Enforcement of a sentence means carrying out a final conviction in accordance with the law. The process is not merely a calculation of the days to be spent in prison. Finality and notification, the correct judgment being taken into enforcement, credit for time served, the status of the institution, good conduct, supervised release, conditional release and legal applications are assessed together. A correct enforcement calculation cannot be made by looking only at how many years the prison sentence is. [1]
This guide is prepared to explain which document the convicted person and the family need at which stage. While presenting the general rule, it preserves the differences arising from the type of offense, the date, age, recidivism and transitional provisions. The person-specific release date must be determined on the basis of final judgments and current enforcement records.
At what stage does enforcement begin?
Finality is checked according to the part of the sentence to be applied
Under Article 4 of Law No. 5275, conviction judgments cannot be enforced until they become final. However, a person's being in pretrial detention during the proceedings is a separate legal situation. The fact that a conviction has not yet become final does not cause the detention to end automatically for that reason. Finality is examined through the legal remedy to which the decision is subject and through the notifications. [1]
One decision may cover more than one offense and more than one defendant. Some judgments may become final while others remain under review on appeal. For this reason, having the file number is not enough; it must be clearly seen which sanction imposed for which offense has been sent for enforcement. Transferring the wrong part of the sentence to enforcement affects all later stages of the calculation.
The Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor follows and supervises enforcement
The court sends the final judgment to the Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor. The enforcement record, summons or apprehension procedures and the sentence calculation sheet (müddetname) are connected to this process. The court that issued the judgment, the public prosecutor's office, the enforcement judgeship, the penal institution and the supervised release directorate each have different duties. It is not correct to address every request to the same authority. [1, Arts. 5 and 20]
| Stage | Document to look at first | Key question |
|---|---|---|
| Finality | Judgment, appellate decision, notifications | Which judgment can be enforced? |
| Summons or apprehension | Enforcement papers and notification records | Which procedure is being applied? |
| Admission to the institution | Admission record and sentence calculation sheet | Are the start of enforcement and the calculation correct? |
| Transfer to an open institution | Board and court decisions | Have the status conditions been met? |
| Supervised release | Enforcement judgeship decision, supervision plan | Which obligation applies, and for how long? |
| Conditional release | Good conduct report and release decision | How will supervision and the remaining term be applied? |
The summons notice, surrender and apprehension must be kept apart
Article 19/1 of Law No. 5275 provides that an apprehension warrant is issued against a convicted person who does not appear within ten days after the summons notice is served. By contrast, in the enforcement of prison sentences exceeding three years for intentional offenses and five years for negligent offenses, an apprehension warrant is issued directly. Other situations, such as flight or suspicion of flight, are also assessed separately. [1]
For this reason, the idea that “the prison sentence became final but no paper came to the house, so nothing has started” is not reliable. The enforcement record, the address and the notifications must be checked. The outcome of an application made for health or other reasons must also be seen; the application itself does not automatically remove the obligation to surrender.
In preparing for surrender, the judgment and summons papers, health reports, medication information and the need to notify relatives can be addressed together. However, the items the institution will accept and the admission procedures it will apply must be confirmed separately. The choice of institution and an expectation of release on the same day cannot be determined by personal decision.
What data is needed for the “time-served calculation”?
The offense date, judgment date and enforcement date serve different functions
The offense date is decisive for the more favorable law and for certain transitional provisions. The judgment date may matter for procedure and for appellate transitional provisions. The finality date concerns whether the judgment can be enforced; the date enforcement begins concerns the calendar calculation. Using these dates in place of one another leads to different and wrong results for the same sentence. [1][2]
For each judgment, the statutory article and paragraph of the offense, the resulting sentence, the offense date, finality, recidivism status and credit information should be recorded separately. A later judgment keeps its own legal character when it is linked to an earlier calculation.
If data is missing, a definite release date should not be given
Entering only “five years” into a calculation tool is not enough for a correct result. The offense group, whether the person is an adult or a child, any special enforcement regime, more than one sentence, earlier restrictions on liberty, good conduct and transitional provisions must be known. In particular, for offenses with different paragraphs under the same heading, one cannot proceed merely by the everyday name of the offense.
