The Project Secret Witness of the General Staff Roof Trial

One of the most important trials related to July 15, the General Staff Roof Trial, included a secret witness who was the Acting Chief of Staff of the Foça Gendarmerie Commando Training Command at the time—Colonel Hakan Bıyık (Code Name: “Hat”).

Hakan Bıyık, who testified as a secret witness in İzmir, made statements about July 15 that were discussed for days and talked about across various platforms. However, no one examined this individual's statements in detail. A close analysis reveals that Bıyık's testimonies are riddled with contradictions.

In his first statement, Bıyık claimed to have been part of the “secret structure” for 25 years but said he couldn't remember his code name. However, in his later testimony in İzmir, he stated that he did, in fact, recall his 25-year-old code name. Furthermore, his testimony about the so-called coup attempt shows he manipulated timelines and altered details. He claimed to confuse the days he was on vacation, later changing the date he went to the villa, thus contradicting himself. One of the defendants in the General Staff Roof Trial Case, Barış Avıalan, explained this situation in court as follows:

“If you make a thief forget he is a thief, he will start lecturing you on morality. Let me explain why this quote came to mind: In his initial statement as a secret witness, he claimed to be in the “secret structure” for 25 years—so by his own words, he’s a 25-year veteran terrorist—but when asked directly, he said he had no code name. Later, realizing how absurd that sounded, he recalled his 25-year-old code name in his own trial in İzmir. — By the way, the code name is interesting: ‘Şahin’ (Hawk), showing he was part of the aggressive wing of the organization. He originally said he was contacted while on vacation on July 5 and confirmed this by referring to it as the second day of Eid, then claimed he went to the villa on July 6. Later, perhaps realizing it would be hard to justify staying idle for so long, he thought, ‘maybe I stayed at the villa four days too long,’ and reduced the stay by one day, saying in court 1.5 years later, ‘I got the dates mixed up, President.’”

This points to the contradictory testimony of a false secret witness. Yet, inexplicably, neither judges, prosecutors, nor the public questioned these inconsistencies.

Another suspicious point is that although Bıyık was mentioned by another secret witness, Halil İbrahim Yıldız, in a statement dated July 17, 2016, he continued to walk free for 24 days and only became a secret witness after giving a statement to the police. Barış Avıalan described this in court:

“Halil İbrahim Yıldız turned himself in on the morning of July 16, 2016. He said himself that he gave a statement on July 17, which is also confirmed in some documents, but the statement is missing. According to this statement, Hakan Bıyık was named as someone seen at the villa. But curiously, no action was taken against Hakan Bıyık. What was he doing during this time? He got a 10-day sick leave from a doctor. Maybe he was finishing his coordination. Then, on August 7, 2016, Halil İbrahim Yıldız gave a secret witness statement to the police—not to a prosecutor or judge. On the morning of August 8, Hakan Bıyık was finally detained. But he had remained free for 24 days since he was first named on July 17. He never went to the authorities on his own. After being detained, he became a so-called repentant secret witness on August 18, ten days later. So can we really believe this individual spoke truthfully out of sincere remorse? Or is it clear that this was a planned role, where he operated under orders?”

Another clue that Bıyık was a "project" secret witness is his refusal to testify about the villa or the Ankara events in other cases after he had already received a sentence related to the coup. Barış Avıalan explained:

“Apparently, the prosecutor or police tricked this man with promises like, ‘Say what we tell you, and we’ll get you released,’ and he—naively—signed without reading. He recited the script given to him, complete with crocodile tears, until his own trial was concluded. …Until he was sentenced. Then, he realized he’d been deceived again. In the first proceeding after receiving his sentence, he sent a message to those who betrayed him: ‘My case is now in appeal, so I won’t say anything about the villa or Ankara because it may affect the process.’ In other words: ‘Hey, dear uncles who tricked me with promises and who are also my lawyers, keep your promises or I’ll expose the plan and sell you out too.’”

The seven names Bıyık gave also raise questions. All were people linked to Akıncı Air Base and July 15, suggesting a planned scenario. Avıalan stated:

“Let’s list the names Bıyık gave, in order of military protocol:

1. Barış Avıalan — General Staff
    
2. Bilal Akyüz — Land Forces
    
3. Ömer Faruk Harmancık — Navy
    
4. Gökhan Şahin Sönmezateş — Air Force
    
5. Ali Osman Gürcan — Gendarmerie
    
6. Fırat Alakuş — Special Forces
    
7. Mehmet Partigöç-Where was Mehmet Partigöç assigned? At the General Staff Headquarters. But his case is unique. In these trials, he's like aspirin for anyone in trouble—whenever you're in a tight spot, just mention Partigöç's name and your headache is gone. I predict that if Adil Öksüz is ever caught, he will probably say, or be made to say, 'Mehmet Partigöç gave me the order.' That's why Partigöç is out of classification.

