework of their duties and authorities. It was stated that Department Head İsmail Oskay serving as both the tender decision-maker and the approving authority between 2023 and 2025 weakened the system of checks and balances.
It was determined in the file that despite warnings from the Court of Accounts, the way was paved for signing contracts by accepting some documents, and that in some organizations, records that should show that the service was performed, such as accommodation lists, flight ticket records, distribution minutes, and movable transaction documents, were not found in the progress payment files.
In the 1833-page indictment prepared as part of the investigation conducted by the Antalya Chief Public Prosecutor's Office, 55 people were charged with "rigging a tender," "bribery," "laundering assets derived from crime," and "rigging the performance of an act." The first hearing of the ANSET case is expected to be held on January 27, 2027, at the Antalya 3rd High Criminal Court.
News Source: 12punto
