31.08.2026 11:40
The details of the HSK investigation into Sidar Demiroğlu, the former judge dismissed from the profession, have emerged. It has been alleged that Demiroğlu, who made posts claiming he was 'unjustly dismissed,' issued 'procedurally and legally unlawful' release decisions for suspects arrested for serious crimes such as drug and arms trafficking, robbery, illegal betting, and attempted murder, and that he attempted to make contact regarding case files handled by other judges.
It has been stated that former judge Sidar Demiroğlu, who was dismissed from the profession by the Second Chamber of the Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSK), made posts on his social media account claiming he was "unjustly dismissed," while the details of the HSK investigation against him have emerged.
In Demiroğlu's file, it was alleged that he issued release decisions deemed "contrary to procedure and law" regarding suspects arrested for serious crimes such as drug trafficking, arms trafficking, robbery, illegal betting, and attempted murder, that he attempted to intervene in files handled by other judges, and that he made financial transactions inconsistent with his income and issued release decisions in return for benefits.
DISMISSAL FROM THE PROFESSION IN TWO SEPARATE FILES
While the HSK Second Chamber decided on June 16, 2026, to dismiss Demiroğlu from the profession regarding two separate files, some of the criminal cases filed against him continue to be heard by the Court of Cassation as a court of first instance.
"UNJUST DISMISSAL" ON SOCIAL MEDIA, SERIOUS FINDINGS IN THE FILE
It was determined that Sidar Demiroğlu, against whom HSK inspections and investigations were conducted during his tenure as a judge at the Istanbul Anatolian Courthouse, made posts on his social media accounts characterizing the dismissal decision against him as an "injustice." The acts in the HSK investigation file and the ongoing criminal proceedings revealed that the process was much more extensive.
INVESTIGATION INTO GRAVE ALLEGATIONS
According to HSK records, not only a disciplinary investigation arising from a single judicial decision or an isolated transaction was conducted against Demiroğlu. Together with the consolidated files, numerous release decisions, contacts regarding other judges' files, financial transactions, administrative sanction decisions, and allegations of obtaining benefits were made the subject of the investigation.
DRUGS, ROBBERY, ARMS TRAFFICKING... RELEASE DECISIONS EXAMINED ONE BY ONE
One of the most striking topics in the HSK file was the release decisions Demiroğlu issued during his tenure as a judge at the Istanbul Anatolian 4th Criminal Court of Peace.
The file included findings that the decisions regarding many suspects arrested in investigations into crimes such as drug trafficking, robbery, arms trafficking, illegal betting, and attempted intentional murder were "contrary to procedure and law."
Among these are the release or judicial control decisions regarding Ramazan Kentaç, Mesut Doğru, Ersin Coşkun, Hakan Bal, Yılmaz Gürçay, Atila Yıldırım, Mesut Yüksel, Aliya Karataş, Murat Karataş, Hakan Karataş, and Emre Saka, who were arrested in drug trafficking investigations.
The releases of Nedim Gündoğdu, Yıldırım Tuğrul Kort, and Umut Alkan in arms trafficking investigations, Umut Üçgül in the robbery investigation, and Sabahattin Şahin, stated to be the organization leader, and Ertuğrul Mertoğlu, stated to be the organization manager, in the illegal betting file were also included in the HSK investigation.
4 SUSPECTS COULD NOT BE APPREHENDED AFTER RELEASE
One of the most striking details in the inspection by the HSK Chief Inspectorate was that some suspects could not be apprehended again after being released. According to the report, Ramazan Kentaç, Mesut Doğru, Hakan Bal, and Atila Yıldırım could not be apprehended after the release decisions issued against them.
It was stated that arrest warrants were later issued for these individuals by heavy criminal courts in the public cases filed against them. The investigation authorities did not evaluate these acts only within the scope of abuse of office but also considered that these individuals were "provided with the opportunity to escape apprehension, arrest, or execution of the sentence," and therefore addressed them four times within the scope of the charge of "harboring a criminal."
ALLEGATION: "HE WENT TO THE OFFICE FOR A SUSPECT ARRESTED BY ANOTHER JUDGE"
Another striking incident in the file occurred regarding a detainee arrested for drug trafficking. According to the HSK file, Demiroğlu went to the office of Judge Ecem Temoçin, who had decided to arrest the suspect, and said he knew the detainee's family and that the person was not someone who could commit such crimes.
It was recorded that when the Chief Public Prosecutor's Office's request for the continuation of detention later came before him, Demiroğlu rejected this request and decided to release the detainee.
"LOOK AT THE FILE NOT ONCE, NOT TWICE, BUT FOUR OR FIVE TIMES"
The HSK investigation contains findings that Demiroğlu tried to intervene not only in files that came before him but also in investigations handled by other judges.
Regarding Hacı Ali Tarlacı, who was referred for arrest in an intentional injury investigation, it was reflected in the file that he called Judge Ecem Temoçin before the interrogation and said, "Look at the person's file not once, not twice, not three times, but four or five times."
It was stated that regarding the same suspect, he later sent the file number and the suspect's name to another criminal court of peace judge before whom a release request came, mentioning that he was a relative or friend of the suspect's lawyer and noting that the prosecutor also requested judicial control.
