They Didn’t Close a University, They Closed Turkey’s Future

Anatomy of a Midnight Decree

On the night of Thursday, May 22, 2026, a few lines of text published in the Official Gazette by presidential decree opened one of the darkest pages in Turkey’s academic history. The operating license of Istanbul Bilgi University—whose founding foundation had been under trustee administration since September 2025—was completely revoked, citing Article 11 of the Higher Education Law No. 2547 as justification. This decision meant the effective destruction of an institution that represented over a quarter-century of accumulated knowledge: founded in 1996 as Turkey’s fourth foundation university, with more than 20,000 students, over a thousand academics, nearly 50,000 graduates, 7 faculties, 3 institutes, and more than 150 programs.

A university in Turkey does not consist merely of classrooms, campuses, and diplomas. The university is the most fundamental institution where free thought is produced, science develops, and the future of society is shaped. Ever since Wilhelm von Humboldt built the modern university idea in Berlin at the beginning of the 19th century, universities have been recognized as structures where knowledge is not only transmitted but also produced, where research and teaching are inseparable, and where scientific autonomy forms the institutional backbone. According to Humboldt, the university must be independent of political power despite being funded by the state; academics should have complete freedom over the content, methods, and publications of their courses; the university should exist not merely as an institution that confers professions, but as an autonomous sphere where scientific thought flourishes. The experiences of every developed country today—from Europe to America, from Japan to Australia—demonstrate that the strength of universities is directly proportional to their capacity to remain outside the sphere of political power’s intervention.

The closure decision concerning Istanbul Bilgi University is the most striking example of how this universal principle has been trampled upon in Turkey. Although official statements claim that the decision is based on legal and administrative processes, it is clear that this step has triggered a much broader political and structural debate in the public sphere. This decision, taken by hiding behind the rhetoric of the rule of law, is one of the heaviest blows struck against academia by a political mentality incapable of tolerating dissident and critical thought in Turkey.

The Meaning of the University and Istanbul Bilgi University’s Place in Turkey

Although the concept of the university has taken different forms in different civilizations throughout history, it has always been shaped around the same ideal at its core: an institutional structure where knowledge is freely produced, discussed, and disseminated. The earliest universities that emerged in Medieval Europe (Bologna, Paris, Oxford) possessed partial institutional autonomy; the transition to the modern university occurred in the 19th century with the Humboldtian model, where knowledge production and academic freedom gained central importance. While American research universities carried this legacy further in the 20th century, universities became fundamental pillars of democratic societies with the massification of higher education after the Second World War.

Istanbul Bilgi University was founded in 1996 as one of the most successful carriers of this universal heritage in Turkey. With its educational model that encouraged critical thought, its emphasis on social sciences, and its international academic connections, it created a distinctive university culture in Turkey. Through its legal clinics, human rights center, migration studies, gender studies, cultural studies, and interdisciplinary programs, Bilgi was not merely an institution that trained students; it also became a structure that generated ideas, opened spaces for debate, and contributed to social transformation. Having transformed industrial heritage into a space of cultural production with its Santralistanbul campus, the university had also registered its international academic success by ranking among the top five foundation universities from Turkey in the 2024 QS rankings.

The most important characteristic that distinguished Bilgi University from its peers was its insistence on preserving the space of academic freedom despite Turkey’s authoritarian tendencies. Its defense of the peace academics, its willingness to take a stand in debates on freedom of expression, and its institutionalization of the critical social sciences tradition were the primary factors that placed it in the crosshairs of political power. The process that began with its sale to Can Holding in 2019 evolved into a new phase with the appointment of a trustee to the university following an investigation launched in September 2025 against the holding on charges of “forming a criminal organization,” “smuggling,” “fraud,” and “money laundering,” and ultimately culminated in the closure decision.

