The signature on a voluntary return form is an important document showing that a foreign national wishes to return to their country. However, a signature does not in every case conclusively show that free and informed consent existed. The language of the document, what explanations were given, the person’s health and mental condition, any claim of pressure, and the legal steps taken before signing must be assessed together.[[1, 2]](#kaynak-1)
This matter is especially important because Article 53(3) of YUKK, which regulates the time limit for bringing an action and the guarantee against deportation during proceedings, preserves the foreign national’s consent. Accordingly, whether a document is a notification receipt, a voluntary return request or some other statement can change its consequences. The content of documents matters as much as their headings.
Is voluntary return the same as deportation?
A deportation is an administrative decision taken on legal grounds. In voluntary return, by contrast, the person’s will to return is the basis. The two processes may arise in the same file: a person who is subject to a deportation decision and held in administrative detention may also wish to return voluntarily. For this reason, the fact that a person is in a removal centre does not by itself invalidate every statement of will; however, it requires careful examination of how the consent was formed. The article Deportation Decision may also be helpful on this subject.
The legal basis depends on the person’s status. The return of a person under temporary protection and the return of an international protection applicant or an irregular migrant cannot be grouped under a single status heading.
| Person’s situation | Main provision | Distinction to observe |
|---|---|---|
| Irregular migrant subject to a deportation decision | YUKK Article 60/A | Provision of support depends on it being considered appropriate and on the conditions |
| Holder of or applicant for international protection | YUKK Article 87 and Implementing Regulation Article 121 | The effects on the application and the status are examined separately |
| Person under temporary protection | Regulation on Temporary Protection, Articles 12, 13 and 42 | Leaving at one’s own request and benefiting again from protection are assessed separately |
This distinction prevents generalizations such as “everyone who signs the form loses the same rights” or “everyone who returns voluntarily receives the same support.”[[1, 3, 4]](#kaynak-1) For the process and documents, the article International Protection Application: Rights and Objection Guide may also be consulted.
Under what conditions is valid consent disputed?
Understanding the document and its consequences
The person must be able to understand the meaning of the form. The fact that a document is drafted in Turkish does not show that a person who does not speak Turkish understood it. If a translation was made, the language used, the identity of the translator and the matters explained can be examined in the file. Literacy, or a health problem affecting the person’s ability to understand, is also important.
Information must not be limited to saying “you are returning to your country.” It must make clear what the return means for the current protection status, for the procedures in Türkiye and for personal risks in the destination country. Not every file requires the same details; however, where a serious risk is alleged, it is open to question whether a person has been informed on the basis of general and standard wording.
Pressure, threats and misinformation
Where it is alleged that the signature was obtained under threat, physical pressure or misleading statements, the claim should be made as specific as possible. Alongside the statement “I was pressured,” it should be explained what was said, when the event took place, who was present and how the person was affected.
The administration may point to the signature on the form and to the interpreter’s record. Objections made before signing, a consultation with a lawyer, instructions to file a case or medical records may, however, present a different picture. The examination should assess the whole sequence of events, not merely declare a document correct or incorrect.
Supervision itself does not automatically invalidate every consent, and an interpreter’s signature on the form does not automatically refute every claim. What matters is which safeguards were actually provided.
Why is the Constitutional Court’s Abdulkerim Hammud decision important?
In the decision in Abdulkerim Hammud, Application No. 2019/24388, dated May 2, 2023, the Constitutional Court (AYM) examined a return that was claimed to be voluntary within the context of the whole event. The administration accepted that there was a risk in the applicant’s country of origin; nevertheless, the return was based on a signed form.[2]
The Court assessed together the absence of adequate information about the personal risk, the fact that the lawyer was not informed when the form was signed, the procedural safeguards of the period, and the applicant’s will, expressed shortly before, to bring an action against the deportation procedure. A violation was found in relation to the right to an effective remedy connected with the right to life and the prohibition of ill-treatment.
It cannot be concluded from the decision that “every form without a lawyer’s signature is invalid.” The circular and form arrangement discussed in the decision was considered in light of the circumstances at the time of the events. In a current file as well, real information and free will must be investigated; a single signature or a single omission must not replace the whole assessment.
