KÜHEYLAN HUKUK
SPKn m.107 and m.110, Isnats under the Scope of TCK m.282, Active Regret Account, Objection to Hand Putting and TMSF Retention
This guide was updated as of November 1, 2026, based on Capital Market Law No. 6362, Law No. 7596 and public statements by the Istanbul Public Prosecutor's Office.
The fund investigation conducted by the Istanbul Public Prosecutor's Office has reached a broad circle of suspects, ranging from portfolio management companies to brokerage institutions, public companies to public officials. According to media reports, as of 24 October 2026, the number of detainees has increased to 114; there are still measures on assets for over 100 people.
The investigation highlights market fraud (SPKn m.107), misconduct (SPKn m.110), laundering (TCK m.282), organization and bribery charges. The SEC announces the possibility of effective regret in transaction-based market fraud by paying double the interest to the Treasury. Law No. 7596, on the other hand, strengthened confiscation and TMSF registrarship, allowing its assets to be sold unanticipated as a result of the lawsuit. The investigation is ongoing, and anyone who has been processed benefits from the presumption of innocence (Constitution Art. 38/4).
19 August 2026 The Bureau of Investigation for the Financing and Laundering Crimes of Terrorism of the Attorney General's Office requested a review from the SEC in reference to Article 107 of the CMB.
19 September 2026 The first arrests took place.
25 September 2026 The SEC has begun to announce effective terms of regret in its criminal complaint decisions.
27 September 2026 Measures on assets of 45 companies and 19 funds were abolished; measures against real persons were put in place.
October 4, 2026 The Attorney General's office has requested permission to investigate the former SPK President for alleged misconduct.
20 October 2026 The Chairman of the SPK has resigned.
21 October 2026 Following a review of the shares of four publicly traded companies, a detention order was issued against 31 people.
24 October 2026 The number of prisoners reached 114.
27 October 2026 The SEC has issued a criminal complaint and ban on 51 persons due to transactions in the shares of the three companies.
31 October 2026 The investigation extended to Borsa Istanbul's top management; detention was carried out for membership in the organization and alleged bribery.
The fact that an investigation can be made of the offences described in the Capital Market Law depends on the written application of the SEC to the public prosecutor's office; the law explicitly qualifies this application as a condition of judgment (SPKn Art.115/1). If a public case is filed, the Board shall win the title of participant in the case and may appeal the decision that there is no room for prosecution (m.115/2, m.115/4).
This provision is the first point of control in defense. The CMB sets the limit on which persons, shares and period the application covers. There was a concrete example of this in the investigation: three executive assets measures apparently not involved in the CMB's criminal complaint were removed. Turkish Criminal Code crimes such as laundering, organization, bribery and qualified fraud are not subject to this requirement.
Transaction-based market fraud SPKn m.107/1 3 to 5 years in prison, fine of 5,000 to 10,000 days The judicial fine cannot be less than the benefit obtained; there is effective regret.
Information-based market fraud SPKn m.107/2 3 to 5 years in prison, fined up to 5,000 days It is necessary to benefit; no effective regrets
Quality of abuse of trust SPKn m.110/1 According to Article 155/2 of the TCK, he was sentenced to at least 3 years in prison. Covered transactions with related parties (b and c-bents); there is effective regret
Clearing assets due to crime TCK m.282 3 to 7 years in prison, fined up to 20,000 days Proposed SPKn violation and qualified fraud as preliminary offence
Organization for the purpose of committing crimes TCK m.220 Separate penalties for setting up, managing and membership Details in the Guide to "Organised Crimes and Active Regret"
The element that distinguishes transaction-based market fraud from a regular market transaction is special caste. Purchase, sale, ordering, abrogation of orders or the act of account must be done "in order to give the false or misleading impression" of the price or supply and demand of capital market instruments (m.107/1). The fact that a fund holds the same share at a high rate alone does not prove this goal; investment strategy, liquidity need, or management error can produce the same table.
• Role distinction: Fund manager, portfolio management company manager, brokerage agency employee, associated company partner and staff tasked with delivering orders cannot be put in the same bailout. It should be established by the record of who makes what decision, the chain of instruction and the investment committee; the principle of personality of penalties (constitutional article 38/7) obliges it.
• Analysis of transaction data: Cross-transactions, trades made by the same group among themselves or claims of orders not intended to occur may be tested with records at the order level.