The Justifications for the Closure Decision and Debates in Terms of the Rule of Law

The technical justification given for the closure decision is the appointment of a trustee to the university’s founding foundation and the provision in Article 11 of Law No. 2547 stipulating the revocation of the operating license in such a case. However, the real issue behind this veil of “technical justification” is how the principles of individualizing responsibility and protecting the institutional structure have been brazenly violated in a state governed by the rule of law.

Why do the results of investigations carried out against a company or holding directly affect students, academics, and the entire academic institution? What causal link can be established between the alleged crimes of holding executives and the existence of a university? These questions have no answers compatible with the principle of the rule of law. Indeed, even Professor Dr. İzzet Özgenç, a criminal law scholar who once served as President Erdoğan’s legal advisor, described the closure decision as “unconstitutional” and stated, “The legal existence of a university established by law can only be terminated by law; the legal existence of a university cannot be terminated by a presidential decree.”

The fundamental approach of the rule of law principle is the individualization of responsibility and the protection of the institutional structure to the greatest extent possible. In no developed democracy in the world is a university within a holding closed by citing an investigation against that holding as justification; instead, the management structure is reorganized and the institution is enabled to continue its activities. In Turkey, however, the ruling power has chosen to use law as an instrument of instrumentalization, opting to destroy one of the bastions of critical thought on the pretext of an investigation. This demonstrates that the process that began with the trustee appointment in September 2025 was actually a series of steps leading to closure, and that the “legal process” rhetoric was nothing more than a camouflage.

The Debate on Academic Freedom and University Autonomy

This decision starkly reveals the point that the long-standing debates on academic freedom in Turkey have reached. As the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Turkey stated in a ruling in 1975, “universities are public legal entities endowed with autonomy; they are administered by organs elected by themselves under the supervision and control of the state.” According to the same ruling, “The state’s power of supervision and control does not justify interference in the administrative actions and affairs of an institution possessing administrative autonomy.” Yet in the Turkey of 2026, not the slightest trace of these principles remains.

Over the last twenty years, the AKP government has consciously and systematically placed universities under the domination of political authority. According to reports by the Science Academy, 131 universities have been opened in Turkey in the last twenty years; however, this quantitative growth has gone hand in hand with a qualitative collapse. Rectors appointed directly by the President have become accountable solely to political power, rather than to university constituents and academic autonomy. The mass academic purges following July 15 led to the institutionalization of unmeritocratic practices and political staffing. The Education and Science Workers’ Union’s (Eğitim Sen) 2025-2026 Higher Education Midterm Report emphasizes that “the trampling of academic freedom as a result of political-ideological attacks is one of the fundamental causes of the problems experienced by universities.” The fact that at least 251 cases of rights violations were documented just from those reflected in the press in 2025 reveals the gravity of the situation.

The closure of Bilgi University is one of the pinnacles of this systematic policy of destruction. While the ruling power has for years attempted to standardize universities under the rhetoric of “national and indigenous,” it has sequentially targeted institutions that resisted this rhetoric and defended critical thought and scientific autonomy. First, a trustee rector was appointed to Boğaziçi University, then a trustee was sent to Bilgi University, and now the same university has been entirely shut down. This chronology is not a coincidence; it is the step-by-step implementation of the political power’s strategy of seizing universities and destroying dissident scientific institutions.

The process that began with TÜBA’s autonomy being stripped away by a Decree-Law in 2011 has culminated today in the closure of a university by presidential decree. The fifteen-year period between these two events is a documentary record of how academic freedom and university autonomy have been systematically dismantled in Turkey.

Consequences for Students and Academics: A Lost World

The most direct and devastating impact of the closure decision is on students and the academic staff. According to the Council of Higher Education’s (YÖK) announcement, students will be transferred to Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University (MSGSÜ), which holds the status of guarantor university. YÖK announced that “necessary measures have been taken immediately regarding ensuring that students and administrative and academic staff do not experience any grievances, and that educational activities continue without interruption.”

