Who is Gülistan Doku and what happened to her?
Gülistan Doku is at the center of one of the most debated missing person cases in recent years in Turkey. She was a 21‑year‑old second‑year student at Munzur University’s Department of Child Development in Tunceli when she suddenly disappeared, and since then the question “Where is Gülistan Doku?” has remained unanswered.
Who is Gülistan Doku?
At the time of her disappearance, Gülistan was living in a student dormitory in Tunceli and continuing her studies at Munzur University. Described as a young woman focusing on her education and future profession in child development, she was in her second year at the department.
On 5 January 2020, Gülistan left the dormitory where she was staying. After this date, no one was able to reach her. When her family and friends lost contact and became worried, they officially reported her missing to the Provincial Directorate of Security on 6 January.
Despite all the time that has passed and the efforts of both authorities and the family, Gülistan’s whereabouts are still unknown.
When did Gülistan Doku disappear?
Gülistan Doku went missing on 5 January 2020 in Tunceli. Security camera footage examined along her route showed that she boarded a minibus, but where she got off could not be determined. Since that day, there has been no verified trace of her.
In the first stages of the investigation, her mobile phone records were examined. The last signal from her phone was detected at the Sarı Saltuk Viaduct over the Uzunçayır Dam Lake, a point that became a central focus of search efforts.
How did the search for Gülistan Doku unfold?
Following the missing person report filed by the family on 6 January, large‑scale searches were launched in the region. The work was coordinated under the then‑Governor of Tunceli, Tuncay Sonel.
The search efforts were exceptional in scope:
– A total of 542 personnel took part, including teams from AFAD, the Naval Forces Command, the General Directorate of Security, and the Gendarmerie General Command.
– Support teams from the metropolitan municipalities of Ankara, Denizli, Diyarbakır, Istanbul, İzmir, Konya, Malatya, Manisa and Kahramanmaraş joined the operation.
– Numerous non‑governmental organizations, university units and volunteers also participated.
– 88 vehicles, 38 boats, 10 ROV (remotely operated underwater) devices, 6 drones, 4 sonar systems and 3 search dogs were deployed, especially around Uzunçayır Dam Lake and its surroundings.
Despite this extensive technical and human resource mobilization, no conclusive trace or evidence belonging to Gülistan was found, and the intensive field searches were eventually halted.
What is known about the investigation?
The investigation into the Gülistan Doku case has been described as wide‑ranging and multifaceted. Since 2020, three different chief public prosecutors have changed in Tunceli, and each period has involved new assessments and inquiries.
For a long time, the case remained on the public agenda primarily as a missing person file. Over time, however, suspicions of homicide gained strength, and the scope of the investigation expanded accordingly. As of 2026, authorities are pursuing the file on the basis of potential criminal involvement and possible cover‑ups.
The Gülistan Doku case: What is the “incident” about?
In the broadest terms, what is called the “Gülistan Doku incident” refers to her disappearance on 5 January 2020 and the unresolved questions surrounding it. It includes:
– Her departure from the dormitory and her last confirmed movements that day
– The unresolved gaps in camera footage and phone records
– The large but unsuccessful search operations concentrated around Uzunçayır Dam Lake
– The subsequent judicial investigation, which has increasingly focused on homicide and possible obstruction of justice
– The detentions and allegations involving public officials, security personnel and their relatives
This combination of missing evidence, unanswered questions and alleged irregularities is why the case remains a major topic in Turkey.
New developments and detentions in the case
By 2026, the investigation had entered a new phase with the homicide angle coming to the forefront. Within this framework, an operation spanning 7 provinces was launched and detention orders were issued for 13 suspects.
According to information shared from the investigation, 11 individuals were actually taken into custody. Those detained and the allegations regarding them can be summarized as follows:
– Şükrü Eroğlu – The bodyguard of then‑Governor of Tunceli, Tuncay Sonel, was detained in İzmir.
– Zeinal Abakarov – Alleged to be Gülistan Doku’s boyfriend, was detained in Alanya.
– Engin Yücer – Abakarov’s stepfather, stated to be a former police officer, was also detained in Alanya.
– Cemile Yücer – Abakarov’s mother, again detained in Alanya.
– Uğurcan Açıkgöz – Said to be a close friend of Mustafa Türkay Sonel at the time and still, and allegedly appearing in camera recordings linked to the case, was taken into custody in an Antalya‑centered operation.
– Erdoğan Elaldı – Reportedly working at the Tunceli Provincial Special Administration during the period of the incident, was detained in Antalya.
– Mustafa Türkay Sonel – Detained in Istanbul’s Ataşehir district. He is the son of then‑Governor of Tunceli and current Interior Ministry inspector, Tuncay Sonel.
– Gökhan Ertok – Detained in Ankara; described as a dismissed former police officer and alleged to have had contact with the governor and his bodyguard during the process.
