Effective oversight is a must in the fight against bribery and impunity!

In Turkey, imagine a public servant whose salary is fixed and whose years of service are known.

During that period, the amount of savings one can accumulate is roughly estimated to be between three and five.

So what happens if an enormous fortune emerges that cannot be explained by the income earned?

Million‑dollar villas, luxury cars, valuable plots, company shares… People cannot help but ask: With what money were these assets purchased?

Of course a person's wealth can grow. There may be inheritance, other legal income. No one has a word to say about that. But if there is a wide gulf between the salary received and the wealth possessed, there must be an explanation. Isn't it the state's job to investigate that gap?

The real issue lies here.

Submitting a declaration of assets alone is not sufficient.

What matters is verifying whether the declaration is accurate.

In our country, bribery, corruption, tax evasion, and misuse of public resources have been topics of discussion for years. In recent years, serious allegations have periodically surfaced regarding municipal tenders, zoning and licensing matters, and certain practices within public institutions.

The law enacted in 1990 made asset declaration mandatory for civil servants and other persons specified in the statute. In other words, a person must report not only their own assets but also those of their spouse and children under guardianship to the state. They declare their house, land, car, money, receivables, and debts. In short, the government wants to know the individual's financial situation.

This declaration, made at the start of the assignment, is renewed when there are significant changes in assets and at the times specified by law.

But the real issue is whether these declarations are actually examined.

The property declared years ago should be compared with the current situation. A calculation should be made between the salary received and known income and the houses, cars, and plots acquired later. If there is an unexplained discrepancy, it should be examined. Otherwise, what does it mean after the declaration is received and filed?

There is another side to the matter. Not everyone’s property may be registered in their own name. Houses, plots, and company shares can be registered under other individuals or companies. Therefore, when necessary, one should also look at who paid for the property, who uses it, and who it actually belongs to.

Of course, a relative owning a house or car is not a crime in itself. However, if there is concrete suspicion, no one should be deterred from investigating it.

Imagine; a person who has worked for years at a certain salary has become the owner of multiple houses, luxury cars, and valuable plots. Investigating how this wealth was acquired is a natural right. Does the wealth possessed align with the person's known income? That is the real question.

The law provides sanctions for false property declarations and unjust acquisition of property. What matters is that these provisions do not remain on paper and are applied when necessary.

Of course, no one should be declared guilty solely on allegations. If there is a crime, evidence must be presented, and the decision should be made by a court.

If salaries are fixed and wealth is in the middle, isn't it the state's duty to investigate the gap between them? If no audit will be conducted, what is the point of submitting an asset declaration?

No one should be granted privileges, and no one should be wronged. That's all we want.

In short: asset declaration should not remain a mere formality. The statements given must be examined, and the source of wealth investigated. No one should be granted immunity, and no one should be preemptively accused. What we want is not privilege, but equality and justice.

With greetings and respect…

Yaşar DURMAZ

Retired First-Class Police Chief