A lawful association membership cannot be sanctioned solely on the basis of the association's name or an abstract suspicion about the membership. Public authorities must explain the legal basis of the interference, the legitimate aim it protects and why it is necessary in the concrete case. Professional obligations or public policy are not general grounds that remove this requirement.
In association membership disputes, the organization's activity, the member's own conduct, the professional status and the act applied must be assessed separately. The Constitutional Court's (AYM) decision in İnci Çiğdem Ertan, Application No. 2019/41440, October 19, 2023 is an important example of this distinction in attorney discipline. The decision does not contain a general provision that voids every restriction on association membership.
What does the freedom to found associations and join them protect?
Article 33 of the Constitution protects the freedom to found associations without prior permission, to join associations and to leave them. Not being forced to join an association or to remain a member is part of this protection. Accordingly, freedom of association covers both the freedom to unite around a common purpose and the freedom not to unite.
Associations allow people to act together for cultural, social, professional, scientific or other lawful purposes that they could not pursue alone. Interference with membership may weaken this joint activity. For this reason, the review must address not only the member's registry record but also the effective exercise of the freedom. For the internal organization of religious community structures, see the article on the freedom of religious communities to choose their leaders.
Is an association the same legal structure as a trade union?
No. Although the protected areas of association membership, general freedom of association and the right to organize may overlap, they are not the same. Trade union activity includes special safeguards linked to economic and social interests in labor relations. Membership of a political party, membership of a professional organization and partnership in a commercial company are also assessed within their own legal regimes.
Including a word such as business, profession, employee or solidarity in an organization's name does not by itself determine its legal type. The articles of association, the registration, the organs and the activity actually carried out must be examined. An assessment based on the wrong legal type may lead to the wrong constitutional right and the wrong law being applied.
Under what conditions can freedom of association be restricted?
Articles 13 and 33 of the Constitution are assessed together. First, the interference must have an accessible and foreseeable legal basis. Then a genuine link must be established with one of the aims for restriction listed in Article 33. Finally, the measure must comply with the requirements of a democratic social order and with the principle of proportionality.
These stages do not replace one another. Citing a statutory provision does not prove that the sanction is necessary. Stating the aim of protecting public order does not remove the need to explain which conduct of the member caused which problem.
Can different rules apply to special statuses?
The Constitution allows legal restrictions for members of the armed forces and law enforcement, and for civil servants to the extent required by their duties. For this reason, it cannot be said that a single membership rule applies to all professional groups. The person's duty, special status and the applicable law must be examined separately.
The mistake to avoid here is to derive unlimited administrative discretion from the existence of a special status. The scope of the restriction and its application to the concrete case must be justified. Likewise, it is wrong to set aside an explicit special statutory provision without discussion by relying on general freedom of association.
Which interference was examined in the İnci Çiğdem Ertan decision?
The applicant, an attorney, received a disciplinary warning because of his membership in an association of young businesspeople. In the disciplinary assessment, a link was drawn between the association's name and the perception of the attorney profession as a commercial activity. The AYM required it to be substantiated why the attorney's membership led to a consequence that could not be tolerated in terms of professional reputation and public policy. (İnci Çiğdem Ertan, §§ 37–41.)
Short direct quotation from the decision
“attorneys, like everyone else, have the right to be members of an association.”
Source of the quotation: AYM, İnci Çiğdem Ertan, Application No. 2019/41440, October 19, 2023, § 38. The quoted sentence is part of the paragraph.
Operative part and the nature of the reasoning
The AYM's operative part: The freedom of association guaranteed by Article 33 of the Constitution was violated. The Court decided that a retrial should be held to remedy the consequences of the violation. (§§ 42–44 and the operative part.)
Legal characterization: In this file, the AYM accepted the legal basis and the legitimate aim, but did not find the necessity of the interference sufficiently justified. Presenting the decision as if it had been given for lack of a legal basis would be wrong. It was not explained which concrete act of the attorney's association membership constituted a breach of a professional obligation.
Is the name of an association alone sufficient for a sanction?
