21.04.2026 18:51
In the Gülistan Doku investigation, former Tunceli Governor Tuncay Sonel was referred to the court with a request for arrest on five separate charges after his 78-question interrogation at the Erzurum Republic Chief Public Prosecutor's Office. During his interrogation at the prosecutor's office, Sonel openly admitted that he sent Gülistan Doku's SIM card to Gökhan Ertok via Şükrü Eroğlu and did not hand it over to official authorities.
In the Gülistan Doku investigation, former Tunceli Governor Tuncay Sonel, after giving a 21-page statement at the Erzurum Republic Chief Public Prosecutor's Office, was referred to the court with a request for arrest on charges of evidence tampering, destruction of official documents, and unauthorized intervention in information systems.
78-QUESTION CRITICAL INTERROGATION
During the 78-question interrogation at the Erzurum Republic Chief Public Prosecutor's Office, the most critical topics of the Gülistan Doku file were posed one by one to former Tunceli Governor Tuncay Sonel. The questions reflected in the statement record brought the darkest points of the file back to the agenda, from the SIM card sent for examination in an irregular manner, to camera and hospital records alleged to have been deleted, from serious allegations about his son Mustafa Türkay Sonel, to the role of protection police officer Şükrü Eroğlu. Sonel described all the accusations as "slander," "fabrication," and "character assassination."
According to the record, Sonel was asked detailed questions about Gülistan Doku's family, close circle, his son Mustafa Türkay Sonel, protection police officer Şükrü Eroğlu, Gökhan Ertok, Erdoğan Elaldı, Ferhat Güven, Celal Altaş, Songül Acar, and many others mentioned in the file during the period she disappeared. The harshness and scope of the questions revealed that the investigation has now deepened not only in the dimension of the missing person case but also along the axis of suspicion of evidence tampering and cover-up.
SIM CARD SCANDAL: "I HAD IT SENT" HE SAID
One of the most striking topics of the interrogation was the sending of Gülistan Doku's SIM card to Gökhan Ertok in Ankara instead of to the official investigation authorities. Tuncay Sonel openly admitted that he sent the SIM card to Gökhan Ertok via Şükrü Eroğlu. His reasons were "to reach the missing girl," "to detect the last signal," and "to get a result as soon as possible."
However, the prosecutor's questions became even harsher here. Because, according to the statement record, the investigation authority questioned why a governor would have a material that could constitute direct evidence in a judicial case examined outside official procedure. Sonel explained this as a "human reflex," "the sister's crying and wailing." Nevertheless, the question of why the SIM card was not handed over to the prosecutor's office or police cyber units remained one of the most critical knots in the file.
THE ISSUE OF EVIDENCE SENT BY BUS
Another shocking topic in the file was the claim that the SIM card was sent to Ankara via a bus company instead of through official cargo or judicial delivery chain. During the interrogation, recalling the statements of Gökhan Ertok and Şükrü Eroğlu, it was asked why such a critical material was dispatched using a method that gave the impression of being off the record. Sonel said he did not know about this part; he claimed he had no information about the return process either. The prosecutor's office questioned Sonel about why an official record chain was not established from the acquisition to the protection and transportation of the evidence, but received no answer.
"BLACK BOX" DEBATE: ŞÜKRÜ EROĞLU AT THE CENTER OF THE FILE
One of the names that attracted the most attention throughout the interrogation was the then protection police officer Şükrü Eroğlu. In the statements, the description "the governor's black box" was brought up for Şükrü Eroğlu. Based on the statements of Gökhan Ertok and Ferhat Güven, Sonel was asked whether Şükrü Eroğlu represented not just a protection police officer, but a much closer and more critical link.
Tuncay Sonel rejected this description. He defended that his relationship with Şükrü Eroğlu was only within the framework of duty. However, the set of questions in the interrogation showed that Şükrü Eroğlu's name was mentioned in many critical areas, from the sending of the SIM card to the transfer of location information, from cash flow to the follow-up of private matters. Regarding the file, Şükrü Eroğlu's role is evaluated as being far beyond that of an ordinary protection police officer.
MONEY TRAFFIC BETWEEN TUNCAY SONEL AND GÖKHAN ERTOK
Another topic highlighted by the prosecutor's office was the money transfers made to Gökhan Ertok. The interrogation reminded that, according to MASAK (Financial Crimes Investigation Board) movements, money transfers sent piecemeal via Şükrü Eroğlu were detected. Sonel explained these payments as "pocket money," "aid," "he might have had a technical need."
The investigation authority directly questioned why money was transferred from a personal account to a person with whom it was said they had only met a few times within the scope of social media and technical support. The answer Sonel gave to the question of why the official budget was not used for an official public job gave the appearance of a defense far from dispelling the suspicions in the file.