– Savaş Gültürk – Taken into custody in Elazığ; reported to have been responsible for camera systems at Munzur University.
– Süleyman Önal – Detained in Tunceli, also said to be a staff member in charge of camera systems at the university.
– Celal Altaş and Nurşen Arıkan – Both detained in Tunceli as part of the same investigation.
The detentions particularly drew attention because they involved not only people from Gülistan’s close circle but also the relatives of former high‑level public officials and individuals who were allegedly in key positions related to camera systems, security and local administration.
Why are camera systems and phone signals so important?
Two technical elements stand out in the investigation: security camera recordings and mobile phone data.
– Security cameras (KGYS and university systems):
The Kent Güvenlik Yönetim Sistemi (City Security Management System) cameras spotted Gülistan boarding a minibus, but it has never been clearly established where she got off or what happened immediately afterward.
At the same time, the fact that two detained suspects, Savaş Gültürk and Süleyman Önal, were responsible for the camera systems at Munzur University has raised serious questions about whether any footage related to the case was overlooked, mishandled or tampered with.
– Mobile phone signals:
Gülistan’s last phone signal was detected at the Sarı Saltuk Viaduct over Uzunçayır Dam Lake. This finding shaped the search strategy and led to intensive work around the dam and its surroundings. However, the absence of physical evidence despite such comprehensive searches has kept alternative scenarios, including forced disappearance or concealment of the body in another location, on the agenda.
Why does the case remain unresolved after so many years?
Several factors contribute to the fact that “Where is Gülistan Doku?” is still an unanswered question:
– Lack of a body or any clear physical trace
– The last images and signals giving only partial information
– Possible deficiencies or delays in early‑stage search and investigation activities
– Allegations that some witnesses did not initially testify fully or clearly
– Claims that certain camera records may have been deleted or not examined in time
The complexity of the case has pushed investigators to consider multiple possibilities at once, including suicide, homicide, and forced disappearance with possible institutional involvement or protection.
The role of public officials and allegations of influence
One of the most striking aspects of the file is the presence of current and former public officials, or their close relatives, among the suspects:
– The detention of the then‑governor’s bodyguard
– The detention of the former governor’s son, Mustafa Türkay Sonel
– Allegations that dismissed or former police officers were in contact with the governor and his guard
– The inclusion of employees linked to provincial special administration and camera systems in the investigation
These details have brought claims of influence, protection and possible obstruction of justice into the public debate. The detentions do not by themselves prove these allegations, but they indicate that the investigation is now examining whether there was any organized effort to mislead or weaken the search and legal process.
What does the homicide suspicion mean in legal terms?
The step to treat the case under suspicion of homicide means that prosecutors and law enforcement are now:
– Looking for evidence of intentional killing rather than mere disappearance
– Examining communication records, camera footage and testimonies with a focus on possible perpetrators and accomplices
– Investigating whether there were actions to destroy, conceal or falsify evidence
– Assessing the actions and omissions of public officials who had a duty during the search and early stages of the investigation
In legal practice, transforming a missing person file into a homicide investigation usually broadens the power of investigators to carry out searches, detentions and data analysis.
What is known about Gülistan’s close circle?
Within the scope of the file, particular attention has been paid to individuals in Gülistan’s close environment, especially:
– Her alleged boyfriend, Zeinal Abakarov
– His family members, including his stepfather and mother
– People who appear in camera footage near key locations and times
– University staff and local administrators who may have had access to information, records or infrastructure relevant to the incident
These people have been questioned to clarify:
– The nature of their relationship with Gülistan
– Where they were on the day and night she disappeared
– Their phone and digital activity
– Any inconsistencies between their statements and technical data
Why does the case matter beyond a single disappearance?
The Gülistan Doku case has become symbolic for several reasons:
– It highlights the difficulties in solving missing person cases in which early evidence is limited.
– It raises questions about how effectively institutions respond, especially when allegations involve people with public authority.
– It shows the importance of transparency in investigations where social trust is at stake.
– It reflects broader concerns about the safety of young women, students and those living away from their families.
For many, the case is no longer just about one young woman, but about ensuring that similar incidents are thoroughly investigated and that potential failures or abuses are confronted.
Current status of the investigation
As of 2026, the investigation into Gülistan Doku’s disappearance is ongoing. The file remains open, with:
– Multiple suspects detained and questioned
– New allegations and lines of inquiry being evaluated
– The homicide angle actively pursued by prosecutors
– The possibility of further detentions and new evidence emerging
Despite all these developments, the central fact has not changed: Gülistan Doku has still not been found, and what exactly happened to her on 5 January 2020 remains unclear. Until definitive evidence is uncovered, the case will continue to be one of the most sensitive and closely watched unresolved files in the country.