When goods are not handed back to a passenger at the airport, the legal act behind it is not always the same. The goods may have been placed in a warehouse for customs procedures, held because of an administrative decision, or seized in a criminal investigation. The right route of application is determined not by the warehouse where the goods are located but by the legal basis on which they are being held. The first step is to obtain copies of the record and the decisions and to establish the type, date and file number of the act.
This article explains the collection of documents, the monitoring of time limits and the requests for return after a passenger’s goods have been held. An objection to a tax penalty, an objection to a judicial seizure and the physical collection of the goods may be separate procedures; a favorable result in one does not automatically complete the others.
How are retention, seizure, abandonment and confiscation distinguished?
Keeping goods in a warehouse so that customs procedures can be completed is different from judicial seizure applied to goods as criminal evidence or as the object of confiscation. Confiscation (müsadere), for its part, should not be used as a synonym for seizure (elkoyma), which is a temporary measure. Abandonment (terk) and disposal (tasfiye) are likewise separate processes with their own conditions. [1, 2, 3]
| Act | Basic function | First document to examine |
|---|---|---|
| Placement in the passenger warehouse | Safekeeping until the appropriate customs procedure is determined | Warehouse receipt and goods record |
| Retention because of an administrative decision | Applying the procedure provided in customs legislation | Reasoned administrative decision and notification |
| Judicial seizure | Protecting evidence or goods that are the object of confiscation | Seizure decision, order and approval records |
| Abandonment to customs or deemed abandonment | Applying the consequence of abandonment provided by the law | Relevant declaration, payment and procedure records |
| Confiscation | A judicial outcome that, if its conditions are met, extinguishes the right over the goods | Court judgment and the status of appeal |
More than one process may exist in the same incident. Even if the goods are in a customs warehouse, they may be held under a public prosecutor’s file. For this reason, one should not conclude that “the goods are at customs, so a petition to the directorate is enough.” Conversely, it is also incorrect to apply to the criminal judge for every customs warehouse procedure.
What information should the first record contain?
The record should not show only the total number of items. The type, quantity, brand, model, serial number, physical condition, accessories and packaging of the products should be written in a way that distinguishes them as far as possible. Listing a camera and its lenses of different values as a single item can make later disputes over value and delivery more difficult.
The place and time of the inspection, the point at which the passenger was stopped, the content of the passenger’s declaration, the documents presented and to whom the goods belong should be entered in the record. Points of the record with which one does not agree should be stated specifically, and a copy of the decision or delivery document should be obtained. One should not assume that avoiding signing makes the procedure disappear by itself.
It is also important that a foreign passenger understands the document. In judicial procedures such as taking a statement as a suspect, the safeguards of defense counsel and, where necessary, an interpreter apply. The first explanation given at customs and a statement in a criminal investigation are not the same procedural act; it should be made clear in what capacity the person is being heard. [3]
The basic records that are useful to have in the file are as follows:
- The inspection, counting, seizure or warehouse-placement record.
- The tax and penalty decision and the detailed calculation schedule.
- The warehouse number, storage location and list of goods delivered.
- Invoices, payment records, flight and baggage documents.
- The prosecutor’s or court file number and copies of decisions.
- Records showing the dates of notification, of learning of the act and of application.
Does the three-month period in the passenger warehouse apply in every case?
Article 48/2 of the Customs Law sets the period for which goods that are brought with a passenger, presented to customs and placed in the warehouse reserved for passenger goods until the appropriate procedure is determined may remain there as three months. Article 50 of the Law regulates the disposal of goods for which the necessary procedures are not begun within the relevant periods and which are not the subject of judicial or administrative proceedings. [1]
These three months are not a general objection period or free waiting period granted for all seizure and retention acts. In particular, deemed abandonment of the goods where double customs duty is not paid under Article 235/3 is subject to a separate rule. Circular No. 2014/2 provides that the period in Article 48/2 is not applied in this case. [4]
The passenger should therefore find out in writing under which provision the goods were placed in the warehouse, when the waiting period began, which procedures can be carried out and the basis of the costs. A request for return shipment or for normal import does not automatically lift a judicial seizure. Nor does the passenger’s departure from Türkiye on another flight automatically end the procedures concerning the goods.
How is a customs penalty or an administrative decision objected to?