A reliable approach is to ask for the document rather than fill in missing data by guesswork. If the date the family remembers differs from the date in the judgment, the official record is investigated. As a result, both the calculation and the bases of the calculation become verifiable.
How is the sentence calculation sheet read?
The sentence calculation sheet does not change the judgment; it shows the enforcement calculation
Article 20/4 of Law No. 5275 provides for giving the convicted person a document showing the length of the sentence, the relevant judgment, and the dates of admission to the institution and release. In practice, the sentence calculation sheet is one of the main tools for checking the enforcement calendar. Even so, the calculation document is not a new court decision that changes the conviction judgment. [1]
During the review, whether each judgment is written correctly, the start date, credit for time served, and the dates of conditional release and release upon full completion of the sentence are examined. If there is more than one version, it must be determined not only which is the date of the latest document but also why it departs from the earlier calculation. A new judgment, a correction of decision or a credit procedure may explain the difference.
A calculation error and a delay caused by good conduct must be distinguished
A wrong mathematical calculation, a wrong enforcement ratio, and an open-institution or good conduct condition that has not yet been met are different problems. The fact that the sentence calculation sheet shows a conditional release date does not mean that all other conditions are automatically met on that day. Conversely, the good conduct reasoning cannot be used as grounds for not examining a calculation error.
If there is a concrete error, the wrong line, the data accepted as correct and the supporting document must be clearly shown within the scope of objection to the sentence calculation sheet and correction of the enforcement calculation. Instead of merely attaching another internet calculation, a comparison connected to the judgment should be prepared.
Credit for time served (mahsup): how are police custody and pretrial detention periods assessed?
Article 63 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK) provides for deducting from the prison sentence the periods spent for reasons that arose before the judgment became final and that resulted in a restriction of personal liberty. The start and end dates, the file to which they relate, and whether they were used in earlier enforcement must be examined. [2]
It is not correct to deduct the same days more than once. Crediting a restriction of liberty in another file also requires an examination of time and legal connection. Moreover, not all judicial control measures are calculated in the same way as pretrial detention; the special provisions on the type of measure must be checked.
In practice, the custody record, the detention and release decisions, the institution entry and exit records and the earlier sentence calculation sheets are assessed together. Presenting a dated official record in place of oral information given to the family reduces the risk of missing or double credit. The details are in our article on crediting police custody and pretrial detention against the sentence.
Conditional release and release upon full completion of the sentence are not the same date
The ratio is determined according to the offense and the enforcement regime
Although Article 107 of Law No. 5275 sets the general conditional release ratio for fixed-term prison sentences at one half, the same article and special provisions contain exceptions for different groups of offenses and persons. Recidivism, the organization or terrorism regime, certain sexual offenses and other special provisions are examined separately. The same ratio should not be applied to all sub-types merely on the basis of the offense heading. [1]
Life imprisonment and aggravated life imprisonment also cannot be fitted into the ordinary fixed-term formula. With more than one sentence, upper limits, special regimes and cases in which conditional release is not possible are assessed separately. The purpose of a general guide is not to squeeze all exceptions into a single table but to show which distinction should be investigated.
Conditional release is not the complete end of the sentence
Conditional release takes place as a result of a competent decision, upon the statutory period and good conduct conditions. Afterwards, the supervision and revocation provisions remain important. Release upon full completion of the sentence, on the other hand, is a separate calendar relating to the enforcement of the entire sentence. Leaving the institution does not in every case mean that all criminal law consequences have ended.
When examining conditional release requirements and enforcement ratios, the current sentence calculation sheet, the board assessment and the enforcement judgeship decision should be viewed together. If a new offense or a breach of obligation is alleged, the relevant conditions are assessed separately.
How should the 2025 amendments be handled in 2026 enforcement files?
The one-tenth and at-least-five-days condition in supervised release
Law No. 7550 added to the first paragraph of Article 105/A of Law No. 5275 the condition that, to benefit from this enforcement procedure, at least one tenth of the period that must be spent in the institution until the conditional release date, and not less than five days, must be spent in the institution. Provisional Article 11, added by the same Law, states that this provision will not apply to offenses committed before its entry into force. [3]
Here, the calculation is not automatically one tenth of the total sentence imposed; the basis is the period that must be spent in the institution until the conditional release date described by the law. For this reason, the distinction between an offense committed before or on June 4, 2025 and one committed after that date is important. Credit for time served and other conditions are also assessed separately. The statement “everyone stays only five days” misrepresents the scope of the law.