What to do when the form has been signed
If the person has not yet left Türkiye
First, a copy of the signed document and the case file should be obtained. If the person does not wish to return, or states that the earlier declaration was based on pressure or misinformation, this should be communicated to the competent authority without delay, in a clear and recorded statement. If there is a lawyer, the situation should be conveyed to them.
The date and time of this statement matter. The stage of the removal preparations, the response given to the person and a record confirming receipt of the notification should be kept. Conveying the current will to the administration does not mean that all procedures stop automatically; the relevant judicial protection must also be assessed separately.
Article 121(4) of the Implementing Regulation of YUKK regulates the protection of international protection status holders who withdraw their voluntary return request and the continuation of the procedures of applicants from the point where they stopped.[4] This special provision should not be presented as a single general “withdrawal period” for all foreign nationals. Temporary protection and other situations are governed by their own rules.
If there is a deportation decision and an ongoing case
If the decision has been served, the seven-day period for bringing an action under Article 53(3) of YUKK must be protected. When an action is brought, the authority that issued the decision is notified. If the administration relies on voluntary return, the objection to the validity of consent must also be conveyed to the court and the administration with concrete documents.[[1, 5]](#kaynak-1)
The fact that an action has been brought should not be treated as sufficient protection on the assumption that a voluntary return based on valid consent is still possible. Equally, a claim that consent did not exist or was vitiated should not remain merely oral. The legal request should aim at investigating the genuine will and securing protection proportionate to the concrete risk.
If the person has been removed from Türkiye
The fact that a person has left Türkiye does not mean that all legal remedies have disappeared. However, the implemented act, the protection status and the possibility of re-entry are now examined separately. The person’s current location, safety, the notification of decisions, the possibility of representation and any ongoing cases must be established.
The request is often not merely the “cancellation” of the form on paper. It must be stated which of the following is the subject of the dispute: the deportation based on the form, termination of status, a registration or an entry ban. Where the conditions are met, annulment and compensation remedies may be considered; however, a finding that an act was unlawful does not mean an automatic return ticket or an unconditional right of entry.
What does a V-87 record mean and what does it not show on its own?
V-87 is one of the codes encountered in practice for recording foreign nationals who have returned voluntarily. The code also appears in historical administrative documents relating to temporary protection procedures.[6] However, the person’s full legal situation cannot be inferred from the name of the code alone.
The termination of temporary protection, a prohibition on entry into Türkiye and a subsequent refusal of entry must be kept apart. It should be investigated whether the file contains a separate entry ban decision, and on what date and for what reasons it was imposed. It cannot be said from the code alone that a fixed ban period or an automatic lifting date applies to every person.
Article 12 of the Regulation on Temporary Protection counts a person’s leaving Türkiye at their own request as one of the individual grounds for termination of protection. Article 13 provides that the decision on whether a person who returns may benefit from temporary protection again is made individually. Accordingly, possessing an old identity document or having been under protection in the past does not mean that the status is reactivated automatically.[3] See also International Protection and Temporary Protection Law.
Under Article 45 of the Regulation, matters concerning entry bans are subject to the general provisions. Accordingly, neither “I returned voluntarily, so an entry ban cannot exist” nor “there is a V-87, so return is never possible under any circumstances” can be concluded without examining the specific file.
Which documents help assess consent?
| Document or record | Matter to examine |
|---|---|
| All pages of the form | Language, dates, signatures, statements and the true nature of the document |
| Translation and information records | In which language, and what consequences and risks were explained? |
| Lawyer consultation and case records | Will and legal steps before signing |
| Medical records | Circumstances that may affect understanding and decision-making |
| Removal, departure and notification records | The sequence of procedures and when the objection reached the authority |
| Status and restriction documents | Which separate procedures were established after the return? |
Camera footage or other recordings can be requested insofar as they exist, are available and are legally accessible. It should not be assumed that such records always exist or will in every case be provided directly to the person. Witness statements should be supported by verifiable details such as the place and time of the event.