Article 242 of the Customs Law allows an objection to notified customs duties, penalties and administrative decisions within 15 days to a superior authority or, if there is none, to the same authority. An objection that reaches the administration is to be decided and notified within 30 days. Administrative judicial review is available against a rejection of the objection. [1]
The objection should not be reduced to the statement “the goods are personal.” The behavior on which the violation is based, the reason the goods were treated as commercial, the article applied, the valuation and tariff calculation, the addressee of the penalty and the notification should be examined. If both the removal of the tax or penalty and the delivery of the goods are sought, the requests should be set out separately and clearly.
How is the time limit for the later lawsuit determined?
Under Article 7 of the Administrative Procedure Law (İYUK), where there is no special period, the time limit for filing an action is 30 days in the tax court and 60 days in the administrative court. Which court has jurisdiction is determined not by the fact that a procedure took place at customs but by the nature of the dispute. Disputes over customs duty and penalties attached to it should not be treated as the same as other administrative acts. [5]
The notification of the rejection of the administrative objection, the absence of a reply, the notification of an extra period and the legal nature of the decision may affect the calculation of the period. A calendar day should not be calculated before the notification document has been seen. One should not assume that a telephone call, a request for information or a general complaint takes the place of an Article 242 objection and preserves the time limit.
Does filing a lawsuit secure delivery of the goods?
The effect of an action filed in the tax court on the collection of the tax and penalty in dispute is regulated, with its exceptions, in Article 27 of the İYUK. A halt to collection does not mean that the goods have been delivered to the passenger or that the judicial seizure has ended. A stay of execution for the administrative act preventing delivery, and the relevant criminal procedure application for a judicial measure, may additionally be required. [5]
How do review of a judicial seizure and a request for return proceed?
The seizure decision and judicial approval
Under Article 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CMK), seizure may be carried out by a judge’s decision; where delay would be prejudicial, by the written order of the public prosecutor, or, if the prosecutor cannot be reached, of the superior of the law enforcement officers. An act carried out without a judge’s decision must be submitted for judicial approval within 24 hours, and the judge must announce the decision within 48 hours of the seizure; otherwise the seizure is lifted automatically. [3]
To review these periods, the dates and times of the actual seizure, the written order, the submission for approval and the judge’s decision should be compared. Instead of a unilateral attempt to take the goods back physically, it should be requested that the lifting of the act be recorded and that delivery be secured. If there is another obstacle arising from customs legislation, its legal status is determined separately.
The difference between an objection and a request for return
An objection to the unlawfulness of the seizure decision and a request for return because the goods are no longer needed may rest on different grounds. Article 131 of the CMK allows the goods to be returned where it is no longer necessary to keep them for the investigation or prosecution, or where it becomes clear that they will not be subject to confiscation. A rejection of the request for return can be objected to. [3]
In Article 268 of the CMK, the general period for objecting to a judge’s or court’s decision, in cases where there is no separate provision, is set at two weeks from learning of the decision. The general seven-day period in older sources should not be applied automatically to present-day procedures. The application is made to the authority that issued the decision; the reviewing authority is determined according to the type of decision.
A request for return should explain who owns the goods, their connection with the investigation, whether the examination has been completed and why continuing the measure is unnecessary. If the goods belong to another person, that third party’s ownership documents should also be submitted. Keeping the goods as evidence should be distinguished from the possibility of confiscation.
Why does an acquittal or the annulment of a penalty not always secure immediate delivery?
In its decision of 18 June 2020, E.2016/8548, K.2020/9799, the 7th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 7. Ceza Dairesi) reversed a conviction and confiscation ruling because the commercial nature of the goods had not been proved with sufficient evidence, and stated that the goods should be sent to the customs administration for a procedure under Article 235/3. The decision shows that the criminal assessment and the customs delivery procedure may be separate. [6]
The operative part of a favorable decision should therefore be read carefully. It should be determined whether the decision provides for direct return or for delivery after customs procedures, what the status of finality or enforceability of the decision is, and whether any other measure exists. It is not enough merely to see the heading “acquittal” or “annulment.”
Article 177/2-b of the Customs Law regulates the disposal of goods under the Anti-Smuggling Law that are not collected within 30 days of the notification made for taking delivery after the court has decided on their return. This period is not a general return period that begins with the first seizure. Even after a return decision has been obtained, notification and delivery procedures should be followed. [1]
What can be done in case of disposal or damage to the goods?
