Prevention of the Financing of Terrorism: Law No. 6415, MASAK Obligations, Asset Freezing and Remedies

On What Legal Structure Is the Prevention of the Financing of Terrorism Based?

Law No. 6415 Regulates the Criminal and Asset-Freezing Regimes Together

Law No. 6415 entered into force on 16 February 2013. On the one hand, the Law defines the offence of terrorist financing; on the other, it regulates the procedures for freezing assets in respect of United Nations Security Council decisions, requests by foreign states and domestic freezing decisions in Türkiye.

The significant 2020 amendments to the Law were made not, as is sometimes written in older articles, by a "Presidential decree" but by Law No. 7262 dated 27 December 2020. These amendments detailed in particular the domestic freezing procedure for assets located in Türkiye, the approval of the Ankara high criminal court (ağır ceza mahkemesi), the six-month review and the request for lifting.

Law No. 5549 and the MASAK Legislation Determine the Preventive Obligations

The Law No. 5549 on the Prevention of Laundering Proceeds of Crime, together with the Regulation on Measures and the Regulation on Compliance Program issued under it, regulates preventive obligations such as obligated parties knowing their customer, identifying the beneficial owner, monitoring transactions, filing suspicious transaction reports, retaining and submitting records, providing information and documents, and establishing a compliance programme in certain institutions.

The purpose of these obligations is not for the obligated party to issue a finding of guilt like a criminal court. The purpose is to ensure that transactions that are inconsistent with the ordinary transaction profile, whose economic or legal purpose cannot be explained, or that support a suspicion of terrorist financing, are examined by MASAK, the competent financial intelligence unit.

Criminal Procedure Provisions Are Also Applied Through Law No. 3713

Article 4 of Law No. 6415 provides that the provisions of the Anti-Terror Law No. 3713 on investigation, prosecution and enforcement also apply to the offence of terrorist financing. The Law also contains special provisions allowing measures such as the appointment of a trustee to manage a company, interception of communications, undercover investigators, technical surveillance and controlled delivery.

Each of these measures is subject to its own statutory conditions. The mere existence of a financial movement does not mean that all protective measures can be applied automatically and without limit.

The 2026 FATF Evaluation Shows the Current Risk and Compliance Agenda

The FATF Mutual Evaluation Report on Türkiye dated 23 September 2026 stated that Türkiye has strengthened its financial intelligence and international cooperation capacity; on the other hand, it noted that cross-border risks, financing activities relating to different terrorist organisations and networks, and the tracing and recovery of assets need to be developed further.

In the report, Türkiye was assessed as "largely compliant" with Recommendation 5 on the offence of terrorist financing and Recommendation 6 on targeted financial sanctions relating to terrorism and terrorist financing. This technical rating does not mean a finding of guilt about a specific person or transaction; it is an international assessment of the normative and institutional adequacy of the country's system.

What Do Funds, Assets and Asset Freezing Mean?

The Concept of Funds Is Not Limited to Cash

Under Law No. 6415, funds include money or any kind of movable or immovable property, tangible or intangible, and rights and receivables that can be represented in monetary value, as well as the documents representing them.

For this reason, the following values may qualify as funds depending on the specific case:

• Cash and bank deposits,
• Electronic money and crypto-assets,
• Movable and immovable property,
• Securities, shares and receivable rights,
• Commercial goods, fuel, provisions and living supplies,
• The possibility of benefiting from a service or asset,
• Interest, dividends, profit shares and other income derived from funds.

The Criminal General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay Ceza Genel Kurulu) accepts that anything with material and economic value can be considered within the concept of funds; and that neither the amount nor the method of provision is, on its own, decisive for the formation of the offence.

The Legal Source of the Funds and the Purpose of Their Use Are Distinct

The financing of terrorism does not refer only to the transfer of money obtained from crime. Value obtained from a lawful commercial activity, a salary, a donation or another legitimate source may also be the subject of the offence if it is provided or collected for use in terrorist acts or in the activities of a terrorist organisation.

In this respect, the financing of terrorism differs from the offence of laundering proceeds of crime. In laundering, it matters that the assets originate from an offence; in the financing of terrorism, what is decisive, rather than the source of the funds, is the purpose of providing or collecting them and the perpetrator's knowledge and will.

Asset Freezing Is Not a Transfer of Ownership

Asset freezing is a measure that prevents the removal, consumption, conversion, transfer, assignment and other acts of disposal of assets. Ownership of frozen assets in principle remains with the natural or legal person concerned; however, the power of disposal is restricted by law and by MASAK's permission.

