Deportation Orders in Türkiye: Objection and Annulment Action

What is a deport decision and how does it differ from other acts?

Deportation is an administrative act

Deportation is an act of public authority aimed at ending a foreign national's stay in Türkiye and sending them to a particular country. It is not of the same nature as a prison sentence imposed by a criminal court. A criminal investigation or conviction may be important in the deportation assessment; however, the administration that will carry out the act, the provision to be applied and the route of application are determined separately. [1, Arts. 52-54][4, Art. 59]

When people speak of a "deport penalty" in everyday language, they sometimes mean a monetary debt arising from a visa violation, sometimes an entry ban to the country, and sometimes a deportation decision. Being content with this expression may lead to an application to the wrong authority or to missing the time limit for suing against another decision. The decisions should be examined one by one, accepting that there may be more than one act in the same file.

The distinction between deportation, entry ban, restriction and administrative detention

Why are citizenship and protection status important?

This guide deals with deportation procedures concerning persons who have foreign national status in respect of Türkiye. The non-deportability of a Turkish citizen is a separate guarantee in the Constitution. An international protection application, refugee or subsidiary protection status, temporary protection and a residence permit are likewise not the same statuses. Without determining the name and validity of the document the person holds, a conclusion cannot be drawn on the basis of a single "residence card" category. [10, Art. 23][1, Arts. 3, 54, 76, 83 and 91]

Who issues the deport decision and how does the process begin?

The governorate's decision and the migration administration's procedures

Article 53 of Law No. 6458 provides that a deportation decision is taken by governorates on the instruction of the central migration authority or of their own motion. The provincial migration administration takes part in the preparation and conduct of the procedures. The apprehension of the person by law enforcement, the drawing up of a report or taking the person to a centre is a different stage from the issue of a reasoned deportation decision. An assessment in a criminal court file likewise does not take the place of this administrative decision. [1, Arts. 53-54 and 57][4, Art. 59]

Apprehension, assessment and referral to a removal centre

If a foreign national within the scope of Article 54 of the Law has been apprehended by law enforcement, the situation is notified to the governorate immediately. The assessment of whether a deportation decision is necessary, and the period for the decision, cannot exceed 48 hours. The taking of a person against whom an administrative detention decision has been issued to a removal centre within 48 hours is a separate provision. These periods are not periods given to the foreign national for filing an action. [1, Art. 57/1-2]

It cannot be assumed that, in every deportation file, the police station is followed by detention and then by the sending procedure in that order. There may be different routes such as an invitation to leave, an alternative obligation, or a health or protection assessment. The stage that has been reached should be determined, in addition to the person's statement, by official decisions and records.

On what grounds can a deportation decision be taken?

Grounds relating to lawful stay, entry and work rules

Article 54 of the Law regulates, in separate sub-paragraphs, grounds such as exceeding the visa or visa exemption period by more than ten days or the cancellation of a visa, the cancellation of a residence permit, violating the residence period by more than ten days without an acceptable reason, unpermitted work, and violating or attempting to violate the lawful entry and exit rules. Those whose residence permit extension application has been refused and who do not leave Türkiye within ten days are also separately listed in the article. Each sub-paragraph is assessed with its own conditions. [1, Art. 54/1-e, f, g, ğ, h and j]

The same ten-day rule does not apply to every violation

Exceeding the visa period, the cancellation of a visa, the cancellation of a residence permit and unpermitted work are not the same fact. The ten-day expression found in certain sub-paragraphs cannot be turned into a common additional right of stay that can be freely used for all violations. First, when and why the current permit ended, whether the application was properly completed and, if there is one, the status of the application document must be examined. [1, Arts. 25 and 54][2]

Forged documents, means of livelihood and prohibited entry

The use of false information and forged documents in entry, visa and residence permit procedures; obtaining one's livelihood by illegitimate means during the time spent in Türkiye; and coming to the country while an entry ban is in force are also among the relevant grounds. A typing or identity-matching error in a record must be distinguished from the false information asserted by the administration or the use of a forged document. Which fact the administration supports with which record should be clarified. [1, Art. 54/1-c, ç and ı]

Public order, public security and public health

Posing a threat to public order, public security or public health; statutory situations relating to terrorist or profit-oriented criminal organisations; and situations concerning persons assessed as being connected with terrorist organisations defined by international institutions are separate grounds for deportation. These headings do not justify applying the same result to all files on the basis of a general statement alone. The currency and individualisation of the allegation, the supporting information and the documents that can be submitted against it are important. [1, Art. 54/1-b, d and k]

The existence of a criminal investigation is distinguished from a final conviction, an acquittal or a decision of non-prosecution. A favourable decision in the criminal file is relevant to the administrative assessment; however, not every criminal decision removes the deportation act by itself. If the administration asserts a separate and current security ground, that too must be examined.

Prison sentence and Article 59 of the Turkish Criminal Code

Sub-paragraph 54/1-a of the Law concerns foreign nationals assessed as having to be deported within the scope of Article 59 of the Turkish Criminal Code. The current TCK Art. 59 has no general threshold of "a prison sentence of two years or more". After a foreign national who has been sentenced to imprisonment for an offence has been ordered to serve their sentence by application of a probation measure or to be conditionally released, and in any case once the execution of the sentence has been completed, their situation is notified immediately to the Ministry of the Interior to be assessed for deportation procedures. The notification should not be read as an automatic deportation result in every case. [1, Art. 54/1-a][4, Art. 59]

International protection files

In situations such as the refusal, withdrawal, deemed withdrawal or inadmissibility of an international protection request, or the ending or cancellation of status, the deportation assessment is made together with the relevant special provisions, the judicial process and whether there is a right to stay in Türkiye. For applicants and status holders, the special provision in the second paragraph of Article 54 is also taken into account. In any case, the non-refoulement obligation and the individual protections in Article 55 are examined separately. [1, Arts. 4, 54/1-i, 54/2 and 55]

Against whom can a deportation decision not be taken?

