11.06.2026 19:40
The Constitutional Court has ruled on the "missing 128 billion dollars claim" regarding the era of former Treasury and Finance Minister Berat Albayrak, which was frequently raised by CHP Chairman Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu. The court decided that the claim was "without evidence," meaning false. While the Constitutional Court issued a similar decision to the local court and the court of appeals, it upheld the 40,000 lira compensation penalty imposed on the CHP.
The Constitutional Court (AYM) has delivered its final decision regarding the '128 billion dollar loss' allegations frequently raised by CHP Chairman Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu and his party in the past.
AYM RULED ON THE '128 BILLION DOLLAR' ALLEGATION
The High Court ruled that these allegations concerning the tenure of former Minister of Treasury and Finance Berat Albayrak were not based on concrete evidence and were unfounded. The AYM found the lower courts' decisions compliant with the law and rejected the CHP's application on grounds of violation of freedom of expression.
COMPENSATION PENALTY AGAINST CHP FINALIZED
With the ruling, the 40,000 lira compensation penalty imposed on the CHP by the local court has also been finalized. This penalty amount, previously deemed an 'attack on personal rights' by the local court and the appellate court, was donated by Berat Albayrak's lawyers to the Turkish Solidarity Association for Martyrs' Relatives and Veterans.
WHAT IS THE 128 BILLION DOLLAR CONTROVERSY?
During the time of former Minister of Treasury and Finance Berat Albayrak, it was alleged that the Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey (CBRT) sold approximately 128 billion dollars to the market between 2019-2020 through backdoor methods to keep foreign exchange rates and interest rates low. This led to a political and economic crisis. The CHP argued that these sales were conducted using non-transparent methods, bypassing Central Bank protocols, depleting reserves, and causing public loss, turning the question 'Where is the 128 billion dollars?' into a national campaign. The ruling party and economic administration denied the accusations, stating the money did not vanish; it was legally used within market dynamics for financing the current account deficit, foreign capital outflows, citizens' gold/foreign currency demand, and private sector external debt payments.