However, this rhetoric falls short of concealing the trauma created by the closure. Following the trustee appointment in September 2025, students had said, “We are worried that our school’s reputation and the value of our diploma will decline, and that our space of freedom will be restricted.” Today, the accuracy of these concerns has been painfully confirmed. A university is not merely a diploma-granting institution; it is a living space that shapes students’ intellectual development, social environment, academic belonging, and future plans. The overnight destruction of this space is such a profound devastation that it cannot be compensated for merely by a technical “transfer” process.

The situation is even graver for academics. Having already witnessed the groundless dismissal of research assistants, arbitrary appointments, and precarious working conditions during the trustee process, Bilgi University academics today face a completely uncertain future. Research projects, academic networks, international collaborations, and institutional memory built over many years have been nullified by a single presidential signature. Some of these academics will be forced to go abroad, while others will try to hold on in Turkey’s increasingly shrinking space of academic freedom. In either case, the loser will be Turkey’s scientific and intellectual accumulation.

International Academic Reputation and Brain Drain: Global Consequences

Universities are not only national but also part of the international world of science. The fact that Humboldt University has produced 29 Nobel laureate scientists strikingly demonstrates the role of universities in the global scientific ecosystem. The world’s leading universities—such as Berlin’s Humboldt, Harvard, Oxford, Cambridge, and the University of Tokyo—are recognized as institutions that contribute to the scientific capital not only of their own countries but of all humanity.

The closure of a university in Turkey by presidential decree constitutes a heavy blow to the country’s academic credibility and predictability. International academic circles will read this decision as an indicator of how much the rule of law, academic freedom, and scientific autonomy have weakened in Turkey. Erasmus programs, research partnerships, joint degree projects, and academic exchange programs will be directly affected by this erosion of trust.

Data from the Academic Freedom Index reveal a strong relationship between the decline in academic freedom and the drop in democracy levels. In recent years, Turkey has continuously regressed in this index, becoming categorized alongside authoritarian regimes. The closure of Bilgi University is a new and far more visible stage of this regression.

More importantly, this decision will further trigger Turkey’s already accelerated brain drain. Trained academics, researchers, and the brightest students will not want to stay in a country where scientific freedom is absent and universities can be shut down overnight. Every departing scientist represents not only an individual loss but also the loss of the students they would have trained, the research they would have conducted, the laboratories they would have established, and the knowledge they would have produced. With this decision, Turkey faces the risk of losing not merely one university, but a significant portion of its future scientific potential.

The University in the World: Models, Principles, and a Comparative Perspective

Historically, the concept of the university has been shaped around three main models: the Humboldtian German model, the American research university model, and the British collegiate model. The common denominator of all three models is the indispensability of academic freedom and institutional autonomy.

The Humboldtian model defines the university as a scientific institution independent of the state. Founded in Berlin in 1810, Humboldt University made the principle of “the unity of research and teaching” the founding philosophy of the university. German universities were able to preserve their institutional autonomy to a great extent even during the dark period of the Second World War; if Germany today possesses one of the world’s most powerful scientific research infrastructures, it owes this largely to the Humboldtian tradition.

American research universities, on the other hand, carried the Humboldtian model into a more competitive and entrepreneurial framework. Institutions such as Harvard, Stanford, MIT, and Berkeley have seen academic freedom and institutional autonomy not merely as principles but as necessary conditions for scientific success. It is no coincidence that the world’s most important scientific discoveries throughout the 20th century emerged from these universities. No American president can revoke a university’s operating license with a single signature; such a power does not even exist in the American legal system.

In the British model as well, universities like Oxford and Cambridge, with their centuries-old traditions, have preserved their autonomy in the face of political power. Founded in 1209, Cambridge University has maintained its existence for eight centuries as an academic structure independent of the British monarchy, parliament, and governments.

Turkey, meanwhile, adopted the Humboldtian model with the 1933 University Reform; however, it has never been able to fully implement the autonomy required by this model. The establishment of YÖK following the 1980 coup placed universities under centralized bureaucratic control; during the AKP government, this centralizing tendency reached its peak, transforming universities into apparatuses of political power. The elimination of TÜBA’s autonomy in 2011, the post-2016 dismissals, the appointment of a trustee rector to Boğaziçi, and now the closure of Bilgi University are all different manifestations of the same political will.