Freezing, Seizure and Confiscation Are Not the Same Act

For one and the same asset, freezing may come first, followed by seizure within a criminal investigation or confiscation at the end of the trial; however, these measures are not automatic consequences of one another and each is subject to separate statutory conditions.

The Offence of Terrorist Financing Under Law No. 6415

The Basic Act Is Providing or Collecting Funds

According to Article 4 of Law No. 6415, a person who provides or collects funds for a terrorist or a terrorist organisation, with the purpose of having them used wholly or partly in carrying out the acts within Article 3 of the Law, or knowing and willing that they will be used, even without being linked to a specific act, is punished.

"Providing funds" is making an existing economic value available to the terrorist, the terrorist organisation or their sphere of use. "Collecting funds" may take the form of bringing together funds from different persons, sources or transactions, pooling them, or setting up an organisation for this purpose.

Linking to a Specific Terrorist Act Is Not Required

The Law does not make it mandatory to link the funds to a specific attack, date, place or operation. In its decisions E.2017/692, K.2018/41 and E.2017/691, K.2019/202, the Criminal General Assembly of the Court of Cassation explained that knowingly providing funds to a terrorist or a terrorist organisation may constitute an offence, if the other elements are also present, even if no specific terrorist act is shown.

This rule does not remove the burden of proof. That the perpetrator knew the funds would be used for terrorist purposes and wanted this result must be established on the basis of all the evidence in the specific case.

It Is Not Necessary for the Funds to Be Actually Used in an Offence

Article 4/3 of Law No. 6415 expressly provides that, in order for a penalty to be imposed, it is not required that the funds have actually been used in committing an offence. The offence can be completed by providing or collecting the funds with the required purpose and knowledge.

Nevertheless, the funds' not reaching the addressee, the transaction's remaining at the stage of attempt, the role of the intermediary or the seizure of the money through police intervention are separately examined in terms of complicity, attempt and individualisation of the sentence.

The Mental Element Is Knowledge and Intent

The offence of terrorist financing can be committed intentionally. The perpetrator must know and want:

• To whom or to which structure the funds are transferred,
• The link between the funds and the terrorist organisation, the terrorist or the acts in Article 3 of the Law,
• The real purpose of the act of providing or collecting.

In a transaction that has the appearance of a commercial payment, family assistance, repayment of a debt, wages, a donation or social support, whether the explanation is genuine; the relationship between the parties, and the timing, amount, frequency of repetition, communication records and other evidence of the money movement must be assessed together.

Penalty and Aggravating Circumstances

The penalty for the basic offence is imprisonment from five to ten years. The penalty is increased where the act is committed by abusing the influence afforded by a public duty. Where the offence is committed within the activity of a legal person, security measures specific to legal persons come into play.

Where the founder, manager or member of an organisation commits the same act, the increase provided by the Law for the penalty to be imposed for the organisation offence may be applied. Where more than one type of offence is discussed in the same incident, the special norm and the rules on apparent and real concurrence are assessed according to the specific act.

How Are Terrorist Financing, Aiding an Organisation and Membership of an Organisation Distinguished?

A Single Financial Movement Is Not Automatically Organisation Membership

A person's providing funds to a terrorist organisation or acting as an intermediary in a money transfer may, in a specific case, raise the offence of terrorist financing or of aiding an organisation. However, for organisation membership there are criteria that must be assessed separately, such as inclusion in the hierarchical structure, an organic link, and the continuity, diversity and intensity of the acts.

In the decision of the 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, E.2023/23100, K.2024/4030, the acts of distributing money to the relatives of certain persons and providing transport were discussed as aiding rather than organisation membership, where there was not sufficient continuity and intensity to show inclusion in the hierarchical structure.

Continuity, Diversity and Intensity May Change the Characterisation of the Offence

Where the activity of providing or collecting funds is carried out as an organisational duty, systematically, by different methods and continuously, the perpetrator's position within the organisation is separately investigated. In the decision of the 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, E.2024/20179, K.2025/14302, systematic money transfers to persons designated by the organisation by methods that conceal identity, and organisational coding, were taken into account in the assessment of membership.

Provisions and Living Supplies Can Also Be Funds

The concept of funds is not only a bank transfer. Knowingly supplying food, shelter, fuel, clothing or living supplies to members of a terrorist organisation may also be the subject of the financing offence, to the extent that they have economic value.

The decision E.2017/692, K.2018/41 of the Criminal General Assembly emphasises that neither the amount nor the method of provision is decisive on its own, but that the intensity and continuity of the act may also matter separately for organisation membership.