The principle of non-refoulement

Article 4 of Law No. 6458 regulates the guarantee of not being returned to a place where there is a risk of torture, inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment, or where life or liberty would be under threat on certain grounds. The assessment is made in respect of the country to which sending is contemplated and the characteristics of the person. Instead of being content with saying "there is a general problem in the country", how the risk affects the person should be explained with such documents as are possible. [1, Art. 4][10, Art. 17]

Sending to a third country is also examined separately

That the place of sending is not the country of nationality does not make the risk examination unnecessary. The possibility that the accepting third country would send the person to another country where they would be in danger may also be important in the specific case. The existence of a travel document, or a flight being possible, is not the same as the conditions for a safe and lawful sending being met. [1, Arts. 4 and 52]

Protection situations listed in Article 55

Even if they fall within Article 54, a deportation decision is not taken against the following persons where the statutory conditions exist:

• Those for whom there are serious indications that they would be subjected to the death penalty, torture, or inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment in the country to which they would be sent.
• Those for whom travel is regarded as risky because of a serious health problem, age or pregnancy.
• Those whose treatment for an illness posing a danger to life is ongoing and for whom there is no possibility of treatment in the country to which they would be sent.
• Victims of human trafficking who are benefiting from the victim support process.
• Victims of psychological, physical or sexual violence until their treatment is completed. [1, Art. 55]

A separate assessment and document for each person

A health report, a treatment plan, the effect of pregnancy on travel, a victim support record, country information or a document on a personal threat must be linked with the protection relied on. Merely stating age, pregnancy or the name of some illness may not on its own show that all the conditions of the sub-paragraph concerned are met. Conversely, the failure to investigate a serious allegation at all, solely because of the absence of a document, may also be subject to judicial review.

Assessments under Article 55 are made separately for each person. The administration may impose a residence at a particular address or an obligation to report. The guarantee of not being deported and the automatic issue of a particular residence card are different matters; the existing status and an appropriate document of stay must be arranged separately. [1, Arts. 46 and 55/2]

How are notification and the time limit for suing assessed in a deport decision?

The special seven-day time limit for suing

The time limit for applying against a deportation decision is 7 days from the notification of the decision. The 60-day period generally encountered in administrative actions does not apply here. In calculating the period, the procedure and start of notification, the last day and the holiday provisions are examined together. In a calculation that generally begins on the day after notification, intervening holidays are also counted; in situations such as the last day being a holiday, the provisions of the İYUK are taken into account. For a specific file, rather than guessing the last day, a calendar based on the notification document should be drawn up. [1, Art. 53/3][3, Art. 8]

A reasoned decision and information in a language the person can understand

The decision is notified, together with its reasons, to the foreign national, their legal representative or their lawyer. A person not represented by a lawyer, or their legal representative, must be informed of the result of the decision and the application procedures and time limits. What act the applicant learned of, and whether they understood the legal route, are important. Merely seeing a photograph of the decision, being told on the telephone that "there is a deport", or oral information given to the family does not resolve all notification problems. [1, Arts. 53/2 and 100]

Signature, interpreter and the record of notification

The date, language, interpreter information, signature or record of refusal to sign in the notification record should be examined. Not having signed does not mean in every case that the time limit never began. Likewise, the fact that the person signed a text they did not understand does not by itself remove the discussion of the specific notification and effective application. The allegations should be set out with documents and a chronology of events. [5][1, Art. 53/2]

Electronic notification

In a properly made electronic notification, notification is deemed to have taken place at the end of the fifth day following the date on which the message reached the electronic address. The UETS evidence record is separate from an email or SMS alert. The effect in the file of a notification made to a lawyer should also be checked against the representation and notification records. [5, Art. 7/a]

If the time limit appears to have passed

Missing the time limit is a serious admissibility problem. Nevertheless, when and how the decision was actually notified, the regularity of the notification and any violation of rights that can be raised should be examined separately. No definite conclusion independent of the file can be drawn, such as "seven days have passed, no route is left" or "I did not find out, so the time limit never starts". If an irregular notification is alleged, its basis must be clearly shown; preparation of the application should not be delayed.

What should be done first when a deport decision is learned of?

Determining the decisions and the person's whereabouts

The first task is to obtain not just the information "deport" but the complete list of existing acts. The date and number of the deportation decision, the notification document, the administrative detention and extension decisions and, if any, the entry ban and related records are filed separately. In which province and at which centre the person is located, whether they have been able to communicate with a lawyer or relatives, and whether a transfer or sending procedure is planned are determined.

The application calendar and the need for urgent protection

A calendar for the action is drawn up on the basis of the date of notification. While documents are being collected, the application must also be prepared in time. If there is a serious risk in the place of return, a grave health problem, children's circumstances or an imminent sending procedure, these should be made visible in the first petition and in the notice to the authority concerned. Waiting for all the documents to arrive is not a general reason that justifies missing the special time limit for suing.

Conveying the application record to the administration and the centre

The record showing that the action has been filed is notified to the authority that issued the decision. If the person is in a removal centre, informing the relevant units and keeping the submission records helps in following the file in practice. The application number to the court, proof of dispatch and delivery, the lawyer's contact details and, if any, an urgent health/risk document should be kept in order. One should not rely merely on oral information that an action has been filed. [1, Art. 53/3]

How is an action for the annulment of a deportation decision filed?

The court with subject-matter and territorial jurisdiction

The court with subject-matter jurisdiction over a deportation decision is the administrative court. Territorial jurisdiction is, as a rule, determined by the location of the administrative authority that carried out the act. The person's later transfer to a removal centre in another province does not mean that the action is to be filed in that province in every case. The authority that issued the act and the place where the person actually is must be distinguished. [1, Art. 53/3][3, Art. 32]

What allegations should be explained in the petition?

In the petition, the decision, the date of notification, the applicant and the respondent administration, the chronology of events, the grounds of unlawfulness, the evidence and the result requested are clearly stated. The defence put forward must be linked to the statutory sub-paragraph on which the administration relied. A current residence or work document, a mistaken identity match, the calculation of time, an expired record, health and family circumstances, or the risk of return are different headings of proof. [3, Arts. 3 and 20][1, Arts. 53-55]

A concrete fact rather than a general objection

For example, alongside the statement "I am not a threat to public order", what the allegation in the file is, whether the record relied on is current and the counter-documents should be explained. When it is said that "my family is in Türkiye", the status of the family members, living together, the child's age, the care and dependency relationship and the effects of separation should be shown. A university document or a marriage record does not replace the whole discussion of unlawfulness.

Court procedure after the 2024 amendment

According to Article 53/3 as amended by Law No. 7533, the file is deemed complete upon submission of the administration's defence or the lapse of the defence period. Whether a hearing will be held is at the court's discretion. The 15-day period for concluding in the Law runs from the completion of the file; if an interim decision or hearing is necessary, from their completion. This period is not a guarantee that every case will definitely end in 15 days from the day on which it is filed. [19, Art. 36]

If notification cannot be made to the address given by the claimant, the period in Article 26/3 of the İYUK is applied as two months in these cases. This special provision does not mean that the seven-day time limit for suing is raised to two months. Having a correct notification address and notifying the file of any change of address is part of following the proceedings. [1, Art. 53/3][3, Art. 26]

Finality of the court decision

Law No. 6458 provides that the decision given by the administrative court on an application against a deportation decision is final. A calendar cannot therefore be drawn up as if there were an ordinary sequence of regional appeal and cassation. Article 46/2-d of the İYUK, added in 2026, leaves actions arising from Law No. 6458 outside the new possibility of appeal under which the regional administrative court gives a fresh decision on the merits following a reversal. The subject of the decision, any special provision and, if any, the constitutional route of application must be examined separately. [1, Art. 53/3][3, Arts. 45-46][20]

Does the deportation act stop when an action is filed?