SUSPICIONS ABOUT CAMERA RECORDS AND HARD DISK
The security camera records, debated for years in the Gülistan Doku file, were also at the center of the interrogation. The prosecutor's office asked Sonel about the claims of why cameras at K points were changed, why records were not taken, and why changes were made despite no malfunction appearing in official records. Sonel said he had no information on this matter and that the relevant party was the provincial police department.
Even more striking was that, despite it being understood in the National Criminal Bureau examination that the camera viewing the bridge was active, a previously prepared report by the police stated the opposite. This contradiction was directly posed to Sonel in the interrogation. The prosecutor's office explicitly asked, "Why were the records deleted, who gave the order, what was on those records?" Sonel also denied this accusation.
HOSPITAL RECORDS WERE AT THE CENTER OF THE PROSECUTOR'S INTERROGATION
One of the most serious topics in the interrogation was the hospital admission record dated December 31, 2019, stated to belong to Gülistan Doku. The fact that this record, seen in the POLNET query, was not found in the hospital database and that one of the technical firms made an assessment that it "may have been professionally and intentionally deleted" was included in the prosecutor's questions.
Sonel was explicitly asked whether he had any information or instruction regarding the deletion of this record. Sonel said he had not spoken with the chief physician or anyone else on this matter and that he only knew the pregnancy record allegations as "rumors talked about among the public." However, the mere fact that the prosecutor's office posed this question showed that suspicions about the hospital data had entered the official interrogation text.
SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS ABOUT HIS SON MUSTAFA TÜRKAY SONEL
The most shocking part of the interrogation was formed by the allegations about Tuncay Sonel's son, Mustafa Türkay Sonel. The prosecutor's office asked one by one about statements that he had a relationship with Gülistan Doku, that there was a pregnancy claim, that he was in the area on the day of the incident, that he carried a weapon, and even that according to some witness accounts he said "I shot someone."
Tuncay Sonel denied all these allegations with very harsh expressions. He said he did not have "a shred of doubt" about his son. He defended that Mustafa Türkay Sonel did not know Gülistan Doku, that he was a young man who had finished high school and was preparing for university exams, and that all narratives against him were "fabrication" and "slander." However, he argued in the interrogation that these allegations were asked not as ordinary gossip-level claims, but as elements that had entered the file with witness and secret witness statements.
"WOULDN'T HURT AN ANT" DEFENSE
One of the defenses Tuncay Sonel repeated most in the interrogation was his emphasis that his son would not show a tendency for violence.
In response to allegations of weapons, vehicles, pregnancy, and murder directed at Mustafa Türkay Sonel, Sonel defended himself with the statements, "wouldn't even hurt an ant," "is a very conscientious child," and "he called me asking who would take care of his birds."
However, the questions posed by the prosecution were too specific to be dismissed with mere character defense by Father Sonel. The allegation of carrying a weapon in a vehicle, the description of a Glock-like pistol, magazines and bullets, base data, and witness testimonies indicated that the suspicions centered on his son were being taken systematically seriously in the file.
"THE GOVERNOR PERSONALLY LOOKED AT THE BODY AND SAID IT'S NOT GÜLİSTAN" QUESTION
One of the most striking parts of the investigation was what happened after a female body was found. Reminding Şükrü Eroğlu's statement, Tuncay Sonel was asked about the allegation that he went to the scene, looked at the body, and said, "It's not Gülistan." Sonel explained that they went to the scene by helicopter and that the general opinion there was that it was the body of another person.
This section brought back to the forefront the question debated in the file: "Why was a governor so active right in the middle of a judicial incident?" Because the prosecution's questions not only queried going to the scene but also how and under what authority assessments that could have identification qualities were made.
WAS A "SUICIDE" PERCEPTION CREATED?
Based on Songül Acar's statements, the prosecution also asked Sonel about the allegations that after Gülistan Doku's disappearance, the incident was constantly kept within the axis of the dam and suicide. Witness testimonies included the claim, "The governor was saying this girl committed suicide and is in the dam." Sonel denied this; he argued that the searches were continued only due to the family's insistence.
Nevertheless, other questions in the interrogation strengthened the suspicions on this matter. Despite finding some items stated to belong to Gülistan at the dam, the body not being found, the assessments of expert teams that "she is not in the dam," and the extension of searches despite this were directly questioned by the prosecution.
SECRET WITNESS ALLEGATIONS: WAS THE BODY BURIED?
One of the heaviest parts of the interrogation came through the testimonies of the secret witness "Şubat." The prosecution directly asked about the allegation that Mustafa Türkay Sonel called his father or bodyguard police saying he had killed someone, and then Gülistan Doku's body was transported in a vehicle belonging to the governorate and buried on the Pertek-Koçpınar line.
Tuncay Sonel rejected this account with the words "very ugly," "vile slander." However, such a heavy scenario being included in the interrogation text revealed the gravity of the point the investigation had reached. The file is no longer just about a missing person; it is progressing in a multi-layered manner around possibilities of murder, evidence destruction, and cover-up.