A Lawful-Looking Banking Transaction Alone Is Not Sufficient for a Conviction

Using a bank account, having an account at a particular bank or sending money to a person does not, on its own, prove the intent of terrorist financing. In the decisions of the 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation E.2021/8577, K.2023/2074; E.2021/1859, K.2022/6630; E.2022/6156, K.2024/12410 and E.2022/8833, K.2024/13433, it was accepted that where there is no definite and convincing evidence that the transaction was carried out on organisational instruction and with the intent to aid, doubt must be resolved in favour of the defendant.

Therefore, as much as the existence of the financial movement, the real economic reason for the transaction and the perpetrator's knowledge must be investigated.

How Is Evidence Assessed in a Terrorist Financing Investigation?

Bank and Financial Transaction Records

Bank account movements, transfer messages, sender and recipient information, transaction descriptions, cash withdrawal and deposit patterns, crypto-asset transfers and intermediary accounts can be among the basic technical data of the investigation.

In the decision of the 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, E.2021/11401, K.2022/720, it was stated that bank movements must be obtained and examined, that it must be determined whether the act is of the nature of providing or collecting funds, and that, depending on the result, Law No. 6415 and the provisions on participation must be assessed.

MASAK Analysis and Examination Reports

MASAK may carry out financial analysis, assessment of links and of transaction patterns by bringing together information from different institutions and obligated parties. Although these reports are important for the investigation, they do not remove the criminal court's duty to assess all the evidence directly and together.

The relationship or suspicion stated in the report should be compared with:

• The underlying bank records,
• Company and trade registry documents,
• Beneficial owner information,
• Communication records,
• Results of digital examination,
• Witness and defendant statements,
• Documents showing the delivery of goods or services.

How Digital Records Are Obtained and Whether They Can Be Relied Upon in the Judgment

In bringing a telephone, computer, messaging application or other digital records into the file, the seizure and examination decisions, the copying procedure, imaging, minutes, technical integrity, the attribution of the records to the person and their discussion at the hearing are important.

It is not safe to conclude that the perpetrator had financing intent from a screenshot or a message fragment of uncertain context alone. The whole correspondence, the relationship between the parties and the temporal connection with the financial movement must be investigated.

Main Points to Be Checked for the Defence

• The real commercial, family or social reason for the transaction,
• The legal relationship between sender and recipient,
• Invoice, contract, delivery document or debt record,
• The person actually using the account,
• The conformity of the transaction description with the real content,
• Other account movements in the same period,
• The concrete basis of the allegation of organisational instruction or communication,
• Contradictions in witness statements,
• The raw records on which the MASAK report is based,
• Whether documents in the defendant's favour have been assessed.

In criminal proceedings the burden of proof cannot be shifted to the defendant. Although it is important for the defence to submit documents, for a conviction the material and mental elements of the offence must be proved by the prosecuting authority beyond any doubt.

What Are the MASAK Obligations?

Who Are the Obligated Parties?

Law No. 5549 and the Regulation on Measures bring within the scope of obligated parties banks, financial institutions, payment and electronic money institutions, crypto-asset service providers, insurance and capital market institutions, as well as certain non-financial businesses and professions.

The scope of the obligations is not the same for everyone. The sector, the type of transaction, a continuing business relationship, the risk level, the size of the institution and special regulations are taken into account.

Customer Due Diligence and Identifying the Beneficial Owner

It is not sufficient for obligated parties merely to take a photocopy of an identity document. The system of customer due diligence generally covers the following elements:

• Obtaining and verifying identity information,
• Understanding whether the person is acting on behalf of another,
• Examining the ownership and control structure of a legal person,
• Identifying the beneficial owner,
• Understanding the purpose and nature of the business relationship,
• Continuously monitoring the transaction and customer profile,
• Applying enhanced measures in high-risk situations.

Identification is not a formality to be completed at the end of customer acceptance; it is a basic obligation that must be fulfilled before a business relationship is established or a transaction is carried out.

Current Monetary Thresholds as of 7 October 2026

With Presidential Decision No. 11845 published in Official Gazette No. 33393 dated 7 October 2026, the monetary limits in the Regulation on Measures were updated:

These limits do not remove the cases where a continuing business relationship is established, where there is a situation requiring a suspicious transaction report, or where there is doubt about the accuracy of previously obtained identity information. In these cases, identification and the necessary checks are carried out irrespective of the amount.

Because monetary limits may change, the text in force on the date of the transaction must be checked separately.

Suspicious Transaction Reporting

Where there is information, suspicion or a matter requiring suspicion that a transaction carried out or attempted at or through an obligated party involves assets obtained by unlawful means or used for unlawful purposes, in this scope used by terrorist organisations or terrorists or connected with them, a suspicious transaction report is filed with MASAK.