The special protection in Article 53

The Law provides that, subject to the foreign national's consent, the foreign national is not deported during the time limit for suing and, if recourse to the courts is made, until the proceedings are concluded. This is a special guarantee different from the general rule that the filing of an action in administrative cases does not automatically stop the act. Old exceptions that have been removed from the current text should not be conveyed as if they were today's provision. [1, Art. 53/3][3, Art. 27]

In order for the protection to be monitored in practice, the record of the action must be notified to the authority that issued the decision. It cannot be assumed that the same automatic effect exists in a separate entry ban action or in an application against another administrative act. If there is concrete information that a sending procedure will be carried out, it should also be checked separately that the application and the protection are in the records of the relevant unit.

This protection is not a residence permit or a release decision

The non-implementation of the deportation act does not mean that the person gains the right to work, obtains a new residence card, or is automatically released from administrative detention. Detention and alternative obligations are reviewed on their own grounds. The notification of the decision given after the proceedings, the stay status and any other acts must be taken up afresh. [1, Arts. 27, 53, 57 and 57/A]

Voluntary return and the declaration of consent

A document concerning voluntary return should not be treated as a mere routine signing procedure. Whether the person understood the text and its consequences, interpretation, their will and any allegation of pressure are important. The consent provision in the Law cannot be interpreted as allowing the non-refoulement obligation and the serious-risk examination to be disregarded. The relationship between the return request and the application to the court should be examined on the basis of concrete documents. [1, Arts. 4, 53/3 and 60/A]

Is it mandatory to object to the migration administration first?

An administrative application and an application to the court are different

An application may be made to the administration for the decision to be lifted or re-assessed. Matters such as an incorrect identity record, a health document submitted later or a material error in the act can be explained in this application. However, there is no general requirement that an objection must necessarily be made to the administration before filing an action against a deportation decision. The purpose of the administrative application and the purpose of the court route must be determined separately. [1, Art. 53/3][3, Art. 11]

A safe approach as regards the seven-day time limit

Article 11 of the İYUK regulates the effect on the general time limit for suing of an administrative application that meets its conditions. The conclusion "I made an objection, the seven days no longer run" should not be relied on without assessing its relationship with the special and short application period for deportation. Rather than waiting for the administration's reply, the possibility of having recourse to the courts against the deportation decision within the seven-day period should be preserved. The calculation of time in a separate entry ban or residence act should not be carried over unchanged to this special route of action.

How is an administrative detention decision lifted?

A restriction of liberty separate from the deportation decision

Administrative detention is the holding of a person at a particular centre for the purpose of carrying out deportation procedures. It is assessed within the scope of a risk of absconding or disappearing, a violation of entry and exit, a forged document, not leaving within the period granted without an acceptable excuse, and statutory grounds relating to public order, security or health. The governorate may issue a detention decision or apply alternative obligations. That a deportation decision has been issued does not remove the need to examine separately the reasons for detention. [1, Art. 57/2]

Six months and the conditions for extension

The period of detention in a removal centre cannot exceed six months. If the deportation procedures cannot be completed because the foreign national does not cooperate or does not give correct information or documents about their country, an extension of at most six more months is possible. It cannot be said that every file requires 12 months of detention from the start. The specific reason for the extension, the stage of the procedures and the records of the person's cooperation should be examined. [1, Art. 57/3]

Monthly assessment and necessity

Whether the continuation of detention is necessary is assessed monthly by the governorate; if there is a need, the one-month period is not awaited. When the necessity no longer exists, detention is terminated immediately and alternative obligations are imposed according to the statutory conditions. The initial decision, the extension and the results of the monthly assessments must be notified with their reasons. It is not right to continue the following period without examination merely on the basis of the existence of the initial decision. [1, Art. 57/4-5]

Application to the criminal judgeship of peace

A person under administrative detention, their legal representative or their lawyer may apply to the criminal judge of peace. The application does not stop the detention by itself. If the petition is submitted to the administration, it is forwarded immediately to the competent judgeship. The judge concludes the examination within five days and the decision is final. The five days here is not a five-day preclusive period set for the applicant to make an objection. [1, Art. 57/6]

Re-application when conditions change

A fresh application may be made to the criminal judge of peace, asserting that the conditions of detention have ceased or changed. A fixed and verifiable address, family support, a health development, the completion of identity and travel documents or a change in the risk relied on by the administration may be important depending on the nature of the file. Instead of repeating the same petition without grounds, the changed situation and the new evidence should be clearly shown. [1, Art. 57/6]

What are the alternative obligations to administrative detention?

Address, reporting and other alternatives

Article 57/A of the Law regulates the options of residence at a specified address, reporting, family-based return, return counselling, taking up duties in public-interest services on a voluntary basis, a guarantee and electronic monitoring. One or more obligations may be applied. The type of the measure, its reasons, duration and method of compliance must be clear to the applicant. [1, Art. 57/A][8]

The Regulation takes as its basis the individual assessment of alternatives before administrative detention. Age, health, family situation and special needs are taken into account; where the alternative is not possible or sufficient, detention is assessed. If the person was first taken into detention because a preliminary assessment could not be made, this examination is carried out as a priority after admission to the centre. In decisions on continuation and extension, the sufficiency of alternatives is also re-considered. [8, Art. 5/4 and 7]

Duration, notification and the consequences of non-compliance

The period of an alternative obligation cannot exceed 24 months. Imposing an obligation is neither the annulment of the deportation decision nor the grant of an ordinary residence permit. If the address or reporting obligation is not complied with, renewed administrative detention may come into play under the statutory conditions. A special judicial application against an electronic monitoring decision is regulated in Article 57/A; one should not proceed as if the same procedure applied to all alternatives. [1, Art. 57/A][8]

Health or similar situations that make it impossible to go to the reporting place should be documented and communicated in time to the authority concerned. The Regulation provides that, when non-compliance with the obligation is established, force majeure is to be assessed first. [8, Art. 21/2] If it is said that the obligation was lifted orally, its record and decision equivalent should be found out. In the application file, which alternative would be more appropriate than detention can be explained by the person's actual living conditions.

What rights can be exercised in a removal centre?

Access to a lawyer, information and relatives

Being held in a removal centre does not remove a person's right to make a legal application or to be represented. Opportunities for communication and meetings with a lawyer, a legal representative, relatives and other persons concerned are provided within the framework of the Law and the regulations on the centres. Obtaining copies of decisions, meeting with a lawyer, submitting petitions and forwarding the application to the competent authority are the basis of legal follow-up. [1, Arts. 57/5-7 and 59][9]

A person trying to find out where a relative is may apply to the competent authorities using the name and surname, nationality, date of birth, foreign identification number and the last known place of procedure. Because of the protection of personal data and the authority to represent, not all information may be shared with everyone. The absence of a person's name on a website does not mean that there is no procedure concerning them.