A name may be one of the data points that triggers a review, but it does not alone determine the legal nature of an activity. An association name with commercial connotations does not show that every member conducts business. Similarly, the fact that an organization is concerned with a particular social issue does not by itself prove that all its members personally endorse every statement made in the organization's name.
Where a concrete activity is alleged together with membership, however, that activity must be examined separately. Facts such as management, decision-making, representation, financial transactions or individual acts may differ in their existence and legal significance. A file should not be reduced to a simple choice between membership and no membership. Files in which membership and concrete activity are assessed together are discussed in the article on how expression and meeting activities are assessed in the offence of organizational membership.
How is membership separated from commercial activity?
Joining an association does not turn all of the association's activities into the member's personal professional activity. Where a conduct prohibited by professional rules is alleged, the act by which that conduct was carried out must be explained. If, in addition to the membership record, there are claims of providing services, receiving fees or exercising professional influence, the documents relating to them are examined.
This distinction is particularly important for attorneys. The independence of the profession, the prohibition of advertising, conflicts of interest and confidentiality obligations may arise separately in relation to concrete activities. Accepting the right to be a member of an association does not mean that these obligations cease to apply.
Why must the member's individual conduct be shown separately?
When an assessment concerning the organization is applied to a person, the administration must explain the link. The date of membership, whether it continues, the person's role within the organization and the conduct subject to the sanction become important. Possibilities such as a record belonging to another person, a wrong date in the record, or a membership that has already ended are checked against the documents.
Our assessment: A sound review answers the question of what the person actually did. When general information about the organization is written separately from the specific allegation directed at the individual, the legal grounds of the outcome can be reviewed more clearly.
Is closing an association the same review as sanctioning a member?
No. An act aimed at an association's activity or existence may affect the joint activity of the legal entity and its members. A professional disciplinary penalty imposed on a member, however, is a different act and a different subject of application. The competent authority and the applicable procedure must be determined according to the legal nature of the act.
Article 33 of the Constitution provides judicial safeguards for the closure of associations and for their suspension from activity. The possibility of administrative intervention in cases where delay would be harmful is also tied to constitutional conditions and judicial review. These safeguards should not be confused with the procedure of an ordinary disciplinary file.
Where an act has heavy consequences, such as ending all of an association's activities, it is especially important whether more limited measures would be sufficient. Which alternative is possible, however, is assessed in light of the organization's activity and the legal basis. It cannot be said in the abstract that there is a single alternative in every case.
What elements must a concrete justification contain?
| Element | Inadequate approach | Matter to be examined |
|---|---|---|
| Act | Merely naming the organization | The member's concrete conduct and role |
| Norm | A general reference to professional reputation | The provision applicable to the act and its scope |
| Aim | Repeating public order | The concrete interest sought to be protected |
| Link | Drawing a consequence from membership automatically | The relationship between membership and the alleged harm |
| Sanction | Saying the penalty is mild | Necessity, alternatives and deterrent effect |
The length of a decision does not by itself show that the reasoning is sufficient. Listing statutes and precedents does not complete the review where no link to the concrete case is made. Conversely, a short decision may contain understandable reasoning where it openly assesses the decisive facts and the main objections of the parties.
Which documents should an objection file contain?
- The association's articles of association, its type and the purpose clauses relevant to the dispute.
- The membership application, the acceptance decision, any withdrawal document and the membership dates.
- Records showing the person's office within the organization, or that the person holds no office.
- Decisions, correspondence and other lawful documents relating to the concrete conduct subject to the sanction.
- The investigation, the request for a defense, the disciplinary or administrative act, and all service records.
- Petitions and decisions showing how the courts assessed the distinction between membership and activity.
The purpose of the file is not to praise or criticize the association's activity as a whole. It is to examine on what legal ground the alleged interference can be applied to the person. If the organization has controversial aspects, they should not be concealed; the person's role and the scope of the act should be explained together with their legal significance.
How is an older precedent applied to a current disciplinary file?
