On September 11, Turkish authorities seized control of Can Holding, one of the country’s largest media and education conglomerates, citing sweeping allegations of money laundering, tax evasion, and organized crime. The move, which placed 121 of the group’s companies under state trusteeship, marks another dramatic escalation in Turkey’s fraught relationship between media ownership, business elites, and political power.

The Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office announced that Can Holding, run by brothers Kemal Can and Mehmet ?akir Can, is accused of orchestrating an elaborate financial scheme that channeled illicit funds into its operations. The conglomerate’s assets include high-profile media outlets such as Haberturk TV, Show TV, and Bloomberg HT, as well as Istanbul Bilgi University and the Do?a Koleji school chain. By placing these firms under the control of Turkey’s Savings Deposit Insurance Fund, the government effectively assumed direct oversight of some of the most influential channels in Turkish media and education.

According to prosecutors, the Can brothers used a sophisticated network of shell companies and financial maneuvers to funnel untraceable money into their businesses. Investigators allege the group fabricated invoices, shuffled funds across subsidiaries, and manipulated capital increases in dormant companies to disguise the inflow of illicit wealth.

Central to the case is the use of Turkey’s “Asset Peace” laws, which allowed individuals and corporations to repatriate money held abroad with minimal oversight. These amnesty-style programs, touted as a way to stabilize Turkey’s economy during times of currency pressure, expired in March 2023. Authorities now claim Can Holding exploited the laws to launder massive amounts of money, which later financed its expansion into multiple sectors, including media and education.

Raids carried out on September 11 resulted in the detention of at least 10 individuals connected to the conglomerate. Prosecutors argue that the group’s illicit financial strategy not only enriched its owners but also gave them undue legitimacy in Turkish society. “The scheme allowed Can Holding to strengthen economic power and gain public legitimacy,” the statement read.

The extraordinary nature of the seizure was underscored when it was announced live on Haberturk TV itself. Anchor Mesut Yar broke the news to viewers in real time, informing the audience that their channel’s parent company had been placed under state trusteeship.

The irony was not lost on observers. Haberturk, like many other major Turkish outlets, has often maintained a stance favorable to President Recep Tayyip Erdo?an’s government. Its alignment, however, did not shield it from being swept up in the financial crime investigation. The spectacle highlighted the precarious position of Turkish media companies, where ownership structures, political allegiances, and legal vulnerability intersect in ways that often serve the government’s broader interests.

Erol Öndero?lu, Turkey’s representative for Reporters Without Borders (RSF), voiced serious concerns about the seizure. While he acknowledged that allegations of financial impropriety deserve scrutiny, he stressed that the opaque nature of Turkey’s media sector makes it difficult to separate legitimate law enforcement from political maneuvering.

“In a sector which is not transparent and in a country where editorial independence is almost none … this transition of assets was astonishing enough,” Öndero?lu said, referencing the December 2024 sale of Ciner Group’s media holdings to Can Holding. The conglomerate’s controversial reputation had already sparked questions about why it was allowed to acquire such powerful media properties.

Now, with the state in charge, Öndero?lu warned of further consolidation of government influence over the media. “Maybe this operation is legitimate, but the result … is that it might be used for consolidating the government impact not only on the financial sector, but also on the media landscape,” he told OCCRP.

Turkey’s press environment was already in dire straits before this week’s developments. RSF estimates that more than 85 percent of the country’s mainstream media is directly or indirectly controlled by the government or its allies. The seizure of Can Holding threatens to tip the balance even further, eliminating one of the few remaining media groups with a degree of editorial diversity.

Critics argue that successive waves of government intervention—ranging from forced sales of media companies to politically motivated prosecutions—have left Turkey’s information landscape deeply compromised. With newsrooms increasingly subject to direct state oversight or pressure from pro-government owners, independent journalism has been marginalized.

“Media is so important to control, and media is so important to be kept clean and transparent for a healthy information landscape,” Öndero?lu said. Yet he added that years of political corruption and clientelism have created a “dirty ground” where the distinction between legitimate business oversight and political censorship has all but disappeared.

The case against Can Holding carries implications beyond the press. The conglomerate’s portfolio spans universities, schools, and energy companies, sectors that directly affect the daily lives of millions of Turks. By placing these institutions under state trusteeship, the government has expanded its reach not only into what people watch and read but also into where they study and work.

Supporters of the move argue that if the allegations are true, the seizure represents a necessary step to root out corruption and restore accountability. Critics, however, contend that the state has a history of using financial crime investigations selectively—targeting political opponents while overlooking misconduct by pro-government allies.

The timing of the seizure, coupled with Turkey’s upcoming local elections and the Erdo?an government’s ongoing struggle to stabilize the economy, has fueled speculation that the move may serve multiple purposes: discrediting business rivals, consolidating media influence, and projecting an image of firm action against corruption.

For now, the fate of Can Holding’s vast empire lies in the hands of Turkey’s Savings Deposit Insurance Fund, the agency tasked with managing seized firms. While its role is ostensibly temporary, past cases suggest that prolonged state control often leads to the redistribution of assets to politically loyal business figures.

For journalists, educators, and students linked to Can Holding’s institutions, uncertainty looms. Will Haberturk, Show TV, and Bloomberg HT become yet another echo chamber for government narratives? Will Istanbul Bilgi University and Do?a Koleji see their independence eroded under trusteeship?

The answers remain unclear, but the trajectory of Turkey’s media and civic space leaves little room for optimism. As RSF and other watchdogs warn, the seizure of Can Holding is not merely a financial scandal-it is another turning point in the long erosion of press freedom and institutional independence in Turkey.

Please follow Blitz on Google News Channel

The post Turkey’s seizure of Can Holding raises alarms over media freedom and state control appeared first on BLiTZ.

[Read More]

—–
Source: Weekly Blitz :: Writings