In second recidivism, old explanations should not be carried over to a current file
Law No. 7550 changed the provision on conditional release in second recidivism and set a ratio of three quarters for fixed-term prison sentences. For this reason, the statement found in older sources that “a person who is a repeat offender for the second time can in no way be conditionally released” should not be applied unquestioningly to a current file. The recidivist character of the conviction, the regime to be applied and the other conditions are examined together. [3]
Having more than one conviction does not by itself mean second recidivism. The application in the judgment, the dates of earlier judgments and the statutory conditions matter. For this reason, recidivism and the enforcement regime specific to repeat offenders requires a separate examination.
The transitional provision relating to July 31, 2023
Article 27 of Law No. 7571 changed the provision in provisional Article 10/6 of Law No. 5275 on the basis of the offense date and made additional provisions on offenses outside its scope. For this reason, merely asking whether a person was in prison on July 31, 2023 is not sufficient for a current assessment. [4]
This provision cannot be presented as a general amnesty or as an automatic three-year reduction of the entire sentence. Early transfer to an open institution and to supervised release is examined together with the relevant conditions, offenses outside the scope and other transitional provisions. In particular, it should not be assumed that every offense that meets the date threshold falls within the scope. Our article on offense dates and enforcement transitional provisions can be used for a detailed comparison.
Transfer to an open institution and good conduct decisions
The expiry of the period alone may not be enough
Direct admission to an open penal institution and transfer from a closed institution to an open one are different processes. The type of offense, the sentence, the special regime, good conduct and the conditions in the relevant legislation are assessed together. The concrete data on which the board decision rests, its consistency with past assessments and its reasoning may be subject to legal review. [1, Arts. 14 and 89]
One should not be content with the concluding sentence of an unfavorable decision. The assessment period, the supporting reports, the facts the person disputes and the notification of the decision must be seen. The complaint petition should make concrete which reasoning of the decision is insufficient and why.
A good conduct assessment does not replace a review of the calculation
Good conduct includes assessments relating to the person's life in the institution and reintegration into society. Although disciplinary status is important, not every matter should be reduced to a single disciplinary record. On the other hand, the lifting of a disciplinary penalty does not mean that all other conditions are automatically met.
In applications for objection to decisions of the administration and observation board and for transfer to an open prison, the board decision, the reports and the notification documents form the core file. A lack of reasoning and a material error of fact should be raised under separate headings.
Supervised release is the enforcement of the sentence outside the institution
Supervised release is not the end of the sentence; where the conditions exist, it is the enforcement of the remaining part outside the institution under certain obligations. The request, good conduct, the status of the institution, the period to be applied and the competent decision process are assessed together. After the decision, the reporting and supervision obligations in the plan must be followed carefully. [1, Art. 105/A]
If the convicted person thinks that the plan does not suit his or her living conditions, he or she may apply for a legal amendment or review; not applying the plan on one's own is not a solution. If an obligation cannot be fulfilled because of a hospital stay, police custody or another compelling reason, the excuse must be documented without delay.
A breach of obligation, an allegation of a new offense during supervision and a new offense after conditional release are not the same institutions. Without determining which period and which decision is at issue, a general conclusion such as “the supervision is finished” should not be drawn. An application for supervised release should be handled with this distinction.
Why are multiple prison sentences and fines examined separately?
An aggregation decision does not turn every sentence into a single type of sanction
Under Article 99 of Law No. 5275, each sentence keeps its independence; if there are separately finalized judgments, an aggregation decision is requested for the application of Article 107. For a prison term converted from a judicial fine to join an aggregation decision, the condition that it has reached the stage of being enforced in the institution is separately important. [1]
For this reason, multiplying the total sentence figure by a single ratio is not always correct. The type, regime and stage of each judgment must be shown. Aggregation and enforcement of more than one sentence and non-payment of a judicial fine and its conversion to imprisonment explain different parts of the same problem.