There is no monetary lower limit for a suspicious transaction report. Nor is it necessary that the transaction has been completed.

Non-Disclosure of the Report

The obligated party cannot disclose that a suspicious transaction report has been or will be filed to the person who is a party to the transaction or to unauthorised third parties. This "non-disclosure" obligation aims to prevent the investigation and the financial analysis from being rendered ineffective.

Access to information within the institution should be limited to persons who need to know it by virtue of their duties and to the authorised compliance unit.

Postponement of Transactions

Where there is a document or serious indication supporting the suspicion that the assets subject to the transaction are connected with the offence of laundering or of terrorist financing, the obligated party may request the postponement of the transaction together with the report. Upon the competent decision, the transaction may be suspended for up to seven business days or may not be permitted to be carried out.

The postponement of a transaction is not a permanent confiscation or a final finding of guilt. It provides temporary protection so that the judicial or administrative authorities can take the necessary steps within the period.

Retention, Submission and Providing Information

Obligated parties are required to retain the documents and records prescribed in the legislation for the specified period and to submit them when requested by MASAK or competent auditors. Electronic records, transaction messages, customer identification documents and compliance records should be kept in a reliable, accessible form with a traceable change history.

Compliance Programme

Institutions within the scope of the Regulation on Compliance Program must establish a compliance programme containing the following components, according to the size and nature of their activities:

• Institutional policy and procedures,
• Risk management,
• Monitoring and control,
• Compliance officer and compliance unit,
• Training,
• Internal audit,
• Information systems and sanctions list screening,
• Oversight and responsibility of the management body.

It is not sufficient for the compliance programme to exist on paper. Customer acceptance, transaction monitoring, sanctions list matches, the grounds for closing alerts and reporting decisions must be auditable in practice.

Limited Obligations for Independent Lawyers

Independent lawyers are not obligated parties of MASAK in a general and unlimited manner for all their professional activities. After the 2024 legislative amendment, the obligation is limited to certain financial transactions listed in the Law, such as transactions relating to immovable property and limited real rights, the establishment, management, transfer and liquidation of companies, foundations and associations, and account and asset management.

Activities within Article 35 of the Attorneys' Law, information obtained during alternative dispute resolution methods, the right of defence and the right to be heard, and the exceptions to the duty of confidentiality in Article 36 of the Attorneys' Law are also separately protected. Therefore, whether a lawyer's specific activity falls within the scope of the obligation should be assessed transaction by transaction.

Does a Suspicious Transaction Report Mean an Accusation of Crime?

No. A suspicious transaction report is not an acceptance that the person who is the subject of the report has committed an offence, nor a charge that can be publicly disclosed. The report is a preventive mechanism that enables the financial intelligence unit to examine the transaction together with other data.

The source of the suspicion may be transaction characteristics such as the following:

• A transaction that cannot be explained by the customer's known income and activity profile,
• A complex chain of transfers whose economic or legal purpose cannot be understood,
• Concealment of the beneficial owner,
• A potential match with persons on sanctions lists,
• A link to a risky region, network or alternative value transfer system,
• Splitting of the transaction or use of accounts in the names of others,
• A money movement that cannot be verified with ordinary commercial documents and explanations.

These indicators do not automatically result in a finding of guilt. The obligated party must carry out a risk-based assessment; MASAK and the judicial authorities, for their part, must test the suspicion with concrete evidence.

The Guide on Hawala and Similar Alternative Value Transfer Systems published by MASAK on 11 September 2026 shows that informal or alternative value transfer methods must be monitored currently in terms of the risks of laundering and terrorist financing.

Through Which Routes Can an Asset-Freezing Decision Be Made?

Law No. 6415 establishes three basic freezing regimes:

Suggesting a single route under the heading of "objection" or "lawsuit" without determining which article the decision is based on may be wrong.

How Is a Domestic Freezing Decision Taken in Türkiye?

Reasonable Grounds and a Final Decision on a Terrorist Organisation

According to Article 7/3 of Law No. 6415, outside the regimes in Articles 5 and 6, in respect of a structure that has been definitively decided by courts to be a terrorist organisation, the existence of reasonable grounds that the acts within Articles 3 and 4 have been carried out is required.

"Reasonable grounds" is not the same as the definite proof beyond any doubt required for a criminal conviction. On the other hand, abstract intelligence, general opinion or an unreasoned listing should not, on its own, be sufficient either. The financial movements, the links of persons and entities, and the concrete data on which the decision is based must be set out in a way that can be reviewed.