Health, children and special needs

Access to urgent and essential health services and the assessment of special needs are regulated in the Law. The best interests of the child must be borne in mind; the situation of families and unaccompanied children should not be treated as a simple extension of the adults' file. Medicines in use, regular treatment, disability, pregnancy or trauma allegations should be notified to the unit concerned and a health assessment requested. [1, Arts. 59 and 66][9]

Complaint and individual request records

Problems experienced in access to health services, a lawyer or the means of application should be recorded with the date, place, official or unit approached and the documents available. An application concerning the conditions of the centre and a request concerning the unlawfulness of detention may give rise to different legal assessments. It should not be assumed that a complaint petition takes the place of an action against the deportation decision.

How do the invitation to leave Türkiye and voluntary departure work?

An exit period of fifteen to thirty days

Under Article 56 of the Law, a person who meets the conditions is granted a period of not less than 15 days and up to 30 days, to be stated in the deportation decision, in which to leave Türkiye. This does not mean that everyone can necessarily stay freely for one month after the decision. Whether a period was given and its end date should be read from the decision concerned. [1, Art. 56]

Situations in which no exit period is granted

In cases of a risk of absconding or disappearing, a violation of the lawful entry and exit rules, the use of a forged document, attempting or having succeeded in obtaining a residence permit with false documents, and posing a threat to public order, security or health, statutory exceptions apply. A general rule that an invitation to leave will necessarily be made first when a deportation decision is issued therefore cannot be set up. [1, Art. 56/1]

The exit permit document and financial obligations

The Exit Permit Document (Çıkış İzin Belgesi) given to a person who is granted a period is not subject to a fee; nevertheless, obligations concerning visa and residence fees and fines are reserved. That the document is free of charge does not mean that all public debts are erased. The effect of leaving within the period on the entry ban is assessed together with the duration and type of the violation, the payment status and the conditions of Article 9. [1, Arts. 9/5 and 56/2][6]

The invitation-to-leave period does not replace the seven-day time limit for suing against the deportation decision. If the person wishes both to exercise the right of action and to consider the options for leaving, these two calendars must be handled together. The conditions of a programme offering voluntary return support should likewise not be confused with the annulment of the decision. [1, Arts. 53, 56 and 60/A]

How are an entry ban to Türkiye and a restriction code lifted?

The duration of the ban and the validity of the deportation decision

The statutory duration of an entry ban to Türkiye is at most five years. If there is a serious threat to public order or public security, this period may be increased by at most ten more years. It is therefore not correct to describe the general upper limit only as "ten years". However, the existence of statutory upper limits does not mean that the whole of these periods will be applied to every foreign national; the act and its reasoning are examined individually. [1, Art. 9/3]

Does everything correct itself once the ban ends?

The expiry of the entry ban period does not mean that the earlier deportation decision was annulled by a court. On a new entry, the passport, visa, public debt, prior permission or other valid records may separately be relevant. A person who has been deported in the past needs to check all current records, rather than buying a ticket on the basis of a calendar calculation alone. [1, Arts. 7, 9, 11 and 15][6]

A request to the administration for lifting or for a special entry permit

The Law distinguishes between the lifting of an entry ban and permitting entry to Türkiye for a certain period while the existence of the ban is preserved. In the application, which result is requested must be written clearly. Family ties, treatment, study, work or other current reasons can be assessed with concrete documents; none of these reasons creates a guarantee of automatic acceptance in all files. [1, Art. 9/6-7]

A separate annulment action and stay of execution

An act concerning an entry ban may be the subject of an action separately, on the basis of its own notification and nature. The general time limit for suing and the effect of an administrative application are assessed within the framework of the İYUK. The special guarantee of suspension in a deportation action is not carried over automatically to every action filed against an entry ban; if necessary, the conditions of a request for a stay of execution are explained separately. [3, Arts. 7, 11 and 27]

The decision behind the restriction code

A restriction code does not by itself show the whole legal consequence of the file. The date on which the record was placed, its reason, the competent authority, its duration and the decision on which it is based should be found out. The lifting of one code does not show that another independent ban has also been erased. Code lists on the internet cannot be used in place of the person's actual file and current administrative record.

If there is a record belonging to the wrong person, a decision that has been lifted continuing to appear in the system, or a material error of information, a correction request is submitted with its evidence. Conversely, if the act on which the record is based is still valid, merely making a data correction application may not be sufficient. The annulment of the act, its lifting and the updating of records are consecutive but different stages.

Does an annotated visa lift a deport decision?

The difference between entry with special permission and annulment of the decision

The official explanation of YİMER states that, for a person subject to an entry ban to be able to come to Türkiye, an application should be made for an istizanlı visa, otherwise known as a visa with a special annotation, at the Turkish diplomatic mission in the country where they are. This route is not the same as the annulment of the deportation decision by a court. In the Law, the lifting of the entry ban and the grant of entry permission for a certain period while the ban remains are different options. [7][1, Arts. 9/6 and 15/2]

The ground of application and the result

The purpose of coming to Türkiye, family or other ties, earlier violations and decisions, the means of livelihood and the necessary documents are assessed within the scope of the specific application. Past procedures should not be concealed in the visa request, nor contradictory information given. Under the Law, the grant of a visa likewise does not provide an absolute right of entry; the conditions of admission at the border apply separately. [1, Arts. 11/3 and 15]

No general conclusion can be drawn that every entry ban can be overcome only by marriage, an education record or an invitation letter. If, while the application process continues, there is an open time limit for suing against the old decision, it should not be thought that the visa application suspends that period by itself.

How are the deport fine, visa violation fee and costs assessed?

There is no single fixed deport fee

There is no single "deport charge" applicable to everyone for lifting a deportation decision. Fees and fines arising from a visa or residence violation are determined by the type and duration of the violation, nationality, previous payments and the legislation to be applied. Notary, translation, litigation costs, lawyer's fees and the travel costs of the deportation procedure are also separate items. The current amount should be learned from the competent authority's specific assessment of charges. [1, Art. 60][6][16]

Payment may affect the entry ban; it is not an automatic cancellation

The official explanation of the Presidency of Migration Management on violations of lawful stay assesses together, for the purposes of the entry ban, the person's leaving of their own accord before the violation is detected, the duration of the violation, compliance with the exit period granted and the necessary payments. For example, in a violation of less than three months, the position of a person who leaves of their own accord, also meeting the other conditions in the explanation, and pays the necessary debts is not the same as that of a person who does not pay or does not leave within the period granted. This example is not a single calculation of the ban period that applies to all files. [6]

The debt is checked even if the ban period has expired

The official explanation states that, even if the entry ban period has ended, non-payment of the relevant fines and public receivables may constitute an obstacle to entry. Conversely, payment of the debt does not by itself lift an independent entry ban based on public order or another ground. A payment receipt and a decision on lifting or an entry permit are different documents. [6][1, Arts. 7 and 15]

Payment channel, receipt and objection

The official collection channel authorised for the procedure should be used; the type of the debt, to whom it belongs and the payment record should be checked. Making a payment merely to an intermediary does not show that the public debt has been closed. If the assessment is thought to be wrong, the time limit and authority for application specific to the legal basis of the act are determined. The route against a fine does not replace the seven-day route of action against a deportation decision.