Court of Cassation 1st Criminal Chamber, May 22, 2026, E. 2024/1070, K. 2026/4225
The Court of Cassation examined the sentence calculation sheet in a file containing both directly imposed fixed-term prison sentences and imprisonment converted from a judicial fine. In the concrete case, the sanction relating to the fine was still at the community service stage. The Chamber stated that the condition of having reached the enforcement stage in the institution must be observed, and that if this stage is reached, the imprisonment converted from the fine is not to be served within the twenty-eight-year conditional release upper limit calculated for directly imposed prison sentences. The decision dismissing the objection was reversed in the interest of the law. [5]
The decision prevents two generalizations: it cannot be said that “imprisonment converted from a fine can never be included in an aggregation decision,” nor that “all sentences end in twenty-eight years in every case.” The stage of enforcement, the type of sentence and the special upper limits matter. Because the decision also points to different historical regimes for older offense dates, this aspect too must be preserved in the specific file.
Which applications do health, age and family circumstances bring up?
Postponement of enforcement because of illness, postponement on request and special enforcement procedures have different legal bases. Enforcement at home, at night or on weekends are not practices that begin by the convicted person's own choice. Conditions and a decision of the competent authority are required. The amendments that Law No. 7550 made to the special enforcement procedures must also be examined in the current file. [1][3]
In a health file, not only the name of the diagnosis but also the effect of the illness on life and treatment in institutional conditions is important. Properly issued reports, the treatment plan and the other assessments required by the law should be submitted together. A report dated in the past may not show the whole of the current situation.
The essential function of applications for postponement of enforcement and special enforcement procedures is to determine the legal regime appropriate to the specific conditions. The same petition logic should not be used as for a TCK 51 suspension or a TCK 50 alternative sanction request.
Which authority should be applied to for which problem?
Interpretation of the judgment is separated from the sentence calculation
Under Article 98/1-a of Law No. 5275, a decision is requested from the court that issued the judgment when there is doubt in the interpretation of the judgment or when a law that entered into force later must be assessed within the scope of TCK 7. Doubt in the sentence calculation, or the question of whether the sentence can be carried out in whole or in part, belongs to the enforcement judgeship under 98/1-b. Applications do not suspend enforcement automatically; depending on the circumstances of the case, a decision to postpone or stay may be issued. [1]
This division of duties prevents the generalization that “every problem relating to enforcement goes to the enforcement judgeship.” A wrong finality, adaptation to a more favorable law, an error in the sentence calculation sheet and an institutional act must each be characterized separately.
Complaint and objection periods differ from one another
The general period for a complaint under Article 5 of Law No. 4675 is fifteen days from learning of the act and in any case thirty days from its being carried out. An objection to an enforcement judgeship decision under Article 6 of the same Law is two weeks from notification. Under the transitional provision of Law No. 7499, the two-week period applies to decisions issued on or after June 1, 2024; for earlier decisions, the former provision is taken into account. These periods cannot be applied automatically to every request of a different legal nature. [6]
A complaint, as a rule, does not stop the act. In interim protection under Law No. 4675, the existence of a consequence that would be difficult or impossible to remedy and a manifest unlawfulness are both required. These conditions must be made concrete in the petition. The details are in our article on applications and objections to the enforcement judgeship.
How is an effective enforcement file prepared?
The document, the claim and the request must be linked to one another
In an application, the act in dispute is shown first. Then the data alleged to be wrong, the rule of law requested to be applied and the document supporting it are explained. In the final section, the request, such as correction of the act, recalculation, annulment of the decision or interim protection, is written clearly. Adding the same general requests to every petition does not strengthen the file.
| Claim | Required basis | Example of a concrete request |
|---|---|---|
| Credit for time served is missing | Entry-exit and liberty restriction records | Taking the missing period into the calculation |
| Wrong ratio | Offense article, date, regime and judgment | Renewing the calculation under the correct regime |
| Board reasoning is abstract | Decision and assessment reports | Legal review of the decision |
| Notification is defective | Return receipt, address, records of learning | Correction of the relevant procedural act |
| Special need for health reasons | Properly issued current reports | A decision on the applicable special provision |
What preparation can family members make?