The Commission's Proposal and the Joint Decision of the Two Ministers

MASAK conducts the financial investigation. The Evaluation Commission examines the information and documents and submits its proposal to the Minister of Treasury and Finance and the Minister of Interior. The two ministers may jointly decide to freeze assets in Türkiye.

Court Approval Within Forty-Eight Hours

The domestic freezing decision is applied immediately and, within forty-eight hours, is submitted for approval to the Ankara high criminal court designated by the Board of Judges and Prosecutors (HSK). The court examines whether reasonable grounds exist and, within five days, decides whether the decision is to continue or be lifted.

This approval should not be seen as a merely formal act of registration. The addressee of the decision must be able to argue whether the personalised and concrete bases of the financial investigation really exist.

Reassessment in Six-Month Periods

From the publication of the domestic freezing decision in the Official Gazette, the Evaluation Commission assesses, at intervals of no more than six months, whether the reasonable grounds continue and submits its proposal to the relevant ministers.

This provision is important so that the freezing measure does not, once issued, continue indefinitely and without oversight. In each assessment, the current state of the investigation and prosecution, new evidence and whether the earlier grounds continue should be examined.

How Is a Freezing Decision Notified and What Consequences Does It Have?

Publication in the Official Gazette Counts as Notification

Under Law No. 6415, freezing and lifting decisions are published in the Official Gazette. The decision is deemed to have been notified to the person and entity concerned on the date of publication.

For this reason, the fact that the person concerned actually learned of the decision later does not mean that, in every case, the time limits will start later. The date of publication in the Official Gazette should be checked immediately.

Information the Decision Must Contain

The decision must set out:

• About whom the decision was made,
• Its grounds,
• Its scope,
• Its duration,
• The available remedies,
• The time limit for application.

Where there is a deficiency in the identity information, a similarity of names or an incorrect establishment of a company connection, whether the decision has been applied to the correct person is separately examined.

Thirty-Day Notification of Assets, Receivables and Debts

Those against whom a freezing decision has been made must notify MASAK of their receivables, debts and other assets, together with their bases, within thirty days at the latest from the publication of the decision in the Official Gazette.

Natural and legal persons who are creditors or debtors of these persons may also be under an obligation to notify the amount and basis of the receivable or debt within the same period.

Acts Contrary to the Decision Are Null and Void

Transfers, assignments, remittances or other acts of disposal contrary to a freezing decision are null and void. The provisions of the Turkish Civil Code on the protection of good faith are reserved.

Therefore, not only the addressee of the decision but also banks, companies, shareholders, creditors, debtors and the institutions involved in the transfer of immovable property must apply the scope of the decision correctly.

Increases in Assets Are Also Subject to the Measure

Interest, profit shares, dividends, rental income and other increases arising from frozen deposits in principle also fall within the scope of the freezing. For assets alleged to belong to third parties, a separate application with documents of ownership and entitlement may be required.

How Are Frozen Assets Managed?

Ownership Remains With the Person Concerned; Management May Be Subject to MASAK's Permission

Frozen assets are managed with MASAK's permission within the principles of the Law and the Regulation, with ownership remaining with the person concerned. Transfers, consumption, conversion, remittances and similar acts of disposal for which permission is not granted cannot be carried out.

Permission May Be Requested for Minimum Subsistence and Continuation of the Business

MASAK may permit certain transactions for the minimum subsistence of the natural person whose assets are frozen and of the relatives they are obliged to support, and for the commercial business or legal person to continue its activity.

The following should be documented in the request for permission:

• The nature and necessity of the expense,
• The amount and payment date,
• The creditor or service provider,
• The contract, payroll, invoice and bank details,
• Necessity for the continuation of the business,
• Whether there is an alternative source.

Special provisions of the Law apply separately to compulsory payments such as tax, duties, fees, rent and social security contributions. Because MASAK has the authority to make the transactions it deems necessary subject to permission, current practice should be checked before payment.

Similarity of Names and Erroneous Matches

Having the same name as a person on a sanctions or freezing list does not by itself mean being the person on the list. Date and place of birth, citizenship, identity or passport number, other known names, address, and partnership and company information should be compared.

If there has been an erroneous application due to similarity of names or incomplete identity information, a reasoned and documented request for correction should be made to MASAK. In the application, not only the difference in name but all distinguishing identity and trade registry data should be submitted.

Which Remedy Is Used Against Asset Freezing?

A Special Judicial Route Applies to a Domestic Freezing Decision

A domestic freezing action taken under Article 7/3 of Law No. 6415 by the joint decision of the Minister of Treasury and Finance and the Minister of Interior is submitted for the approval of the Ankara high criminal court within forty-eight hours. The court's decision may be objected to under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CMK).