• The nature of the CMB report: The CMB audit report is not an expert report. Expert consultation may be submitted against the interest account and method in the report (CMK Art.67/6).
• Non-crime situations: Reclamation programs, market building and price stability transactions in accordance with board regulations are not offences by law (SPKn Art. 108).
Scope Only transaction-based market fraud (m.107/1). There is no effective regret in the information-based type.
Amount It is twice the benefit that has been obtained or caused to be obtained; it cannot be less than TL 500,000. Payment is made to the Treasury.
Payment before the investigation begins Punishment is not decreed.
Payment during the investigation phase Punishment is reduced by half.
In prosecution, pay up to the verdict The penalty is reduced by one-third.
SPK application The payment is requested to be made to the Ministry of Treasury and Finance's e-investment account within 15 days from the Board decision, and the documents are forwarded to the SEC at the same time.
The account of this decision is not simple. First, it is controversial whether the condition of payment will be assessed on a person-by-person basis or file-by-file basis due to the fact that the investigation began on 19 August 2026. Second, the basis of payment is the interest calculated by the CMB and this amount must be audited independently. Third, effective remorse results only in respect of the offence m.107/1; it does not affect charges of laundering, organization or bribery in the same file and does not automatically terminate detention.
The judgment of the laundering offence itself depends on a different condition: it seeks to ensure that the crime-related values are seized before the competent authorities hear (TCC Art. 282/6). At this stage of the investigation, the area of this road has narrowed considerably.
6. Is the Optional Return in Law No. 7596 Effective Regret?
Law No. 7596 regulates the ability of those who gain above inflation from funds in liquidation or subject shares to manipulation to return such earnings on an optional basis to accounts declared by the SEC (m.4/4). According to public information, some people paid for these accounts.
The law does not directly link this extradition to a penalty or deduction; therefore, the extradition is not effective regret in the sense of Article 107/3 of the CMB. However, the perpetrator's conduct after the offence may be considered in determining the sentence and reducing the discretion (TCC Art.61, M.62). The extradition decision must be assessed in conjunction with the rest of the defense strategy; otherwise, it risks being interpreted as an admission of interest.
In the fund investigation, asset measures have often become a topic that has faster consequences for individuals than the risk of punishment. Law No. 7596 changed this field in three ways:
• Confiscation: In investigations connected with funds, the rights and receivables may be confiscated under CMK Art. 128. The CMB's report on the basis of criminal complaint counts as a report on the value derived from the crime sought in CMK Art. 128 (7596 s.K.). m.6/1).
• Fund refund: The confiscated money and capital market tools are returned to the relevant fund or recovery account by the prosecutor, judge or court if it is possible to return them directly.
The final provision is particularly important for the defence. Even after an acquittal, an asset already sold may no longer be returnable in kind; the person concerned may be limited to claiming its value and compensation. It is therefore crucial to challenge the seizure before a trustee is appointed and a sale begins. A sale before the outcome of the proceedings also raises issues under Article 35 of the Constitution and Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights.
• Assets acquired prior to the fund and adjective, whose legitimate source can be documented
The examples in which the measures were removed from the investigation indicate that a personalized and documented objection could have results. Objection to the decisions of a magistrate's judge shall be made within seven days from the date of learning of the decision (CMK Art.268).
Regarding the persons whom the CMB holds responsible for the loss of funds, the TMSF may initiate a follow-up it will receive under Law 6183; in cases relating to these proceedings, Istanbul administrative courts are authorized (7596 s.K.). m.5/4). Since the appeal deadlines in Law 6183 are short, notices such as a payment order must be evaluated without delay.
Along with criminal complaint resolutions, the CMB also imposes a ban on transactions in the share market about persons involved. These decisions are administrative proceedings independent of criminal trial; in the administrative court, an abort case may be brought and the executive may be asked to stop (SPKn Art. 134). The time to file a lawsuit is 60 days, as a rule, from notice or announcement.
The detained person has the right to meet with his/her defender and to remain silent. In mass crimes, the detention period may be extended by written order of the public prosecutor; therefore time for pre-expression preparation is limited.
Whether judicial control measures such as a ban on going abroad, assurance (guarantee) and regular signature are sufficient in economic crime investigations instead of arrests should be put forward at every stage (CMK Art. 109). Having a restraining order in the investigation file limits the defense's access to evidence underlying arrest; in this case, the path is described in detail in the "Rejection to Arrest in Files with a Confidentiality Decision" guide at the Information Pool.