Do marriage, children, health and long-term residence affect a deport decision?

Marriage to a Turkish citizen and family life

Marrying a Turkish citizen does not automatically lift a deportation decision. Nevertheless, genuine and continuing family life, ties in Türkiye, the status of family members, living together and the effects of separation are important in the administrative and judicial assessment. The balance between a public order ground and interference with family life must be struck on the person's specific circumstances. [10, Arts. 20 and 41][14]

The best interests of the child

One should not be content with the child's citizenship or school enrolment alone. Their age, who undertakes their care, their health and education, their dependence on the parent, the other parent's means and the concrete consequences of separation should be explained. The assessment of the child's interests does not mean that the parent has an unlimited right of residence independent of all other conditions; the decision must be reasoned with these facts. [10, Art. 41][1, Arts. 55 and 59]

Health and access to treatment in the country

In a health allegation, two different matters may arise: the journey itself being risky, and the absence of access to vital treatment in the country of destination. Besides the name of the illness, the report should explain the treatment, the effect on travel and, if possible, the consequences of an interruption. The existence of a hospital in the country of destination and the person's actual ability to access the necessary treatment are not the same question. [1, Arts. 4 and 55]

Immovable property, work, education and a long residence history

Owning immovable property in Türkiye, setting up a company, working in a job or having lived there for many years are facts of the file; on their own they do not provide absolute protection against a deportation act. These ties should be presented by linking them with genuine documents and with the basis of the decision. That a permit was granted in the past likewise does not prevent all later administrative assessments; the current permit and the situation on the date of the act are examined together.

How are a deport and an entry ban queried, and what documents are needed?

Obtaining a written record from the competent authority

For an act inside Türkiye, the provincial migration administration concerned, the border unit and the authority holding the file may be contacted; on entry or visa matters from abroad, the Turkish diplomatic mission may be contacted in a way suited to the type of procedure. YİMER is among the official channels from which procedural information can be obtained. For detailed person-specific records, identity verification and a power of attorney or legal representation document may be required. It should not be assumed that there is a single publicly accessible internet query that shows every deport decision in full detail. [7]

Matching the evidence with the reasoning of the decision

Explaining contradictory and missing records

If a name is spelt differently, a passport has changed, the same person has more than one number or there are differences in dates, the reason should be explained. A usable translation and, where necessary, authentication of documents in a foreign language should be prepared. Producing a document contrary to the truth, uploading a client's identity to a publicly accessible area or spreading sensitive information unrelated to the file is not part of preparing an application.

Which procedures are followed after a court decision?

Implementation of the annulment decision

When the court annuls a deportation decision, the operative part and the reasoning are examined together. The administration must perform what the court decision requires without delay; the general implementation period in Article 28 of the İYUK cannot exceed 30 days from the notification of the decision to the administration. The effect of the decision should be followed in respect of the centre where the person is located, the detention decision, the records and other valid administrative acts. [3, Art. 28]

There is also an express provision regarding alternative obligations: the annulment, lifting or withdrawal of the deportation decision ends the alternative obligation under the Regulation concerned. The entry of this result in the records and the updating of the reporting obligation imposed on the person should be followed. The explanation that "the acts are separate" does not mean that this statutory link is to be disregarded. [8, Art. 20/2-g]

Annulment is not automatic residence or citizenship

The annulment of a deportation decision does not by itself provide a new residence card, a work permit or citizenship. If there is a separate entry ban or another decision, its status should also be determined. The administration acting in accordance with the reasoning of the decision, the document on which the person's further stay will rest, and the new application required are separate headings. In the same event, an act that renders the court's ruling ineffective should be distinguished from a separate act based on a new fact.

Dismissal of the action and subsequent routes of protection

If the action is dismissed, the ending of the protection against being sent during the proceedings under Article 53 comes into play. The date of learning of and notification of the decision, any other protection or court measure and the conditions of an individual application should be examined without delay. Applying to the Constitutional Court does not by itself create a new automatic period of suspension. [1, Art. 53/3][11]

When do an application to the Constitutional Court and to the ECtHR come into play?

Individual application to the Constitutional Court

An individual application is not a second general annulment action that replaces the ordinary judicial routes. The allegation of a violation of a fundamental right is assessed together with the exhaustion of remedies, the time limit and the other admissibility conditions. The general time limit for an individual application in the Law is 30 days; the starting point is determined according to the specific decision and the situation of learning of it. This period should not be confused with the seven-day initial time limit for suing in a deportation file. [11, Arts. 45-47]

Urgent measures and serious risk

If there is a serious danger to life or to physical and moral integrity, the Constitutional Court's interim measure mechanism may come into play. The request should explain what the risk is, the stage of the sending procedure, the routes pursued and the documents. The mere fact that an individual application has been made does not mean that a measure has been granted. Transmitting the application and the request for a measure through the correct channel, and notifying the decision given to the authorities concerned, are separate tasks to follow. [11, Art. 49; Rules of Procedure Art. 73]

European Court of Human Rights

For an application to the ECtHR, domestic remedies and the conditions under the Convention are assessed. The Court's interim measure under Rule 39 is directed at exceptional situations in which there is a risk of imminent and irreparable harm. It should not be presented as an automatic stay or a new visa route available in every deportation dispute. The timing of the application, domestic measures and the current official procedural requirements must be checked in the specific file. [18]

Which points do court decisions and academic assessment highlight?