Today, in developed countries, the closure of a university is an extraordinary and almost unprecedented occurrence. In Japan, South Korea, Canada, Australia, Sweden, and the Netherlands, political powers do not have the authority to close universities they disapprove of because the constitutions and laws of these countries safeguard university autonomy. In Turkey, however, the President can terminate the existence of a university where 20,000 students are receiving education with a single signature. This situation is one of the most striking indicators of the gulf between the official rhetoric about how advanced a democracy Turkey is and the reality.

Conclusion

The closure of Istanbul Bilgi University will go down in history not merely as an administrative act but as a critical rupture that reopens the discussion on the relationship between the university, freedom, and science in Turkey.

Responsibility for this decision lies primarily and essentially with the current political power. Over their more than twenty years in office, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and the AKP government have institutionalized a mentality that sees universities as “service institutions,” cannot tolerate critical thought, and attempts to substitute scientific autonomy with political loyalty. At the point reached today, universities in Turkey have ceased to be universities in the sense described by Humboldt, Einstein, Russell, and Gramsci; they have become obedient bureaucratic structures integrated into the chain of command of the political power.

The closure of Bilgi University is the most dangerous stage this process has reached. Because this time, the issue is not merely the appointment of a trustee to a university, the removal of a rector, or the dismissal of academics; the issue is the complete destruction of an entire academic institution. This demonstrates that the ruling power has reached the point of “I will close the university I dislike.” There is no guarantee that another university will not suffer the same fate tomorrow on some other pretext.

Universities are the institutions that build the intellectual future of societies. The elimination or incapacitation of these institutions irreversibly damages not only the present but also the country’s scientific and cultural capacity in the long term. Turkey will feel the consequences of this decision for decades to come: the acceleration of brain drain, the weakening of international academic collaborations, the decline in scientific production, and, most importantly, the shrinking of the institutional foundation of free thought.

At the center of the debate is not merely one institution, but fundamental questions such as what the university is, how it should be protected, and the place of science within society. The answers given to these questions will determine not only Turkey’s academic future but also its democratic future.

Today, the political will that closed Istanbul Bilgi University has, in fact, closed Turkey’s future. The issue is not the existence or non-existence of a university; it is whether science, free thought, and the common intellectual heritage of humanity will survive on this soil. The closure of Bilgi is a dark answer given to this question. However, history has shown that no darkness lasts forever; sooner or later, the light of science and free thought pierces through even the thickest walls.

Recommendations

In the face of the closure of Istanbul Bilgi University, the responsibilities incumbent upon the academic community, civil society, and the democratic public are as follows:

  1. Initiating a legal struggle: The closure decision is clearly contrary to the constitution and universal legal principles. Legal processes should be initiated before national and international judicial bodies, and all legal avenues—including application to the European Court of Human Rights—should be used effectively.
  2. Mobilizing international academic solidarity: International organizations such as Scholars at Risk, the European University Association, and the Magna Charta Observatory should be involved in the process; it should be emphasized that the closure of Bilgi University is a threat to global academic freedom.
  3. Establishing independent monitoring mechanisms to protect the rights of students and academics: YÖK’s rhetoric of “there will be no grievances” should be audited by independent observers; the problems experienced by students and academics should be systematically documented.
  4. Strengthening legal guarantees for academic freedom and university autonomy: The higher education legislation, particularly the existing Higher Education Law No. 2547, should be reformed to protect university autonomy and academic freedom; Article 11, which grants the President the authority to close universities, should be repealed.
  5. Developing policies against brain drain: In order to halt the academic brain drain that will accelerate with the closure of Bilgi University, academics should be provided with free and secure working conditions; mechanisms should be created that allow scientists forced to go abroad to maintain their ties with Turkey.
  6. Supporting alternative academic structures: In order to keep the intellectual heritage of the closed Bilgi University alive, independent research institutes, open academy programs, and alternative education platforms should be established.
  7. Raising social awareness: It should be communicated that the closure of a university is not only a problem for the academic community but a democracy problem that concerns the entire society; the public should be made aware of the social value of science, free thought, and the university.