The İnci Çiğdem Ertan decision dates from 2023. Articles 134 and 135 of the Attorneyship Law, which concern discipline, were amended in December 2025. In a new dispute, therefore, the date of the act and the regulation applicable in time must be determined separately. The constitutional criterion contained in the precedent and the current text of the law applicable to the case should be shown separately.
The part of the decision that may be relied on is that invoking a legitimate professional aim does not remove the requirement of a concrete justification. Even where a new statutory provision is shown, the link between the act, the norm and the sanction must be explained. This approach does not mean that the old provision is applied to the new file as it stands.
How are the association and the member distinguished in an individual application?
In an individual application, the requirement of a current and personal impact is important. The act directed at the association itself and the act directed only at the member are examined separately. If an application is to be made on behalf of the association, the power of representation and the way in which the legal entity's right has been affected must be shown. If the application is made on behalf of a member, the interference with that person's own legal situation must be explained.
Where an application is made directly to the AYM before the available effective remedies are exhausted, the Court may be unable to proceed to examine the merits. The general thirty-day period and the date on which the final decision was learned of should also be tracked separately. The application petition should not merely state that freedom of association was violated; it should show which justification was missing and how this affects the outcome.
Which claim aims to remedy the consequences of the violation?
The claim should be connected to the nature of the interference. For the consequences of a disciplinary penalty, a retrial may be relevant; for an ongoing restriction on activity, its removal; for proven damage, appropriate compensation. There is no automatic expectation of damages, or of a payment of the same amount, in every file.
When the AYM issues a violation judgment, what it requires can be understood from the operative part and the sections on remedies. When the outcome of a precedent is transferred to another file, merely reading the word violation is not enough. It should also be assessed which violation the judgment aimed to remedy, and how.
For more on this subject, see our articles on qualified rights in Constitutional Court decisions and bans on meetings and demonstration marches. For our firm's work in this field, see the page on Constitutional Court and ECtHR applications.
For more on this subject, see our article on how a foundation is established.
Conclusion
An interference with freedom of association must be justified by showing the link between the person's membership and the alleged unlawfulness. General expressions such as the association's name, professional reputation or public policy are not sufficient explanation on their own. Limits arising from a special status must also be examined separately and explicitly.
The İnci Çiğdem Ertan decision shows the importance of concrete justification in a sanction imposed on an attorney because of association membership. A file that correctly distinguishes membership, management and individual activity presents both the scope of the right and the limit of the interference more reliably.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can an attorney be a member of an association?
Membership of an association benefits from constitutional protection. However, concrete activities are assessed separately in terms of their compatibility with the practice of law, independence, advertising and other professional obligations.
Does a businessperson reference in an association's name show that business is being conducted?
Not on its own. Membership must be separated from concrete commercial or professional activity. The assessment in the İnci Çiğdem Ertan decision is important in this respect.
Do the same membership rules apply to every public official?
No. Legal restrictions arising from duty and special status may exist. The constitutional protection and the specific provision applicable must be examined together.
Does leaving the membership remove a past sanction automatically?
It does not do so automatically. The date of the act, the duration of the membership, the reasoning of the act and its continuing effects must be assessed. The withdrawal document may be important in the concrete file.
Are the closure of an association and a sanction imposed on a member examined in the same way?
No. Depending on the nature of the act, the competent authority and the procedure may differ. The legal personality of the association and the member's personal legal situation must be determined separately.
Sources and legal bases
- Constitution of the Republic of Türkiye, Articles 13 and 33.
- AYM, İnci Çiğdem Ertan, Application No. 2019/41440, October 19, 2023, §§ 29–44 and the operative part. The full decision may require a login.
- Law No. 1136 on Attorneyship (1136 sayılı Avukatlık Kanunu), Articles 34, 134 and 135; changes made by Law No. 7571.
- Law No. 6216 on the Establishment and Trial Procedures of the Constitutional Court (6216 sayılı Kanun), Articles 45–50.
- AYM, Fundamental Rights: Summaries of Decisions, June 2025, freedom of association section.