Disposal may be carried out by sale, allocation, destruction or other statutory methods, depending on the nature and legal status of the goods. Particularly for perishable goods or products that are difficult to keep, waiting for the end of the file does not mean that the goods will be preserved in the same condition. The disposal decision, the notification and the valuation records should be obtained separately. [1, 2]
If the goods have been sold, a return decision issued later may bring into play a process of refunding the sale proceeds under the relevant legislation instead of delivery in kind. The provisions in Article 16 of Law No. 5607 and Article 180 of the Customs Law are assessed on the basis of the specific file. No conclusion should be drawn directly from the retail sale price in a store as to the sale proceeds, deductions and interest.
If goods are missing or damaged at the time of delivery, this should be entered in the record, and the initial inventory, photographs and the physical condition at delivery should be compared. The route for compensation may vary depending on whether the loss arises from administrative custody or from a judicial protective measure. The return of the goods does not by itself resolve a claim for damage that has arisen separately.
Conclusion
In the retention of goods at the airport, the most important step is to determine the legal type of the act correctly. The record, the administrative decision, the judicial seizure and the disposal records should be examined separately, and the time limit and the request in each application should be established clearly. Even once a return decision has been obtained, the process should be completed by following the customs conditions, the delivery notice and the physical condition of the goods.
Related articles: Bringing Goods into Türkiye with a Passenger: Customs Exemptions and the Duty to Declare; Green and Red Channel at the Airport: Undeclared Goods and Customs Penalties; When Are Goods in a Suitcase Treated as Commercial? Distinguishing Large Quantities, Samples and Personal Use; Seizure, Retention and Confiscation at Customs: Differences and Routes of Application.
Frequently Asked Questions
Has every item left at customs been confiscated?
No. A warehouse procedure, administrative retention, judicial seizure and confiscation are different legal acts. The decision and the record should be examined.
Which document should I ask for first?
The record, the list of goods, the warehouse record and, if there is one, a copy of the reasoned decision should be obtained. If there is a judicial file, the file number and the seizure decision should also be identified.
Do all goods wait three months at customs?
No. The three months relate to the passenger-warehouse provision in Article 48/2 of the Law. Different provisions may apply to deemed abandonment, disposal and judicial measures.
How many days is the period for objecting to a customs penalty?
The administrative objection under Article 242 of the Customs Law is made within 15 days of notification. The periods for the later lawsuit and for judicial applications are separate.
Is the period for objecting to a judicial seizure still seven days?
The current general period in CMK Article 268 is two weeks. Cases in which a separate provision exists, and the date of learning of the decision, must also be examined.
Is judicial approval required for a prosecutor’s seizure?
A seizure carried out without a judge’s decision is submitted for approval within 24 hours, and the judge announces the decision within 48 hours of the seizure. The periods are checked from the records.
Are the goods delivered immediately once I file a lawsuit?
No. A halt to tax collection is different from delivery of the goods. An administrative or judicial obstacle to delivery must be lifted separately.
Does an acquittal remove all customs liabilities?
Not always. The operative part of the decision and the independent basis of the customs procedures are examined; the goods may be sent to the administration for customs procedures.
Can I postpone collection after a return decision?
Postponing for an indefinite period is not correct. Goods not collected within 30 days after the delivery notification under Article 177/2-b may be disposed of.
If I leave Türkiye, does my right to apply end?
Leaving the country alone does not extinguish the right. However, time limits may continue to run; representation, notification and delivery procedures must be arranged properly.
Sources
- Customs Law No. 4458 (4458 sayılı Gümrük Kanunu), Arts. 48, 50, 177–180, 235/3 and 242; accessible consolidated copy.
- Anti-Smuggling Law No. 5607 (5607 sayılı Kaçakçılıkla Mücadele Kanunu), Arts. 9, 11, 13 and 16.
- Code of Criminal Procedure No. 5271 (5271 sayılı Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu), Arts. 123, 127, 131, 147, 202 and 267–268; accessible copy as updated on 6 October 2026.
- General Directorate of Customs, Circular No. 2014/2 (Gümrükler Genel Müdürlüğü, 2014/2 sayılı Genelge), especially paragraphs 3–5.
- Administrative Procedure Law No. 2577 (2577 sayılı İdari Yargılama Usulü Kanunu), Arts. 7, 8 and 27; accessible consolidated copy.
- Court of Cassation 7th Criminal Chamber (Yargıtay 7. Ceza Dairesi), 18.06.2020, E.2016/8548, K.2020/9799, full text reviewed; database access may require a membership.