VEHICLE, DETAILED CLEANING, AND EVIDENCE DESTRUCTION ALLEGATION
The vehicle with license plate 06 SNL 10, a black BMW, also had a special place in the interrogation. The prosecution asked Sonel about the allegation that this vehicle was put through a detailed cleaning at a car wash center in Elazığ for the purpose of destroying evidence of a crime. Sonel also denied this allegation; he said the vehicle could have gone to and from his wife's hometown Elazığ and might have had a normal wash.
However, the investigation authorities insisted on this vehicle. Because the vehicle, stated to be in the use of the son Mustafa Türkay Sonel, is kept at the center of the file due to both its use and base and movement allegations on the day of the incident and afterwards.
THE DEFENSE'S LINE: "OFFICIAL DUTY CRIME, JURISDICTION LIES WITH THE COURT OF CASSATION"
In the final section of the statement record, his defense attorney, Lawyer Tüncay Kılınboz, also made a notable defense. Attorney Kılınboz argued that the acts attributed in the file should be evaluated within the scope of the governorship duty, and therefore, not the Erzurum Chief Public Prosecutor's Office but the Chief Public Prosecutor's Office of the Court of Cassation should be authorized.
Furthermore, the defense emphasized that the SIM card was not the original card from the day of the incident but a card later reissued by the GSM operator. The defense attorney argued that the legal value of the evidence tampering allegation built around the SIM card was debatable. Nevertheless, the prosecution's comprehensive 78-question interrogation showed that the investigation authorities were working on a suspicion picture far beyond the framework drawn by the defense.
WHY WAS THE FILE SHAKEN AGAIN?
This statement record shows that for the first time, allegations that have been talked about piecemeal in the public for years in the Gülistan Doku file were reflected in an official interrogation text with this intensity and severity. The improper sending of the SIM card, the suspicion that camera and hospital records were deleted, the consecutive mentions of names around the governorate in the file, and the serious allegations against Mustafa Türkay Sonel; moved the file to a completely different point.
Tuncay Sonel denied all accusations, saying that a "lynching," "fabrication," and "character assassination" were carried out against him and his family. However, the 78 questions directed by the prosecution revealed that a person who has held the most critical positions in the state is now being interrogated under much harsher and much more concrete suspicion headings.
EYES ARE NOW ON THE NEXT STEP OF THE INVESTIGATION
The interrogation in Erzurum is not read merely as a statement-taking procedure in the Gülistan Doku file. This record clearly shows which evidence headings the investigation is focusing on, which names it is keeping at the center, and which contradictions it is trying to resolve.
In the upcoming process, technical and forensic examinations regarding the SIM card chain, camera hard disks, hospital records, money movements, hotel and travel organizations, and witness and secret witness testimonies are expected to determine the fate of the file. In the Gülistan Doku file, every new statement, every new report, and every new contradiction now contributes to lifting the fog over this file that has remained in the dark for years.
HERE ARE THE REFERRAL GROUNDS: EVIDENCE WAS SYSTEMATICALLY DESTROYED
In the detention request sent by the prosecution to the Erzurum Penal Court of Peace, the irregularities that occurred after Gülistan Doku's disappearance were listed one by one:
Hospital and Camera Records: Immediately after Gülistan disappeared, it was determined that hospital records and security camera footage in the area were deleted.
SIM Card and Social Media Operation: It was documented that the SIM card reissued by Gülistan's family was, upon the governor's instruction, examined by "unauthorized" persons outside judicial procedure, and vital data was destroyed by secretly accessing social media accounts.
SERIOUS CHARGES: DETENTION REQUEST ON 5 SEPARATE ARTICLES
In the referral letter signed by Chief Public Prosecutor Deputy Harun Çetinkaya, it was stated that there was "strong suspicion of crime" that Tuncay Sonel committed the following crimes:
- Destroying, concealing, or altering evidence of a crime (Turkish Penal Code Article 281/1)
- Obstructing, damaging the system, destroying data (Turkish Penal Code Article 244/2)
- Violating the privacy of private life (Turkish Penal Code Article 134/1)
- Unlawfully obtaining personal data (Turkish Penal Code Article 136)
- Falsifying, destroying, or concealing an official document (Turkish Penal Code Article 205)
REFERENCE TO ECHR DECISIONS: DETENTION NECESSARY FOR PUBLIC PEACE
The prosecution referred to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) precedent decisions to strengthen the detention request.
In the referral letter, it was clearly stated that "due to the severity of the crime and the outrage it created in society, social unrest can only be quelled by arrest," and that if the suspect were released, there was a danger of "interference with the administration of justice."
Legal experts evaluate a governor being referred for arrest on allegations such as "destroying an official document" and "shielding a criminal" as the most critical turning point for the course of the case.