The Istanbul Regional Court of Justice 20th Criminal Chamber has ordered the release of Yusuf Ziya Gümüşel, the founder of the Hiranur Foundation, who was previously sentenced to 18 years and 9 months in prison for child sexual abuse. According to court records, the decision was based on “health problems” cited in an appeal by Gümüşel’s legal team. The court has placed him under house arrest and imposed a travel ban.
Background of the H.K.G. Case
The case centers on allegations that Gümüşel married his daughter, H.K.G., to Kadir İstekli when she was six years old. These allegations were first brought to public attention on December 3, 2022, by journalist Timur Soykan in the BirGün newspaper. Evidence presented to the court included nişan (engagement) photographs from when the victim was six and thirteen, alongside audio recordings of Kadir İstekli confirming the marriage.
Following the initial reports, an investigation was launched by the Anadolu Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office. In October 2023, the local court sentenced Kadir İstekli to 30 years and Yusuf Ziya Gümüşel to 20 years for the sexual abuse of a child. The case was later sent back by the appellate court for procedural reasons, including a failure to apply appropriate sentencing enhancements for the defendants’ roles as parents.
Did You Know?
The victim, H.K.G., initiated the legal proceedings herself in 2021 after divorcing. She provided the court with photographic evidence of her engagement at ages six and thirteen to counter attempts by the defendants to dismiss the allegations as false.
Public Reaction and External Influences
The release of Gümüşel has drawn sharp criticism from journalists and observers. Timur Soykan stated on social media that the decision ignores extensive evidence, including audio recordings of Kadir İstekli. Soykan also highlighted that Ahmet Mahmut Ünlü, known as “Cübbeli Ahmet,” publicly celebrated the release and thanked the Yeni Şafak newspaper for its coverage, which had framed the initial imprisonment of Gümüşel as an “injustice.”
According to Soykan, Ünlü explicitly linked the court’s decision to two recent high-level meetings, including a meeting between Ünlü and President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. The Yeni Şafak newspaper had previously published headlines accusing the victim in the case, a move that Soykan described as an attempt to influence the judicial process in favor of the accused.
Expert Insight:
The release of a defendant convicted of serious child abuse charges, particularly following a public campaign by media outlets and religious figures, raises significant questions regarding judicial independence. The contrast between the initial 20-year sentence and the current release on health grounds demonstrates the volatility of this high-profile case as it moves through the appellate process.
What Happens Next?
The case remains active as it proceeds through the appellate court system. Because the appellate court previously identified procedural errors in the sentencing—specifically regarding how the crimes were categorized and the lack of parental sentencing enhancements—the local court will be required to re-evaluate the case based on those findings.
Legal observers may expect the prosecution to continue seeking the maximum requested sentences, which were previously calculated at 52 years and 6 months for Kadir İstekli and 47 years and 3 months for Yusuf Ziya Gümüşel. The case of the victim’s mother, Fatıma Gümüşel, remains legally separate, as her file was set aside due to her status as a fugitive.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why was Yusuf Ziya Gümüşel released from prison?
The Istanbul Regional Court of Justice 20th Criminal Chamber ordered his release after reviewing an appeal from his lawyers that cited “health problems” as the primary justification.
What are the current legal restrictions on Gümüşel?
Although he is no longer in prison, the court has imposed a house arrest order and a prohibition on traveling abroad.
Has the final verdict in the case been reached?
No. The case is currently in the appellate phase. The appellate court previously overturned the initial ruling due to procedural issues, and the case has been returned to the local court for further proceedings.
How will this development impact the ongoing pursuit of justice for the victim in this case?