How are time limits and legal aid tracked?
The seven-day period for bringing an action against a deportation decision is not the same as the general sixty-day period applicable to administrative acts for which no special period is set. For acts such as termination of status, rejection of an application for protection or an entry ban, the legal nature and any special provisions must be checked separately. Writing a single “objection period” for all acts may lead to the loss of rights.[[1, 7]](#kaynak-1)
Under Administrative Procedure Law No. 2577 (İYUK), Article 11, an administrative application may suspend the general time limit for bringing an action where its conditions are met; after thirty days without a response, an implied rejection occurs and the remaining period becomes relevant. It cannot be assumed that this provision safely extends the special seven-day period for a deportation decision. The special period for bringing an action must not be allowed to lapse while awaiting an administrative response.
Where administrative detention applies, the route to a criminal judgeship of peace (sulh ceza hâkimliği) must also be assessed separately. For a person who cannot afford lawyers’ fees, Article 57(7) of YUKK and, in appropriate statuses, Article 81 on legal aid are important. A request for legal aid does not mean that applications are postponed indefinitely or that every expense is covered automatically. For details on this subject, see Objection to an Administrative Detention Decision.
Conclusion
The legal assessment of voluntary return rests on the relationship between the signature and the genuine will. The understanding of the document, information about personal risks, claims of pressure and the chronological order of events must be examined together. Where it is claimed that the return request has been withdrawn or the consent was vitiated, this must be recorded without delay.
A V-87 record, however, cannot be used as a summary of the entire status and entry position of a person. The correct legal approach is to determine separately the decisions taken on the basis of the form, the person’s protection status and the notifications.
Related articles: Notification and the seven-day period in a deportation decision; Application guide for relatives at a removal centre; Restriction code and lifting of an entry ban.
Frequently asked questions
Is it mandatory to sign the voluntary return form?
Voluntary return is based on the person’s will. However, not every document requested for a signature is a voluntary return form. A notification receipt and the content of a return request must be kept separate.
If I have signed, do I lose all my application rights?
No. The validity of consent and the procedures based on the form can be examined. Since a signature may have significant consequences, the document and the time limits should be assessed without delay.
If an interpreter has signed, is a claim of pressure not examined?
It can be examined. The interpreter’s record is an important piece of evidence, but it does not replace an assessment of the whole sequence of events, the information provided and free will.
After signing, can I state that I no longer wish to return?
The current will can be stated without delay, in writing and in a recorded form. There is a specific withdrawal provision for international protection; other statuses are examined separately. There is no single general withdrawal period for everyone.
Is V-87 always a five-year entry ban?
No. The record, a separate entry ban decision and the termination of protection status must be kept apart. The duration and outcome are determined from the specific case file.
Is the temporary protection of a person who returns voluntarily reinstated automatically upon return?
No. Under Article 13 of the Regulation on Temporary Protection, an individual decision is required to benefit from protection again.
Sources and legal bases
- Law No. 6458 on Foreigners and International Protection (YUKK), Articles 4, 53, 55, 57, 60/A, 81 and 87. Consolidated text of the law.
- Constitutional Court (AYM), Abdulkerim Hammud, Application No. 2019/24388, May 2, 2023, in particular §§47–74 and the operative part. Official decision record; full text, alternative access.
- Regulation on Temporary Protection (Geçici Koruma Yönetmeliği), Articles 12, 13, 42 and 45. Consolidated regulation.
- Implementing Regulation of the Law on Foreigners and International Protection (YUKK Uygulama Yönetmeliği), Articles 63 and 121. Regulation record; official publication.
- Law No. 7533, Articles 36 and 38. Text of the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye (TBMM).
- Procedures and principles document published in the 2016 archive of the official authority responsible for temporary protection processes, for the historical use of the V-87 record. It is not a binding dictionary of all current codes. Document hosted by the Ministry of National Education (MEB).
- Administrative Procedure Law No. 2577 (İYUK), in particular Articles 7, 11 and 27. Consolidated law.