The closure of Istanbul Bilgi University by presidential decree is the latest link in the systematic dismantling of academic freedom and university autonomy in Turkey. This decision has turned the lives of 20,000 students and over a thousand academics upside down overnight; it has nullified a quarter-century of scientific accumulation, international academic networks, and a tradition of critical thought.

The principles of individualizing responsibility and protecting the institutional structure, which are fundamental requirements of the rule of law, have been explicitly violated; an investigation targeting a holding has been turned into a pretext to punish an entire university. This is the most concrete manifestation of the political power’s intolerance of critical thought and its project of standardizing universities.

The closure of Bilgi University has dealt a heavy blow to Turkey’s international academic reputation; it has created a rupture that will further trigger the already accelerated brain drain. What is actually closed is not so much a university as Turkey’s scientific and intellectual future. However, history shows that the light of science and free thought never succumbs to any darkness.

References

Çeçen, Anıl. “Üniversite Özerkliği” [University Autonomy]. Eğitim ve Bilim 3, no. 14 (1978): 3-12.

Constitutional Court of the Republic of Turkey. Decision E. 1991/21, K. 1992/42, June 29, 1992. Official Gazette Date: November 30, 1992.

Gedikoğlu, Tokay. “Yükseköğretimde Akademik Özgürlük” [Academic Freedom in Higher Education]. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi 15, no. 57 (2009): 5-34.

Bingöl, Bülent. “Üniversite Özerkliğinin Değişen Tanımı ve Üniversitelerin Yeniden Yapılandırılması” [The Changing Definition of University Autonomy and the Restructuring of Universities]. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi 67, no. 1 (2012): 39-76.

Dedeoğlu, Saniye Gül. “Akademik Özgürlük ve Üniversite Özerkliği” [Academic Freedom and University Autonomy]. Yaşar Üniversitesi E-Dergisi 9, no. 34 (2014): 5887-5906.

Ergün, Rıdvan, and Berke Özenç. “Anayasa Mahkemesi’nin Barış Bildirisi Kararı: İfade Özgürlüğü, Akademik Özgürlük ve Devlete Sadakat Kavramı Çerçevesinde Bir İnceleme” [The Constitutional Court’s Peace Petition Decision: An Analysis within the Framework of Freedom of Expression, Academic Freedom, and Loyalty to the State]. Anayasa Hukuku Dergisi 8, no. 16 (2019): 289-332.

Kükner, Burcu. “Bir Hak Olarak Akademik Özgürlük: Sınırlar ve Tartışmalar” [Academic Freedom as a Right: Limits and Discussions]. İnönü Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 10, no. 1 (2019): 177-192.

Tanrısevdi, Füsun. “Beyin Göçü mü, Beyin Gücü mü?” [Brain Drain or Brain Power?]. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 6, no. 2 (2019): 43-58.

Adaman, Fikret. “Akademik Özgürlük ve Üniversite Özerkliği İlkeleri: Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Deneyimi” [Principles of Academic Freedom and University Autonomy: The Boğaziçi University Experience]. Boğaziçi Üniversitesi ÜYYK Yayınları, 2021.

Taştan, İlknur Özlem. “OHAL Döneminde Türkiye‘de Akademik Özgürlükler” [Academic Freedoms in Turkey during the State of Emergency Period]. İnsan Hakları Okulu Yayınları, 2021.

Tufan Emini, Filiz, and Hatice Gürsoy. “Türkiye‘de Beş Yıllık Kalkınma Planlarında Beyin Göçü Olgusu” [The Brain Drain Phenomenon in Turkey’s Five-Year Development Plans]. Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences Research 8, no. 73 (2021): 2045-2056.