Let me also state this: On the night of July 15, Partigöç Pasha did not give me any orders that would constitute a crime. I did not perceive any word, implication, behavior, or attitude from him indicating that he knew about the coup attempt.

Now, picture the names and their positions I’ve just mentioned in a table. Only one name is given from each branch of the military. What are the odds? Couldn't they have given at least two names from one branch?

In this constructed chart, there’s only one logical name that could be presented as a representative of the General Staff—and that’s me, the only person from General Staff Headquarters who was captured at Akıncı that day, and a well-known name within the Turkish Armed Forces. They couldn’t name anyone else anyway; no second person came out of Akıncı.

If you look carefully at the other names—except for Ali Osman Gürcan—they’re all people connected to Akıncı. This “list of names given for the villa meeting,” which could be called flawless, raises serious suspicion that there was a plan even more thoroughly and meticulously prepared than the July 15 fiasco itself, and that these names were given—or made to be given—as part of that plan.

Hakan Bıyık claims he attended the meeting but did nothing. He says he merely stayed at the villa but, oddly enough, didn’t participate in anything related to the coup. In his court testimony, Barış Avıalan describes the situation as follows:

"You know how some of the cross-examination experts here—both some lawyers and occasionally you, Mr. Presiding Judge—would say things like 'Are you mocking our intelligence?' to us defendants. Well, now this individual named Hakan Bıyık, a.k.a. 'Şahin,' claims that he came all the way from Izmir to Ankara at his older brother’s urgent request. At first, he said he stayed for four days; a year and a half later, he reduced that to three. Let’s go with three then—he claims he stayed at the villa day and night. According to him, he was there longer than I was, because he once said he remembered me leaving at night!

Apparently, he stepped outside for a bit, but what he did or who he met with outside is unclear. In the end, he claims he was there just to fill space, that he did nothing—just ate, drank, sat, and slept. To use your words, he says he 'stood there like a potted plant./like a decoration' Then he adds: 'I tried to leave the villa, but I couldn't. They didn't let us use our phones, either.'

At that moment, an inner voice in me, in the tone of our hometown, murmured: 'Oh, really?' I thought that to myself, but unlike how people here lash out at us during interrogations, no one challenged him by saying:

'Hey, friend—why would they call you all the way from Izmir to Ankara just to decorate the place and sit around doing nothing, when there are far more qualified gendarmerie officers in Ankara? And why couldn't you leave the villa—were the doors locked with codes, or were there armed guards like gatekeepers from hell? You said there were 8–10 rooms and 3 floors—did you never find a moment alone to use your phone? Not even in the bathroom?

You also said you couldn’t talk to anyone there, yet you mentioned your classmate Bilal Akyüz was present. And you also said Barış Avıalan—whom you claimed to know beforehand and exchanged greetings with upon arrival—was there during those days. So why didn’t you approach them either? Were you really that isolated and miserable? Are you mocking our intelligence? It’s clear you had prior knowledge of certain things, and maybe you were even the brain behind it. And the codename you were given—'Şahin'—can’t be a coincidence either. It doesn't even have any religious significance.'

But no one said that. Yet this so-called informant’s sincerity and consistency should have been examined by you with extreme scrutiny."

In conclusion, the doubts and inconsistencies surrounding Hakan Bıyık’s statements undermine his credibility as a legitimate confidential witness. The underlying motives of this false testimony can only be uncovered through a truly fair trial.

In his court statement, Barış Avıalan summarizes Bıyık’s secret witness status as follows:

"I wonder what unknown truth this person—who holds the trio role of 'confidential witness, witness, and defendant'—has actually clarified. In my opinion, absolutely nothing. Here's what I think happened: since the minaret was already stolen, they had to find a cover for it. The July 15 plotters and planners needed useful individuals with the kind of personality that could make them secret witnesses in any era. They picked two such individuals with matching character traits who worked in the same place within the TSK (Turkish Armed Forces). Then, with the special efforts of the İzmir Prosecutor’s Office, promises of reduced sentences, and subtle reminders about the fate of their wives and children, they were brought into play to carry out this so-called secret witness operation."

"In short, the fact that people like Hakan Bıyık received sentence reductions that are legally questionable proves that they are 'project witnesses'—just like state-backed 'jewel witnesses' who tailor their testimonies to match the needs of those in power. In the Muğla trial, when asked, 'Were you a secret witness in the Ergenekon case?' he responded, 'I won’t answer that question.' Based on that, and as one defendant put it, Hakan Bıyık is a secret witness for every era. And in my own words—given that he betrays every structure he gets involved with—he’s a 'betray-ist.' Honestly, I wouldn’t be surprised if one day he becomes a secret witness in the Adnan Oktar case under the codename 'Tekir,' testifying against the 'kittens'😀."

Tarık Ünal