Abdulkerım Hammud: Informed voluntary return and effective application

The Constitutional Court, in the Abdulkerım Hammud application, did not regard the signing of a pre-printed voluntary return form as sufficient on its own in an event in which the administration accepted that there was a genuine risk of return. It assessed whether the person had been adequately informed about the risks, whether the return rested on informed and genuine will, and whether the legal application could in practice be used. In the specific event, the Court decided that the right to life and the prohibition of ill-treatment, and the right to an effective remedy connected with them, had been violated. [12, §§46, 50-62 and 66-74]

The limit within which the decision can be used

This decision shows that no signature whatsoever removes all objections to return. However, the administrative detention complaint in the same application was found inadmissible because the remedies had not been exhausted. The country conditions on the date of the event in the decision cannot be used as ready proof of the same risk conclusion for every file today. [12]

Abdulkadir Yapuquan: The specific reason for detention and regular review

In its Abdulkadir Yapuquan decision, the Plenary of the Constitutional Court examined the person-specific reasons, regular assessment, grounds of extension and the maximum period as regards the start and continuation of administrative detention. It reached the conclusion that the right to personal liberty and security had been violated because general security or absconding-risk statements were not sufficiently linked to the specific event and because of deficiencies in the continuation process. [13, §§111-124 and 133-140]

Review of the deportation decision and review of detention are not the same

The decision's basic contribution is that administrative detention must be reviewed with its own statutory guarantees. It would not be correct to say that the deportation act was annulled on the merits or that all complaints about the conditions of the centre were accepted. Current alternative obligations and the application procedure are assessed separately on the basis of the Law in force. [13][1, Arts. 57-57/A]

Hekmat Al Zaım: Giving reasons for the effects on family life

In its decision of 4 March 2026 in Hekmat Al Zaım, the Constitutional Court assessed whether, in addition to the allegation of unpermitted work and the information in the file, the effects of the deportation act on existing family life had been sufficiently examined. It reached a conclusion of violation and retrial on the ground that a fair balance between interference with family life and the public interest had not been struck according to the circumstances of the specific event. [14, §§12-23 and 26]

The decision does not lay down a general rule that everyone who marries a Turkish citizen cannot be deported. It shows the importance of answering family ties and the relevant objections with concrete reasoning; it should also not be conveyed as a solution of a particular event relating to the best interests of the child. [14]

A 2026 academic study on alternative obligations

Cansu Kaya Ülken's 2026 study examines the aim of restricting liberty less through alternatives to administrative detention, while discussing problems of definiteness regarding the scope of the obligations, their joint application and the authorities of application. This assessment contributes to explaining the effect of the chosen measure on the person's living conditions and whether a lighter instrument would be sufficient. Academic criticism is neither a court decision that takes the place of the provision in force nor a ground of annulment by itself. [15, pp. 495-506]

How is the correct route of application determined, through three examples?

Example 1: A deportation decision and administrative detention together

Hypothetically, a person against whom a deportation decision has been issued and who is held in a removal centre applies to the administrative court within the seven-day period for the annulment of the decision. If they allege that the detention is unnecessary or unlawful, they apply separately to the criminal judgeship of peace. A document showing that an action has been filed in the administrative court does not make the application to the criminal court of peace unnecessary; the two routes review different acts.

Example 2: A person who is abroad and subject to an entry ban

If a person who has left Türkiye wishes to come again, the current entry ban, restriction, public debt and visa status are first determined. The lifting or annulment of the ban and a request for entry with special permission are assessed separately. Having married in Türkiye or received a job offer may be important for the file; these do not mean that all the obstacles are automatically removed.

Example 3: Serious illness and the problem of treatment in the country of destination

In the file of a person whose vital treatment is ongoing, the health report, the consequence of an interruption of treatment, the risk of travel and the genuine possibility of treatment in the country of destination are shown together. Non-refoulement and the scope of Article 55 are examined, together with the effect of detention on health if any, but as separate application requests. The examples are not real client files or a promise of a specific result.

Lawyer support, litigation costs and legal aid

Scope of the legal follow-up

The legal work in these files covers the review of the decision and notification, the correct route of application, the calculation of time limits, individual risk and evidence, notifying that an action has been filed, the detention application and the implementation of decisions. Following the file with a lawyer does not secure an automatic result for any person; however, when there are several decisions and short time limits, it is important that the procedures are carried out consistently with one another. Merely using a standard petition may not meet the differences of the file.

Fees and litigation costs

The service fee agreed with a lawyer, court fees, notification and translation costs and the attorney's fee that the court may award in favour of the other party are distinct from one another. The scope of the work to be done, how many separate decisions and applications there are and the need for representation should be explained in the fee assessment. A single payment definition tied to the result, such as a "fee for lifting a deport", is not correct. [16, Arts. 163-164 and 168][17, Arts. 323 and 326]

Legal services and court legal aid

For a person who has had recourse to the courts against an administrative detention act and who cannot meet the lawyer's fee, the provision of legal services upon request under Law No. 1136 is separately regulated in Law No. 6458. Bar legal aid and the legal aid decision a court may give regarding fees and costs are not the same. The type of application, the financial position and the statutory conditions must be examined separately. [1, Art. 57/7][16]

In administrative cases, because of the reference to the HMK, the conditions of court legal aid are assessed. For foreign nationals, the condition of reciprocity and the statutory exceptions relating to statelessness or international protection status are taken into account. It cannot be said that all costs are automatically free for every foreign national, nor can it be assumed that a person without the means to pay can receive no legal support. [3, Art. 31][17, Arts. 334-336][1, Arts. 51 and 88]

Conclusion

To lift a deport decision, the legal nature, reasoning and date of notification of the decision must first be determined. A deportation decision, administrative detention, an entry ban, a restriction record and a monetary debt are not a single act resolved automatically within one application. The competent authority, time limit, need for proof and consequence of implementation of each may be different.

Effective preparation rests on preserving the seven-day time limit for suing, applying to the correct court, notifying the administration of the record of the action and making concrete the evidence showing the person's situation. The risk of return, family life, the best interests of the child, health and the necessity of detention should be assessed in the file with separate reasons. Monitoring the records and the stay status after a court or administrative decision has been obtained is also a complementary part of the process.

Frequently asked questions

Is a deport decision the same thing as a deportation decision?

"Deport" in everyday use describes deportation. However, this expression is sometimes also used for an entry ban, a restriction or a fine. When a legal application is prepared, the name of the act in the official document must be determined. The consequences of the distinction are explained in the section on types of act. [1, Arts. 9 and 52-60]

How is a deport decision lifted?

The unlawfulness of a deportation decision can be asserted by an annulment action filed in time; the administration's re-assessment of the decision may also come into play in the specific file. If the result sought is the lifting of an entry ban or a special entry permit, a different route is needed. The first step is the review of the decision, the reasoning and the notification. See the section on the annulment action. [1, Arts. 9 and 53][3]

What is the time limit for suing against a deport decision?

It is 7 days from the notification of the decision. The procedure of notification, the representation status, the electronic record and whether the last day is a holiday are assessed separately. It should not be confused with the period given for the invitation to leave or with the court's period for deciding. For details see the section on notification and time limits. [1, Art. 53/3][3, Art. 8][5]

Is it mandatory to object to the migration administration first?

There is no requirement of making an administrative objection first in order to apply to the administrative court against a deportation decision. A request for re-assessment may be given to the administration; but it should not be assumed that this application preserves the special seven-day time limit for suing. The administrative application and the action calendar should be handled together. [1, Art. 53/3][3, Art. 11]

Does the deportation act stop when an action is filed?