In the decision of the 10th Chamber of the Council of State (Danıştay) dated 06.05.2025, E.2021/3326, K.2025/2381, it was accepted, on the ground that the Law specifically regulates the review by the Ankara high criminal court and the objection under the CMK, that a dispute against the domestic freezing implementing action must be heard in the ordinary judiciary.

Because of this current approach, the generalisation found in older sources that "both an objection under the CMK and an annulment action before the Council of State are filed in the same way against a domestic freezing decision" is not safe.

The CMK Objection Period Is Two Weeks

For decisions given on or after 1 June 2024, the general objection period in CMK Art. 268 is two weeks from the day the person concerned learns of the decision. If a special period or a different procedure is indicated in the decision, it should be assessed separately.

The application is submitted to the authority that made the decision; if that authority does not find the objection well-founded, it sends it to the authority competent to examine it.

A Request for Lifting May Be Made to the Commission

Those concerned may apply to the Evaluation Commission for the domestic freezing decision to be lifted. The Commission submits its proposal to the relevant ministers. If the request is not found well-founded, the file is sent to the relevant Ankara high criminal court for a decision.

The decision of the 10th Chamber of the Council of State, E.2021/3311, K.2025/2803, also states that this reassessment and request-for-lifting application exists.

For a request for lifting, the following should be explained with concrete documents:

• The disappearance of the facts on which the initial decision was based,
• Developments in the criminal investigation or prosecution,
• Incorrect matching of a person or company,
• The legitimate source and purpose of the financial transactions,
• Disproportionality,
• The rights of third parties.

The Route for Decisions Based on the UNSC and Requests of Foreign States Is Different

Freezing actions implemented by Presidential decision under Law No. 6415 Art. 5 or Art. 6 rest on a different procedure from a domestic freezing decision. A request by a foreign state, the UNSC listing mechanism, the route for delisting from the international list and administrative justice may be assessed together.

The decision of the Plenary Session of the Chambers for Administrative Cases of the Council of State (Danıştay İdari Dava Daireleri Kurulu) dated 08.05.2024, E.2023/2446, K.2024/1003, shows that the concrete investigation and assessment processes within the framework of a foreign request and a Presidential decision are subject to judicial review.

For this reason, no definitive generalisation should be made about the competent authority and the time limit without seeing the text of the decision and the article on which it is based.

Administrative Action Period and Stay of Execution

For freezing decisions that are administrative in nature and not subject to the special judicial route, the general sixty-day action period in Article 7 of the Code of Administrative Procedure (İYUK), if there is no special period, may come into play. Because publication in the Official Gazette counts as notification, the calculation of the period is particularly important.

Filing an annulment action does not automatically stay the act. A stay of execution may be requested by showing together a clear unlawfulness and damage that would be difficult or impossible to remedy.

How Are the Right to Property and Proportionality Protected?

Asset freezing is a serious interference with the right to property. Although the measure has a legitimate aim, such as preventing the financing of terrorism, it requires:

• A clear statutory basis,
• Application to the correct person and asset,
• Concretisation of the reasonable grounds,
• Keeping the scope limited to what is necessary,
• Regular and effective review,
• Operation of an appropriate permission mechanism for subsistence and business activity,
• Effective objection and judicial review.

In its decisions on long-running seizure measures, the Constitutional Court accepts that a disproportionate interference in terms of scope and duration may violate the right to property. Although these decisions do not directly concern all the freezing regimes in Law No. 6415, they are instructive in terms of urgency, diligence, reasoning and proportionality in asset measures.

Compliance Roadmap on Terrorist Financing for Institutions

Financial institutions and crypto-asset service providers in particular should handle sanctions list matches together with data on the beneficial owner, linked accounts, wallet addresses and the transaction chain. Non-financial obligated parties, on the other hand, should not underestimate the risks of their own sectors and should not mechanically copy general banking scenarios.

What Should Be Done on Learning of an Account Block, a Freezing Decision or an Investigation?

Identify the Legal Basis of the Action

A bank's internal control block, MASAK's decision to postpone a transaction, a seizure by the public prosecutor's office or a court, and an asset freeze under Law No. 6415 are different from one another. The date, number and legal basis of the action should be requested from the institution or the decision-making authority.

Calculate the Time Limits the Same Day

Publication in the Official Gazette may count as notification; the period for objecting to a court decision may be two weeks; in an administrative act the general sixty-day action period may come into play. A request for lifting or an application to the institution does not in every case automatically suspend the other periods.