FINDING OF "SUSPICIOUS RELEASE" IN ATTEMPTED INTENTIONAL MURDER FILE
Another striking topic in the HSK file was the release decision regarding Mehmet Fatih Boğa. It was recorded that Boğa was arrested in an attempted intentional murder investigation, the objection to his detention was rejected, and an indictment was prepared demanding his punishment for attempted murder three times.
Despite this, it was stated that while the file was still at the stage of evaluating the indictment in the heavy criminal court, Demiroğlu had the file brought and decided to release the suspect, and this release was characterized as a "suspicious release."
BRIBERY FILE: RELEASE BY OBTAINING BENEFITS
The file against Demiroğlu later expanded with new allegations. In the consolidated HSK file numbered 2026/116, it was alleged that Demiroğlu released Murat Karataş, Hakan Karataş, and Aliya Karataş Atalay by obtaining benefits from arrested suspects Murat Karataş and Hakan Karataş through lawyer Recep Saraffoğlu.
Similarly, it was claimed that he issued a release decision for Mehmet Fatih Boğa, who was detained in an attempted intentional murder investigation, by obtaining benefits through the same lawyer.
Due to these allegations, the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office prepared an indictment for the crime of "bribery" and requested the opening of a final investigation. It was stated that the file was registered under the 2026/13 docket of the Istanbul 10th Heavy Criminal Court.
FINANCIAL PICTURE ALSO CAME UNDER HSK SCRUTINY
The investigation was not limited to judicial transactions. In the expert examination conducted, it was determined that the income earned by Demiroğlu and his wife in 2022 and 2023 did not match the expenditures and debt payments made in the same period.
It was assessed that there was no sale of assets that could constitute a source for the amount underlying the cash transactions made in the same period and that the transactions did not align with the financial profile.
It was also noted in the file that although the 2017 model Passat vehicle was registered in the name of the judge's spouse, there was no corresponding cash withdrawal or bank transfer for the purchase, and that 225,000 TL was paid in cash to the private school where their children were educated.
In the HSK file, this financial picture was evaluated under the allegation of 'acquiring unjust assets beyond legal income, in a manner with no discernible source.'
VEHICLE, MONEY TRANSFERS, AND PHONE CONTACT WITH THE BATMAZ FAMILY
In another consolidated investigation file, it was stated that two separate administrative fines issued for an automobile registered under the company owned by Veysi and Bünyamin Batmaz were, contrary to general practice, recorded and subsequently cancelled at the courthouse where Demiroğlu served, without being distributed through the case assignment system.
It was also noted that sanctions imposed for drunk driving and administrative fines amounting to hundreds of thousands of lira against a currency exchange company were similarly handled and cancelled without going through the standard case distribution process.
In the criminal investigation, taking into account relationships such as vehicle purchases and sales, money transfers, phone call records, and visits to entertainment venues together, the prosecutor's office assessed that the connection between Demiroğlu and the individuals involved in the files could not be considered an ordinary judicial relationship.
HSK: DISMISSAL FROM PROFESSION
At the end of this entire process, the Second Chamber of the Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSK) made critical decisions regarding Demiroğlu with its decision dated June 16, 2026.
The Second Chamber of the HSK, for the acts in file number 2024/340 joined with 2026/116, ordered the penalty of dismissal from the profession pursuant to the final paragraph of Article 69 of Law No. 2802, and also separately ordered the penalty of dismissal from the profession for the acts in file number 2024/849.
For the acts in the consolidated file number 2024/410, a reprimand penalty was imposed. The HSK also decided to temporarily suspend Demiroğlu from duty until the dismissal decisions became final.
CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS CONTINUE
In addition to the disciplinary process, there are also multiple criminal cases against Demiroğlu. The file being conducted for the offenses of 'harboring a criminal, abuse of office, and violating Law No. 3628' was, after jurisdictional disputes, registered as file number 2025/4-MD in the 7th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, acting as the court of first instance. According to the information note, the hearing was scheduled for September 22, 2026.
In another file, the proceedings conducted for the offense of abuse of office committed as part of a chain were sent to the 5th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation. In another file opened in 2026, it was requested that a final investigation be initiated on charges of bribery.
PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE REJECTS 'JUDICIAL DISCRETION' DEFENSE
In his defense, Demiroğlu claimed that the accusations against him were not based on concrete evidence and that his decisions fell within the scope of judicial discretion.
However, the investigation authorities, after evaluating witness statements, phone contacts, money transfers, vehicle connections, and the entirety of the decisions under investigation together, concluded that this defense should not be given credence.
In the indictments, it was explicitly stated that some actions could not be considered within the scope of 'judicial discretion.'
BEHIND THE 'UNJUST DISMISSAL' POSTS LIES THIS FILE
It is noted that Demiroğlu attempts to present himself on social media solely as a 'judge unjustly dismissed from the profession,' but the picture in the HSK file is much broader.
Numerous allegations of unlawful releases, suspects who were released and subsequently could not be apprehended, contacts regarding other judges' files, financial movements inconsistent with his profile, bribery and unjust acquisition of assets allegations, and ongoing criminal proceedings reveal that the process against Demiroğlu is not merely a disciplinary difference of opinion.