Subject to the foreign national's consent, the foreign national is not deported during the time limit for suing and, if recourse to the courts is made in time, until the proceedings are concluded. The filing of the action is also notified to the authority that issued the decision. This protection does not by itself provide a residence permit or release from the centre. See the section on the effect of the action. [1, Art. 53/3]

Is filing a deportation action sufficient to leave the removal centre?

Administrative detention is a separate decision. For detention to end, the administration must assess the conditions for its continuation, or an application to the criminal judgeship of peace must be examined. A document showing that an annulment action has been filed may be important in the detention application; however, it is not by itself a release decision. See the section on administrative detention. [1, Art. 57]

Is the time limit for objecting to an administrative detention decision five days?

The five days in the Law is the period for the criminal judge of peace to examine the application; it does not mean that the foreign national can apply only in the first five days. A fresh application is also possible on the allegation that the grounds for detention have changed or ceased. A detention request is separate from the special seven-day action against the deportation decision. [1, Art. 57/6]

For how long at most can one be held in a removal centre?

Administrative detention for the purpose of deportation cannot, as a rule, exceed six months. If the procedures cannot be completed because the foreign national does not cooperate or does not give correct information or documents about their country, it may be extended by at most six more months. Necessity is reviewed regularly; the upper limit does not mean that everyone can be held for that long. [1, Art. 57/3-4]

Is everyone given thirty days to leave Türkiye?

No. If the conditions for an invitation to leave exist, a period of not less than 15 days and up to 30 days is given. In cases of a risk of absconding and the other situations listed in the Law, no period may be granted. The exit period given does not extend the seven-day time limit for suing. See the section on the invitation to leave. [1, Arts. 53 and 56]

How is the deport fine calculated and paid?

There is no single deport fee for everyone. Items such as the fee, the violation fine, public receivables and travel costs are determined separately. The current assessment should be learned from the competent authority and paid through the official collection channel against a receipt. The lawyer's fee is separate from these public debts. See the section on financial obligations. [1, Art. 60][6][16]

Does paying the fine lift the deport?

Payment may affect the entry ban assessment in a visa or residence violation file; however, it does not by itself annul a deportation decision, another entry ban or a security record. A receipt showing that the debt has been closed and an act showing that the decision has been lifted are different. The other obstacles must be checked separately. [6][1, Arts. 7, 9 and 15]

Where is a deport decision queried?

Depending on the type of act, information based on identity and authority of representation is requested from the provincial migration administration concerned, the border unit or the diplomatic mission. YİMER is an official information channel on procedure. It should not be assumed that there is a single open internet query showing every file in full detail. See the section on querying and documents. [7]

Can a deported person come to Türkiye again?

The current entry ban, independent restrictions, public debt, and passport and visa conditions are assessed together. The lifting of the ban, the expiry of its period or routes of entry with special permission may come into play according to the specific file. Having been deported before means neither a lifelong ban nor automatic admission in every case. [1, Arts. 7, 9, 11 and 15]

Does being deported from Türkiye prevent travel to other countries?

Türkiye's deportation or entry ban decision is not, by itself, a common travel ban imposed by all other countries. Nevertheless, the visa and admission rules of the country of destination, the information it requests about past violations and, if any, separate judicial or international records may have an effect. Country-specific current conditions should be examined separately.

To which country is a deported person sent?

The Law provides for the country of origin, a transit country or a third country that will accept the person. In every case, the non-refoulement guarantee and the protections specific to the person's situation are assessed. The acceptance by a third country and the possibility of the person being sent from there to another risky place may be important. See the protection guarantees. [1, Arts. 4, 52 and 55]

Is a deport decision lifted when one marries a Turkish citizen?

Marriage is not, on its own, an automatic ground for lifting. Genuine family life, living together, the effects of separation and the basis of the decision are assessed together. These facts need to be addressed by the administration and the court with concrete reasoning. See the section on family life and the Hekmat Al Zaım decision. [10, Arts. 20 and 41][14]

Can a foreign national who has a Turkish citizen child be deported?

Although the child's citizenship is important, it does not by itself constitute an automatic rule that removes all grounds. The child's age, care relationship, dependency, health, education and the effects of separation must be assessed. The best interests of the child should be made concrete in the file; it should not be assumed that the same result will apply to all family members. [10, Art. 41][1, Arts. 55 and 59]

Can a pregnant or seriously ill person be deported?

Travel being risky because of pregnancy, age or health, and the absence of any possibility of treatment in the country of destination for a life-threatening illness, are separate protections in the Law. Each situation is assessed with individual and current documents. Not every name of an illness is an automatic obstacle; a serious travel or treatment risk likewise cannot be ignored. [1, Art. 55]

Is there protection for victims of human trafficking or violence?

Victims of human trafficking who are benefiting from the victim support process, and victims of psychological, physical or sexual violence until their treatment is completed, are listed in Article 55. The determination of the victimisation and the process concerned, the person-specific assessment and the necessary referral are important. This does not mean that every type of residence permit is granted automatically. [1, Art. 55]

Does a new residence application remove the deport decision?

Making an application does not by itself annul the earlier deportation decision. The admissibility of the application, the person's current status, the basis of the decision and the statutory conditions of stay are examined separately. The open seven-day time limit for suing should not be allowed to pass in the belief that a residence application has been made. [1, Arts. 25, 53 and 54]

Can students or holders of a protection document never be deported?

Student residence, international protection and temporary protection are different regimes. The validity of the document, the special provisions, the reason for the decision and the non-refoulement guarantee are examined together. Absolute protection or an automatic deportation result for everyone cannot be concluded from a student record alone or from the everyday name of a document. [1, Arts. 4, 38, 54 and 91]

Does acquittal in a criminal file automatically lift the deport decision?

An acquittal and other criminal decisions matter to the extent of their relationship with the ground for deportation. However, the separate administrative act is not deemed to be erased with all its consequences automatically. Whether the criminal decision refutes the administrative reasoning, whether there is another current basis and how the decision will be implemented are assessed separately. [1, Art. 54][14]

Can a foreign national who received a prison sentence of less than two years not be deported?

The current TCK Art. 59 has no general two-year lower threshold. The article regulates that the situation of a foreign national sentenced to imprisonment is to be notified at certain stages of execution to be assessed for deportation procedures. This notification, too, is not an automatic deportation result; the conditions in Law No. 6458 apply separately. [4, Art. 59][1, Art. 54/1-a and 55]

Does lifting a restriction code clear all obstacles?

The decision on which each record is based, its duration and the competent authority should be found out. The lifting of one code does not show that another independent entry ban, a public debt or a prior permission requirement has also been lifted. Correcting a material record error and lifting a valid administrative decision are different requests. See the section on entry bans and restrictions.

