Berat Albayrak’s lawyer responded to the “fund crisis” allegations. A decision to file a lawsuit was announced. Former Hazine ve Maliye Minister Berat Albayrak announced that he would file a lawsuit against CHP Grup Chairman Faik Öztrak and YENİ Parti İzmir Milletvekili Ümit Özlale over their statements regarding the fund investigation.
The statement was made in writing. In the written statement issued by Albayrak’s lawyer İsa Sinan Göktaş, it was noted that although his client had no connection whatsoever to the allegations under investigation, his name was used in bad faith. It was argued that in his speech at the TBMM and on the X platform on 19.10.2026, Öztrak brought the matter to the “128 billion dollars” claim and to Albayrak without establishing any connection to the fund allegations. It was stated that Albayrak left active politics in 2020 and has since been engaged solely in foundation work. It was argued that tables prepared by artificial intelligence using leaked information were shared on social media, and that Albayrak’s name was matched with the matter despite there being no link.
The allegations were listed in the statement. It was claimed that during Albayrak’s two-year tenure as minister, a balance of single-digit interest rates and inflation was established, positive growth and a current account surplus were achieved, and Merkez Bankası reserves were preserved at a level of 85.2 billion dollars. It was also noted that 350 tons of gold held abroad were brought to Turkey, raising the reserves to 719 tons. It was recalled that compensation was awarded against the CHP over the “128 billion dollars” rhetoric and that the decision was finalized with the Anayasa Mahkemesi ruling dated 20.05.2026.
Why it matters
This lawsuit brings the years-long 128 billion dollar debate back onto the judicial agenda; moreover, this time a compensation precedent finalized by the Constitutional Court’s ruling dated 20.05.2026 stands before the parties. The fact that the speech delivered from the rostrum of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey and the social media posts will be addressed within the same legal process opens a case in which the boundary between political criticism and personal rights will be debated once again. The use of tables — allegedly prepared by artificial intelligence with leaked information — as the basis for the allegations also constitutes an example that will show how disinformation is reflected in legal disputes. The drawing of Albayrak, who left active politics in 2020, back into polemics over a fund investigation could also affect the opposition’s rhetoric on the economic past. Since the economic data in the statement are in the nature of a one-sided defense, the picture will become clear with the responses of Öztrak and Özlale and the court proceedings.