THE FIRST INSTANCE WHERE THE NAME AKIN IPEK IS MENTIONED IS ON PAGE 135 OF THE 650-PAGE MAIN INDICTMENT WHERE HE IS ACCUSED OF FINANCING, AND THE EVIDENCE IS ATTACHED IN THE ADDENDUM. HERE IS WHAT IT SAYS:

i) The voice recording of the conversation between Fethullah Gulen and an unidentified person in a joke, taking place late autumn of 2013, which was uploaded to YouTube on 22.01.2014.

An unidentified person puts another person on the phone to Fethullah Gulen and tells him to keep the call short.

The caller reports that a visa was issued for someone called Aziz who is the person coming from Bursa that Osman Hodja mentioned; and that Fethullah Gulen remembered this person and confirmed the situation; that the caller met Ali Sabanci and he said hello; that Mrs Ceyda (the CEO of Ciner Holding) gave a letter to Turgay Ciner and that he said that these are all Hizmet Institutions and that he won’t let any negative piece be published about Fethullah Gulenin his newspaper after a newspaper article was written by a columnist who Turgay Ciner had visited, and that Fethullah Gulen approved saying ‘very good’, and that the caller … his friends … pineapple from Uganda

29) A voice recording was published on this website on 05.03.2014: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=468xC7DhBf8

30) A voice recording was published on this website on 05.02.2014: www.youtube.comlwatch?v=468xC7DhBf8

That 134 has arrived and that they have received a thank you letter, and that when the iftar dinner was being discussed again, Mustafa Koc was upset about the call by Adnan Polat and that he shared this with someone called Suleyman and that Fethullah Gulen said,‘The problem shall be solved in a nice and easy way’, and that the caller had not mentioned the refinery idea to Koc but to Akin Ipek but that he wasn’t interested and that as the deadline was approaching he asked if he should inform Koc or not. It was established that Fethullah Gulen approved by saying,‘It’s possible, you will win hearts,’ and the caller confirmed by saying,‘Your wish is my command.’. (Evidence: File 25, Evidence no:6)

MY ANSWER:

IS THIS EVIDENCE THAT THE PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE HAS PUT FORWARD, IN FACT PROOF THAT AKIN IPEK AND THE KOZA GROUP HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OUTSIDE ORDER? I AM NOT A LAWYER BUT THAT’S HOW I SEE IT. THE COURT WILL GIVE THE VERDICT. IT’S UP TO THE COURT TO DECIDE.

 

2) THE SECOND INSTANCE WHERE THE NAME AKIN IPEK IS MENTIONED IS ON PAGE 288 OF THE 650-PAGE MAIN INDICTMENT WHERE HE IS ACCUSED OF FINANCING. HERE IS EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS:

Initially, FETO/PDY’s aim was to grow. In order to do so, the money collected under ‘Himmet’ (Donations) was used as capital to open schools, private courses, media companies, foundations and bookshops for the members of the organisation and the organisation itself. As the amount of donations increased and the money flew in, all expenses to fulfil the objectives of the organisation were met from here. The organisation created considerable wealth for its members. For instance, Akin Ipek, the manager of KozaIpek Holding, one of the places wherethe money for the organisation was collected, in fact revealed who this fortune was collected for when he said, “I will give my whole fortune for one of his smiles.”

MY ANSWER:

THERE IS ONLY ONE TIME WHEN THERE WAS A BIG CASH INPUT INTO THE KOZA IPEK HOLDING: THE INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC OFFERING WHICH TOOK PLACE IN 2010 AND 90 PERCENT OF WHICH CONSISTED OF FOREIGN INVESTORS. IN THIS PUBLIC OFFERING, ALL THE DOMESTIC BANKS, INTERMEDIARY COMPANIES, ALMOST ALL THE FAMOUS INVESTMENT BANKS AROUND THE WORLD AND INSTITUTONAL INVESTORS TOOK PART. ISN’T IT WRONG TO SAY THAT ALL THESE INSTITUTIONS ARE MEMBERS OF THE ORGANISATION? OUTSIDE OF THIS, OUR YEARLY INCOME WAS SOLELY EARNED AND IS STILL EARNED FROM OUR ACTIVITIES.

NOW THAT THE TRUSTEES HAVE BEEN IN MANAGEMENT FOR THE LAST 1.5 YEARS AND THERE HAS BEEN NO UNFORESEEN CHANGE IN THE EARNINGS FROM THE ACTIVITIES, DOESN’T THIS ACCUSATION ALSO COVER THE TRUSTEES, TOO?

FINALLY, THEY REPEATED THE SENTENCE ‘I WILL GIVE MY WHOLE FORTUNE FOR ONE OF HIS SMILES’ AND DIDN’T DECLARE WHERE THEY HEARD IT. I HAVE EXPLAINED THIS NUMEROUS TIMES IN DETAIL AND SAID THAT NOTHING LIKE THIS EVER HAPPENED.

I CAN’T SAY THAT THE CLAIM ABOUT THE ORGANISATION’S MONEY IS ABSURD NONSENSE BECAUSE IT WAS PREPARED BY THE PROSECUTOR.

LET ME PUT IT THIS WAY; THE PROSECUTOR’S CLAIM IS NOT TRUE AT ALL. OUR ACCOUNTS HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY ALL THE INDEPENDENT INTERNATIONAL AUDIT COMPANIES SINCE THE FOUNDATION OF OUR COMPANY. MY EVIDENCE IS THE INDEPENDENT AUDIT REPORTS. WHY DOES THE PROSECUTOR IGNORE THESE REPORTS?

OF COURSE IT’S UP TO THE COURT TO DECIDE.