Preserve the Documents

• Bank account statements and transfer messages,
• Invoices and contracts,
• Documents of delivery of goods or services,
• Company resolutions and accounting records,
• Tax and social security documents,
• Communication records,
• Crypto wallet and transaction records,
• Beneficial owner and partnership documents,
• Official decisions and notifications

should be collected unaltered and with date information preserved.

Prepare a Transaction Map

The money movements should be turned into a chronological table; the sender, recipient, amount, description, legal reason and supporting document of each transaction should be matched. The defence should be built not on a general denial alone but on the real economic reason for each critical financial movement.

Consider a Request for Permission for Subsistence and Business Expenses

If, while the measure continues, there are payments of wages, taxes, rent, social security contributions, basic living expenses or payments necessary to preserve the business, the MASAK permission mechanism should be used without delay.

Manage Parallel Proceedings Together

In the same incident, the following may run together:

• MASAK's financial analysis,
• A criminal investigation,
• Approval by the Ankara high criminal court and objection,
• A request to the Commission for lifting,
• Administrative justice,
• A third party's claim of ownership or receivable.

A statement made in one proceeding must not contradict the other file.

Common Mistakes

Treating Every Money Transfer as a Financing Offence

The existence of the transaction may be a material fact; however, the intent element of the offence and the real purpose must be proved separately.

Treating a MASAK Report as Conclusive Evidence of Conviction

A MASAK report is an important financial analysis; it is assessed together with the raw records, the method, the connection and counter-evidence.

Treating Freezing, Seizure and a Bank Block as the Same

The deciding authority, duration, route of objection and effect on assets differ for each action.

Using the Old CMK Objection Period

For decisions after 1 June 2024, the general objection period is two weeks, not seven days.

Automatically Filing a Council of State Action Against a Domestic Freezing Decision

The 2025 Council of State approach accepts that the special judicial route is fundamental for an implementing action of domestic freezing under Art. 7 of Law No. 6415. The article on which the decision is based should be determined first.

Believing the 2020 Amendment to Be a Presidential Decree

The basic amendments to the domestic freezing regime were made by Law No. 7262.

Leaving a Transaction Below the Monetary Threshold Outside Control

Where there is a suspicious transaction, a continuing business relationship or doubt about identity information, the monetary threshold is not applied.

Telling the Customer That a Report Has Been Filed

Disclosing a suspicious transaction report is a separate breach of obligation.

Conclusion

The prevention of the financing of terrorism is a multi-layered field where criminal law and financial compliance law intersect. Under Law No. 6415, the funds need not have actually been used in a particular attack; however, the link of the act of providing or collecting funds to terrorist purposes and the perpetrator's knowledge and intent must be established not by assumption but by concrete and reviewable evidence.

Asset freezing is a measure separate from a criminal conviction but one that seriously interferes with the right to property. The most critical first step is to determine whether the decision is based on a UNSC list, a request of a foreign state or the domestic freezing regime under Law No. 6415 Art. 7, because the competent authority, the time limit and the route of application vary according to this distinction.

For obligated parties, effective compliance is not merely filling in forms, but understanding the beneficial owner, monitoring transactions on a risk basis, keeping sanctions lists up to date, reporting suspicious transactions without disclosing them, and applying the decisions taken without delay. For persons and companies, the legal basis of the decision, the real reason for the financial movements, the manner in which the evidence was obtained and the time limits for application must be managed together.

Frequently Asked Questions

Must the money be used in a terrorist act for there to be terrorist financing?

No. Under Article 4/3 of Law No. 6415, it is not required that the funds have actually been used in committing an offence. Providing or collecting the funds with the required purpose and intent may be sufficient.

Are funds only cash?

No. Movable and immovable property, rights, receivables, crypto-assets, commercial goods, provisions and other elements with economic value may fall within the concept of funds.

Does making a bank transfer to a person constitute an offence on its own?

No. It must be proved with concrete evidence that the transfer was made with the purpose of providing funds to a terrorist or a terrorist organisation and in knowledge of that connection.

Is a person considered guilty when a suspicious transaction report is filed?

No. The report is a financial intelligence and preventive review mechanism; guilt can only be decided by an independent and impartial court.

Is there a monetary limit in suspicious transaction reporting?

No. A report may be considered for a transaction where there is suspicion, whatever the amount. The thresholds of TRY 370,000 and TRY 30,000 relate to certain identification and transfer obligations.

For how long can a transaction be postponed?

Upon the competent decision, under the conditions in the legislation, a transaction may be suspended or not permitted to be carried out for up to seven business days.

Does asset freezing transfer ownership to the State?

No. Ownership in principle remains with the person; however, transfers, remittances, consumption and other acts of disposal are severely restricted. Confiscation is a different institution.