The family can gather copies of decisions and dates and can report health and communication needs. However, a relative's having information does not mean the authority to carry out all procedures in every file or to have unlimited access to personal data. Under Law No. 4675, the relatives who are given the right to complain and the lawyer's power of representation are assessed separately.
At the first meeting, the file number, the place where the convicted person is held, the date of the last notification and any need for urgent action can be shared. Extensive health and private life documents should be sent only after secure communication and the necessary authorization have been established. This method protects both effective preparation and privacy.
Common legal mistakes in enforcement
Applying the half ratio to every sentence, treating supervised release like an amnesty, automatically applying the new daily fine amount to old offenses and starting all periods from the same date are the main mistakes. In addition, using the same credit day twice, treating imprisonment converted from a fine as identical to direct imprisonment, and thinking that enforcement has stopped merely because a petition was filed may have serious consequences.
Another mistake is tying the correct result to the number of a single precedent. The offense date, type of sentence, legal issue and outcome of the judgment in the decision should be compared with one's own file. What the decision did not decide is as important as its reasoning. Legal reliability comes not from promising a definite result but from making these distinctions visible.
Conclusion
In the enforcement of a sentence, a reliable roadmap starts from the final judgment and extends through the official calculation, institutional decisions and supervision to release. At every stage, the correct document, the competent authority and the historical regime to be applied must be determined. As well as the calculation, the application procedure and the actual implementation of decisions should be followed; person-specific results should be assessed only on the basis of verified file information.
Related articles: What Happens When a Prison Sentence Becomes Final? Summons Notice, Surrender, Apprehension and the Start of Enforcement; Suspension of a Prison Sentence: TCK 51 Conditions, Supervision Period and Consequences of a Breach; Can a Prison Sentence Be Converted into a Judicial Fine? TCK 50 and Alternative Sanctions.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is knowing how many years of sentence I received enough for the enforcement calculation?
No. The offense article and date, finality, recidivism, credit for time served, other judgments, the status of the institution and transitional provisions are also needed.
Will I definitely be released on the date written in the sentence calculation sheet?
It must be distinguished whether the date in the document is a conditional release date or a release upon full completion of the sentence. In conditional release, other conditions such as good conduct and a competent decision also matter.
Is supervised release a reduction of the sentence?
It is not a general reduction that eliminates the amount of the sentence. It concerns the enforcement of part of the sentence outside the institution under statutory conditions.
Does the one-tenth rule of 2025 apply to all old offenses?
Provisional Article 11, added by Law No. 7550, states that the relevant provision will not apply to offenses committed before its entry into force. The offense date is therefore checked separately.
Does everyone who is a repeat offender for the second time serve the entire sentence?
Old explanations should not be carried over automatically to a current file. Law No. 7550 changed the conditional release provision; for fixed-term prison sentences, the three-quarters ratio and the other conditions are examined.
Do multiple sentences end in twenty-eight years in every case?
No. Twenty-eight years is the upper limit in the relevant conditional release provision. Special regimes, types of sentences and imprisonment converted from a fine are assessed separately.
Does the institution's action stop when I apply to the enforcement judgeship?
As a rule, an application does not stop it automatically. A decision of the competent authority to stay or postpone, under the conditions of the applicable provision, is required.
Can a family member ask for legal assistance for the enforcement file?
The family can apply for document preparation and the initial transfer of information. The authority required for representation, access to the file and sharing special-category data, and secure communication, are arranged separately.
Sources and legal bases
- Law No. 5275 on the Execution of Sentences and Security Measures, especially Arts. 4–5, 14, 16–22, 89, 98–99, 105/A–110 and transitional provisions. Access to the consolidated text.
- Turkish Penal Code No. 5237, Arts. 7, 50–51, 58 and 63.
- Law No. 7550, TBMM text, especially Arts. 13–17; Official Gazette, June 4, 2025, No. 32920, 1st repeat issue (mükerrer).
- Law No. 7571, TBMM text, Art. 27; Official Gazette, December 25, 2025, No. 33118.
- Court of Cassation, 1st Criminal Chamber, May 22, 2026, E. 2024/1070, K. 2026/4225. Published text of the decision; verified decision record.
- Law No. 4675 on Enforcement Judgeships, consolidated text, especially Arts. 4–6; official text address.