The Istanbul Public Prosecutor's Office has announced that the factual sharing of the investigation will be considered under "public dissemination of misleading information" (TCC Art.217/A), while the sharing of investigative documents will be considered under "infringing on the confidentiality of the investigation" (TCK Art. 285). Social media postings of suspects and relatives may be the subject of a new investigation, even if it was done in good faith. If there is a need for public disclosure, it is safer to do so through the defense and after legal evaluation.
Mr. Kaan, who works as an order transmission personnel at a brokerage institution, has entered several orders on behalf of one of the funds in liquidation under the direction of his manager in a low liquidity sense. The SEC has filed a criminal complaint under Art.107/1 of 14 people, including Mr. Kaan, for transactions in this stock, calculating the interest per capita and giving 15 days for effective regret. On the same day, Kaan Bey's bank accounts and his residence, which he had purchased before marriage, were confiscated.
Kaan Bey's entry of orders by hierarchical instruction, not by his own decision, raises the question of whether special caste was found in respect of the "purpose to make a false impression" in Art. 107/1; instruction correspondence and internal records of orders are decisive at this point. Before the effective regret payment is made, it should be examined whether the SPK's per capita self-calculated interest includes a gain that actually reaches it, and the effect of payment on defense must also be weighed. The seizure of the dwelling must be contested within seven days on the basis of proportionality by documenting that it was acquired prior to the date of the verb and with legitimate income; this objection must be made before the appointment of a TMSF trustee and the sale phase is passed.
Do you need to be a fund manager to be a suspect in the fund investigation?
Oh, no. The investigation includes portfolio management company executives, as well as brokerage employees, associated corporate partners and public officials. However, having a business or investment relationship with these structures alone is not a crime.
If an effective regret payment is made to the SEC, will the eviction take place?
Not automatically. Payment is only a result of penalty reduction or impunity in terms of transaction-based market fraud. The arrest decision is made by evaluating the other charges in the file and the reasons for the arrest together.
Does effective remorse drop all charges?
Oh, no. SPKn m.107/3 applies only to transaction-based market fraud. There are separate provisions for abuse of trust, acquittals and accusations of organization, depending on different circumstances.
The bank account has been put into consideration; can mandatory incomes such as salaries be used?
This depends on the scope of the precautionary decision. Due to the principle of proportionality, compulsory incomes that are not related to the suspicious verb may be asked to be removed from the measure. For general principles regarding account block, the "Unfair Block on a Bank Account" guide in the Information Pool also guides.
If caution is removed, will the goods sold by the TMSF be returned?
If the sale is complete, the exact return will not be possible in most cases; the demand turns into a price and compensation. Therefore, the objection must be made before the sale.
• Failure to examine the scope of the CMB application: The person who is excluded from the application with a condition of reasoning and the obsolescence and measure for the transactions may remain unfounded.
• Making effective regret payment without account audit: Payment made without independent control of the SPK's interest account may weaken defense.
• To assume that effective regret will close the entire file: Laundering, organization and bribery charges are not affected by this payment.
• Late objection to confiscation: When the seven-day period is missed and the TMSF enters the sales phase, the exact return of its assets becomes difficult.
• Making statements on social media: sharings based on factual or confidential documents TCK Art.217/A and m. Under 285, it could be the subject of a new investigation.
The fund investigation is a process that proceeds on three fronts at the same time: criminal investigation, administrative sanctions of the CMB and property measures reinforced by Law No. 7596. Decisions to be made on these fronts affect each other; effective payment of regret, voluntary extradition or objection to a measure should not be planned alone without the whole of the file being seen.
Küheylan Law Office; appeals to defense, arrest and judicial control decisions in the process of expression and interrogation as part of the fund investigation, applications against seizure and TMSF trusteeship, and annulment cases against SPK administrative sanctions
Important Legal Notice: The statements, tables and fictional script contained in this guide were prepared by Küheylan Law Office for general information based on the current legislation and public official statements as of November 1, 2026. The text is not legal advice. People who are being investigated and processed benefit from the presumption of innocence; the guide does not include names of real persons. © 2026 Küheylan Law Office.
KÜHEYLAN HUKUK