What is the objection period against a domestic freezing decision?

Against a decision of the Ankara high criminal court, the general objection period in CMK Art. 268 is two weeks for decisions given on or after 1 June 2024. The notice of remedies in the specific decision should be checked separately.

Where is an application made for the lifting of a freezing decision?

In a domestic freezing decision under Law No. 6415 Art. 7, a request for lifting may be made to the Evaluation Commission. A request that is not found well-founded is sent to the relevant Ankara high criminal court. In other freezing regimes the route may be different.

Must company activities stop completely after a freezing decision?

Not in every case. Within the framework of the legislation, MASAK may permit certain transactions so that the business can continue its activity and compulsory expenses can be paid. The scope of the permission is assessed on the basis of a documented request.

What can be done if my account has been frozen because of a similarity of names?

The distinguishing identity information should be compared with the person on the list; a documented request for correction should be made to MASAK with passport, date of birth, citizenship, address, and company and partnership records.

Does a freezing decision mean that a criminal case has been filed?

After a domestic freezing decision, a criminal complaint may be filed by MASAK with a request that an investigation be opened; however, a freezing decision on its own does not mean a conviction or a final finding of guilt.

Bibliography

Legislation and official regulations

• Law No. 6415 on the Prevention of the Financing of Terrorism, Official Gazette 16.02.2013/28561; current consolidated text.
• Law No. 5549 on the Prevention of Laundering Proceeds of Crime, Official Gazette 18.10.2006/26323.
• Anti-Terror Law No. 3713.
• Code of Criminal Procedure No. 5271, in particular Arts. 128 and 268.
• Code of Administrative Procedure No. 2577.
• Law No. 7262 on the Prevention of Financing the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, Official Gazette 31.12.2020/31351 5th Repeated.
• Regulation on the Procedures and Principles Regarding the Implementation of the Law on the Prevention of the Financing of Terrorism, Official Gazette 31.05.2013/28663; amendment Official Gazette 26.02.2021/31407.
• Regulation on Measures Regarding Prevention of Laundering Proceeds of Crime and Financing of Terrorism.
• Regulation on Program of Compliance with Obligations of Anti-Money Laundering and Combating the Financing of Terrorism, Official Gazette 16.09.2008/26999.
• Regulation on Postponement of Transactions Within the Scope of the Prevention of Laundering Proceeds of Crime and Financing of Terrorism, Official Gazette 29.07.2016/29785.
• Presidential Decision No. 11845 published in Official Gazette No. 33393 dated 7 October 2026.
• MASAK General Communiqué Serial No: 12 and current sectoral Suspicious Transaction Reporting guides.

Selected judicial decisions

• Criminal General Assembly of the Court of Cassation, E.2017/692, K.2018/41, 13.02.2018.
• Criminal General Assembly of the Court of Cassation, E.2017/691, K.2019/202, 12.03.2019.
• 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, E.2021/11401, K.2022/720, 18.01.2022.
• 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, E.2021/1859, K.2022/6630, 18.10.2022.
• 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, E.2021/8577, K.2023/2074, 10.04.2023.
• 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, E.2023/23100, K.2024/4030, 18.03.2024.
• 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, E.2022/6156, K.2024/12410, 24.10.2024.
• 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, E.2022/8833, K.2024/13433, 04.11.2024.
• 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, E.2022/5703, K.2024/14413, 19.11.2024.
• 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, E.2024/20179, K.2025/14302, 29.04.2025.
• Plenary Session of the Chambers for Administrative Cases of the Council of State, E.2023/2446, K.2024/1003, 08.05.2024.
• 10th Chamber of the Council of State, E.2021/3326, K.2025/2381, 06.05.2025.
• 10th Chamber of the Council of State, E.2021/3311, K.2025/2803, 29.05.2025.
• Constitutional Court, Application No. 2020/11902, 19.12.2023.

Institutional and academic sources

• Financial Crimes Investigation Board, pages on National Legislation and Obligations on the Financing of Terrorism.
• MASAK, Suspicious Transaction Reporting Guide on Hawala and Similar Alternative Value Transfer Systems, 11.09.2026.
• FATF, Mutual Evaluation Report of Türkiye, 23.09.2026.
• Union of Turkish Bar Associations, Announcement 2025/28, 07.05.2025.
• Yeşim Yılmaz, "Terörizmin Finansmanı Suçu" (The Offence of Terrorist Financing), Yeditepe University Faculty of Law Journal, 2020.
• Justice Academy of Türkiye / Council of Europe, Guide on Combating the Financing of Terrorism.