Bilgili, Ahmet Sinan. “Üniversitelerde Bilimsel/Akademik Özerklik ve Özgürlük: Kavramsal Bir Analiz” [Scientific/Academic Autonomy and Freedom in Universities: A Conceptual Analysis]. Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi 12, no. 1 (2022): 1-15.

Bilim Akademisi [Science Academy]. Akademik Özgürlükler Raporu 2021-2022 [Academic Freedoms Report 2021-2022]. İstanbul: Bilim Akademisi Yayınları, January 2023.

Buğday, Fatma. “Üniversite Özerkliği Üzerine Tarihsel Bir İnceleme” [A Historical Review on University Autonomy]. Uluslararası Yönetim Akademisi Dergisi 6, no. 4 (2023): 1015-1032.

Eren, Esra. “Üniversitelerin Neoliberal Dönüşümü: Bologna Süreci ve Akademik Özgürlük” [The Neoliberal Transformation of Universities: The Bologna Process and Academic Freedom]. Eleştirel Pedagoji Dergisi, no. 67 (2023).

Constitutional Court of the Republic of Turkey. Decision E. 2018/117, K. 2023/212, December 7, 2023. Official Gazette Date: March 10, 2024.

Akçiğit, Ufuk. Türkiye Akademik Diaspora Raporu: Beyin Göçünden Beyin Gücüne [Turkey Academic Diaspora Report: From Brain Drain to Brain Power]. İstanbul: TÜBA Yayınları, 2024.

Atamer, Yeşim M. Interview. “Türkiye‘de Akademik Özgürlüklerin Hâl-i Pür Melali” [The Lamentable State of Academic Freedoms in Turkey]. Reflektif Journal of Social Sciences 5, no. 3 (2024): 487-508.

Bilim Akademisi [Science Academy]. Akademik Özgürlükler Raporu 2024-2025 [Academic Freedoms Report 2024-2025]. İstanbul: Bilim Akademisi Yayınları, February 2025.

European University Association (EUA). Free to Think 2025: Report of the Scholars at Risk Academic Freedom Monitoring Project. Brussels: EUA Publications, October 2025.

Hünler, Olga Selin. “Academic Freedom and Patterns of Self-Censorship in Turkey.” Philosophy & Social Criticism 51, no. 8 (2025): 1123-1145.

Scholars at Risk. Free to Think 2025: Annual Report on Attacks on Higher Education. New York: SAR Publications, October 2025.

Scholars at Risk. SAR 2025 Annual Report. New York: SAR Publications, November 2025.

Buğday, Fatma. “Üniversite İdeasının Krizi ve Özerkliğin Aşınması: Tarihsel Kökenlerden Neoliberal Dönüşüme Kavramsal Bir Analiz” [The Crisis of the University Idea and the Erosion of Autonomy: A Conceptual Analysis from Historical Origins to Neoliberal Transformation]. Eleştirel Pedagoji Dergisi, no. 79 (March 2026).

Eğitim Sen [Education and Science Workers’ Union]. 2025-2026 Yükseköğretim Ara Dönem Raporu [2025-2026 Higher Education Midterm Report]. Ankara: Eğitim Sen Yayınları, February 2026.

ÜNİVDER (Üniversite ve Akademisyenler Derneği) [University and Academics Association]. Üniversitelerde Hak İhlalleri Raporu 2025 [Report on Rights Violations in Universities 2025]. İstanbul: ÜNİVDER Yayınları, 2026.

Sefa Yürükel

Danish ethnographer and social anthropologist (MA)
Aarhus University, 1997
Independent Researcher
Fields of Research: International Politics, Public International Law, Geopolitics, Sociology, Psychology, Cultural Studies, Systems and Structures.

Comments

One response to “They Didn’t Close a University, They Closed Turkey’s Future”

  1. […] They Didn’t Close a University, They Closed Turkey’s Future […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More posts