Tera Yatırım Holding Chairman of the Board Emre Tezmen was placed under a travel ban on September 17, 2026. At the time of the decision, judicial and administrative developments involving fund liquidations, Katılımevim and Pusula Portföy were also on the agenda of the financial markets.
A travel ban is a measure that may be imposed as part of judicial control, rather than a criminal sentence. The decision therefore does not mean that Tezmen was found guilty or has received a final conviction. The case to which the measure relates, its legal grounds, duration and scope have not been established in an official judicial document.
His roles in the Tera group
Emre Tezmen is listed as chairman of the board in the company information for Tera Yatırım Teknoloji Holding. The Tera group operates through multiple companies and affiliates in finance, portfolio management, investment banking and holding activities.
The holding's activity report states that Tezmen was appointed chairman of the board and chairman of the executive board by a board resolution dated December 30, 2024. According to the records, Tezmen was appointed as a member and chairman of one board on March 3, 2025, and elected chairman of the board of another company on September 5, 2025.
Developments involving Katılımevim and Pusula Portföy
Tezmen continued to hold management positions at different companies affiliated with the Tera group in 2026. As the group's financial activities and investments were debated publicly, decisions involving detention, resignation, management changes and travel bans came to the fore around Katılımevim and Pusula Portföy between September 14 and 16, 2026.
A travel ban was also imposed on Serdar Turhan, chairman of the board of Katılımevim. Following Turhan's resignation, Tezmen assumed the chairmanship of Katılımevim. News coverage also focused on a possible detention or arrest process involving Muhammet Yarız, chairman of the board of Pusula Portföy.
Fund liquidations and problems in the financial structure are among the issues considered part of the background to the decision concerning Tezmen. However, no direct link has been established between the decision and a specific company, fund or financial transaction, and it has not been established that the developments involving Katılımevim and Pusula Portföy constituted the legal grounds for the decision. The legal distinction between a judicial measure and guilt must therefore be maintained in Tezmen's case.