Does an annotated visa provide a definite right of entry?

YİMER explains the istizanlı or special-annotation visa application at a diplomatic mission for those subject to an entry ban. The application is not the same as the annulment of the ban by a court and gives no guarantee of acceptance. The grant of a visa likewise does not provide an absolute right of entry under the Law; the conditions of admission at the border apply separately. [7][1, Arts. 9/6, 11/3 and 15/2]

Are debts also erased when the entry ban period ends?

The expiry of the ban period and the ending of a financial debt are different. The official explanation of the Presidency of Migration Management states that, if the relevant fines and public receivables are not paid, entry may not be permitted even though the ban period has ended. The current debt and the other valid obstacles should be checked separately. [6]

Does signing a voluntary return form mean giving up every objection?

The conditions of the signature, the person's being informed in a language they understand and whether their will was genuine are examined. In particular where there is a risk of return, a pre-printed form does not by itself remove all guarantees. The Abdulkerım Hammud decision makes concrete the assessment of informed voluntariness and an effective application. See the review of the decision. [12]

Can one wait until all documents are ready for the application?

Because of the short time limit for suing, the decision and the notification document should be obtained first and the application calendar determined without delay. The collection of the other evidence is carried out at the same time. The fact that not every document is ready is not a general reason that justifies letting the period pass. The necessary groups of documents are explained in the document table. [1, Art. 53/3][3]

Does a deportation case necessarily end in fifteen days?

The 2024 amendment ties the fifteen-day decision period to the completion of the file or the completion of the necessary interim decision or hearing. It therefore cannot be said that every file will end in fifteen days from the day the action is filed. This period is different from the seven days granted for filing an action. [19][1, Art. 53/3]

Does sending stop automatically when one applies to the Constitutional Court?

Making an individual application does not by itself produce a new automatic stay. Besides the admissibility and time-limit conditions, if there is a serious risk, a request for a measure is assessed. Requesting a measure and a measure being granted are also different. See the section on the individual application. [11, Arts. 45-49; Rules of Procedure Art. 73]

Can a person without the means to hire a lawyer obtain legal support?

Legal aid possibilities may be assessed according to the type of application and the statutory conditions. For a person who applies against an administrative detention act and who cannot meet the lawyer's fee, the provision of legal services upon request is separately regulated. Bar legal aid, the court's decision on exemption from costs and social support programmes are not the same. In-kind or cash support for voluntary return may come into play for persons the administration deems suitable; it is not an automatic payment to everyone. [1, Art. 60/A] [1, Art. 57/7][16][17, Arts. 334-336]

When a deport decision is annulled, is a residence permit automatically granted?

An annulment decision does not by itself provide a residence card or citizenship; the implementation of the ruling and the legal basis of the later stay are determined separately. As for alternative obligations, however, the annulment, lifting or withdrawal of the deportation decision is a ground for their ending. See the section on follow-up after the decision. [3, Art. 28][8, Art. 20/2-g]

Sources

The legislation, official explanations and decisions were checked as of 28 October 2026. Statutory amendments, provisions relating to the date of the event and the limits of the decisions to their specific events have been assessed together. The bracketed citations refer to the sources below.

1. Law No. 6458 on Foreigners and International Protection (Yabancılar ve Uluslararası Koruma Kanunu). In particular Arts. 4, 7, 9, 11, 15, 25, 46, 51-60/A, 66, 88, 91 and 100. For review of historical amendments, also Law No. 7196, in particular Art. 75 et seq.
2. Regulation on the Implementation of the Law on Foreigners and International Protection. Official Gazette dated 17.03.2016, no. 29656. Read together with later statutory amendments and special regulations.
3. Administrative Procedure Law No. 2577 (İdari Yargılama Usulü Kanunu). In particular Arts. 2, 3, 7-11, 27-28, 31-32 and 45-46.
4. Turkish Criminal Code No. 5237, Art. 59.
5. Notification Law No. 7201. In particular Art. 7/a and the related notification provisions.
6. Migration Management, Explanation on Entry Bans to Be Applied to Foreign Nationals Who Violate the Right of Lawful Stay, 09.06.2020. Official explanation on the duration of the violation, leaving of one's own accord, payment and entry ban conditions.
7. YİMER, Frequently Asked Questions. Istizanlı/special-annotation visa application of those subject to an entry ban, and official procedural information.
8. Regulation on Alternative Obligations to Administrative Detention. Official Gazette dated 14.09.2022, no. 31953; in particular Arts. 6 and 20. Text as first published.
9. Regulation on the Establishment, Management, Operation, Outsourcing and Inspection of Reception and Accommodation Centres and Removal Centres. Official Gazette dated 22.04.2014, no. 28980.
10. Constitution of the Republic of Türkiye. In particular Arts. 16-17, 19-20, 23, 36, 40-41 and 125.
11. Law No. 6216 on the Establishment and Rules of Procedure of the Constitutional Court, Arts. 45-50; Rules of Procedure of the Constitutional Court, Arts. 64 and 73. The amendment of 05.08.2025 to the provision on measures has been taken into account.
12. Constitutional Court, Abdulkerım Hammud [2nd Section], application no. 2019/24388, 02.05.2023. In particular §§46, 50-62 and 66-74. Official full-text view.
13. Constitutional Court, Abdulkadir Yapuquan [Plenary], application no. 2016/35009, 02.05.2019. In particular §§111-124 and 133-140. Official press release.
14. Constitutional Court, Hekmat Al Zaım [1st Section], application no. 2021/29101, 04.03.2026. In particular §§12-23 and 26. Official full-text view.
15. Cansu Kaya Ülken, “İdari Gözetime Alternatif Yükümlülüklerin Hukuki Niteliği ve Uygulanması” (The Legal Nature and Application of Alternative Obligations to Administrative Detention), Anadolu University Faculty of Law Journal, 12(2), 2026, pp. 487-508, DOI: 10.54699/andhd.1912564. In the review, pp. 495-506 in particular were used. Full text.
16. Attorneyship Law No. 1136. In particular Arts. 163-168 and, on legal aid, Arts. 176-181.
17. Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100. In particular Arts. 323, 326 and 334-336; together with the reference in Art. 31 of the İYUK in administrative justice and the special provisions.
18. European Court of Human Rights, Applying for interim measures; Practice Direction — Requests for interim measures. Official explanations under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court.
19. Law No. 7533, Art. 36. The 2024 amendment to the special procedure and decision period in Art. 53/3 of Law No. 6458.
20. Law No. 7589, Arts. 5-6, provisional Art. 1/3 and the entry-into-force provision. The 2026 amendments to the route of appeal in administrative justice; the exception for Law No. 6458 in Art. 46/2-d of the İYUK.