Trustee for Aziz İhsan Aktaş's companies: "Why after 4 months?"

Source: News Center
CHP Deputy Chairman Gökhan Günaydın made a statement regarding the appointment of trustees to the companies of Aziz İhsan Aktaş, who was released after benefiting from effective repentance following his arrest as part of an investigation into the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality. Günaydın, He claimed that an agreement was made with Aktaş.
Arrested by the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office on charges of being a "criminal organization leader" as part of an investigation into the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IMM), Aziz İhsan Aktaş was released on house arrest and judicial control after testifying under the guise of effective remorse. His house arrest was later lifted. Trustees were appointed yesterday to all of Aktaş's companies. Aktaş's entire assets were transferred to the Savings Deposit Insurance Fund (TMSF). The CHP reacted to the appointment of trustees to his companies four months after his release, despite his statements under the guise of effective remorse prompting new operations against CHP-run municipalities.
CHP Deputy Chairman Gökhan Günaydın made the following statement in his post on the X account:
"Criminal organization leader Aziz İhsan Aktaş was released on June 4, 2025, taking advantage of 'effective repentance.' During the live broadcast, he confessed with his own words that he received tenders from 99 AKP, 27 MHP, 21 trustee municipalities, and 132 public institutions. However, it is public knowledge that operations were only carried out against some CHP municipalities... This situation alone is clear evidence that the operations were political, not legal.
The current question is this: Why were Aziz İhsan Aktaş's companies seized by the TMSF not while he was in custody, not upon his release, but four months after his release? And this was after the companies had been saved from threats of foreclosure through bankruptcy proceedings.
It's not difficult for those with even a passing knowledge of these matters to predict the positive and negative changes in the companies' balance sheets during the period in question. Add to this the fact that Aziz İhsan Aktaş will be used in the hearings following the indictment(s), and the nature of the agreement becomes clear.
The only way to save this from being an 'open secret' is for the changes in the assets and liabilities of the companies in the last year (at least) to be examined and reported by independent auditing companies and presented to the public.
If it is not presented today, it will be looked at tomorrow.
Nothing remains hidden under this sky."
BirGün