Short answer: A restriction code (tahdit kodu) is a registry code entered into the information system used by the immigration administration regarding a foreigner, indicating a specific administrative justification in terms of the person's entry into Turkey, stay in the country, or immigration procedures. Every restriction code does not directly constitute a deportation decision or a definitive entry ban. To have the code lifted, first the underlying administrative act upon which the record is based, the authority that issued the act, the date, duration, and justification must be identified; depending on the specific circumstances, one of the remedies such as an administrative application, an annulment lawsuit, or special-purpose visa/entry permit channels should be evaluated.

In an annulment lawsuit to be filed against a restriction record, the general statute of limitations is, as a rule, starting from the day following the written notification or the awareness of the act is 60 days. On the other hand, if a separate deportation decision has been issued against the same person, the special 7-day litigation period under Law No. 6458 must also be monitored. Filing a lawsuit against a restriction code does not automatically stay the periods applicable to related deportation, visa, residence permit, or work permit procedures.

In this guide, the legal nature of restriction codes; G, Ç, V, N, and O group records; the distinction between an entry ban and a code; how to find out about a code; administrative application, annulment lawsuit, stay of execution, and annotated visa options; along with precedent Council of State (Danıştay) decisions and the Ç-149 and V-69 lawsuits handled by our office, are examined together.

What is a Restriction Code?

Restriction codes are records consisting of combinations of letters and numbers used in immigration proceedings concerning foreigners to classify a specific event, administrative evaluation, obligation, or restriction. In practice, codes such as G-87, Ç-149, V-69, V-70, N-82, and O-100 are commonly encountered.

It must be emphasized that restriction codes and their complete technical explanations Law No. 6458 on Foreigners and International Protection are not exhaustively listed therein. The codes serve to classify actions in the administrative system such as entry bans, inadmissible passengers, visas, residence permits, deportation, administrative fines, and similar proceedings regulated by law. Therefore, one should not rely solely on a code list found on the internet; the official documents and procedural file compiled regarding the relevant person must be examined.

Fundamental principle: The subject of the lawsuit is often not limited to the code displayed on the screen itself. The entry ban, inadmissible passenger status, deportation, cancellation of residence, or other executive action upon which the code is based must be accurately determined.

Are Restriction Codes, Entry Bans, and Deportation Orders the Same Thing?

No. Although these concepts may be interrelated, their legal characteristics, authorized authorities, and litigation deadlines differ.

Concept	Legal function	Main consequence	Importance in terms of application channels
Restriction code	Classifies the administrative grounds, status, or restriction concerning the foreigner in the system.	May be taken into account in entry, visa, residence, work, or citizenship procedures.	The underlying actual proceeding and authority must be identified.
entry ban to Turkey	It is an executive action that prevents the foreigner from entering Turkey for a specified period.	Denial of admission at the border checkpoint or negative conclusion of the visa application	As a rule, it may be subject to an administrative application and/or an annulment lawsuit.
Inadmissible passenger (INAD)	It is the denial of entry into the country of a person evaluated as not meeting the entry requirements during border control.	Denial of entry into Turkey and removal to the country of origin or a country of acceptance	The grounds for the action, the method of notification, and the associated restriction record are examined together.
Deportation Decision	It is a separate administrative action aimed at the removal of a foreigner present in Turkey from the country.	Process of leaving Turkey and, where necessary, readmission	The special litigation period is, as a rule, 7 days.
Administrative detention	It is the holding of a foreigner in a removal center under the conditions stipulated by law.	Restriction of liberty	The authority for appeal is the criminal judgeship of peace; it is separate from the restriction lawsuit.
Administrative fine / cost record	Indicates financial debt connected to visa, residence, work, or departure obligations.	Issues regarding collection, prior authorization, or subsequent entry procedures	The payment of the debt and the lifting of the entry ban may not be the same procedure.

For detailed information regarding the conditions of the deportation procedure, the 7-day litigation period, and the principle of non-refoulement our guide on the annulment of the deportation decision you may review.

Legal Basis of Restriction Codes

Law No. 6458, Article 9: Entry ban to Turkey

Article 9 of Law No. 6458 provides the legal basis for imposing an entry ban on foreigners who are deemed inadmissible to Turkey in terms of public order, public security, or public health, as well as on foreigners who are deported from Turkey. As a rule, the duration of the entry ban shall not exceed five years. In the event of a serious threat to public order or public security, this period may be extended within the limits set forth in the law.

The Law also allows the competent administration to lift the entry ban or to permit the foreigner to enter the country for a certain period while the ban remains reserved. However, this regulation does not automatically grant a right of entry to every foreigner claiming to meet the conditions; the procedure is subject to administrative assessment.

Other relevant provisions of the Law

Art. 10: It is important regarding how the notification concerning the entry ban shall be made to those arriving at the border gate for entry and to those whose visa applications are rejected.
Arts. 15 and 16: Govern the grounds for refusal and cancellation of visas.
Arts. 53 and 54: Govern the deportation decision, legal remedies, and grounds for deportation.
Art. 55: Contains safeguards regarding persons against whom a deportation decision shall not be issued.
Art. 56: Governs the invitation to leave Turkey and the departure period.
Art. 57 et seq.: Relate to administrative detention and alternative obligations thereto.
Art. 4: Governs the principle of non-refoulement; serves as a fundamental safeguard against deportation to a country where there is a risk of deprivation of life, torture, or ill-treatment.

İYUK and constitutional guarantees

in the lawsuit to be filed against the restriction record or entry ban Abditory Procedure Law No. 2577 applies. Article 2 of İYUK regulates the scope of the annulment action; Article 7, the general statute of limitations for lawsuits; Article 11, the pre-litigation administrative application; Article 20, the principle of ex officio investigation; Article 27, the stay of execution; and Article 28, the execution of court judgments.

Depending on the nature of the specific case, the provisions of the Constitution concerning respect for private and family life, freedom of movement, the right to an effective remedy, and the judicial review of administration may also gain significance. The existence of family ties alone does not render a restriction record invalid; however, it must be taken into account when assessing whether the interference is lawful, necessary, and proportionate.

What Consequences Can Restriction Codes Entail?

The outcome of the code cannot be determined solely by looking at its letters and numbers. The same code may lead to entry bans of varying durations, pre-approval requirements, or administrative tracking in different files. The consequences that may be encountered in practice are as follows:

prevention of entry into Turkey at the border crossing,
rejection of a consular visa application or referral for pre-approval,
rejection of a residence permit application, failure to renew, or revocation of the existing permit,
impact on a work permit application or current working status,
being subjected to public order or national security reviews in a citizenship application,
issuance of a deportation order and, in some cases, initiation of administrative detention proceedings,
enforcement of administrative fines, travel expenses, or other financial liabilities.
requiring prior approval from the Presidency of Migration Management for entry into the country.

The existence of a code does not automatically entail every consequence. For example, a security record may not necessarily constitute a criminal conviction, nor does a residence permit cancellation record alone indicate that a deportation order has been issued. Each administrative action must be evaluated within the scope of its own legal basis and statutory limitation period for lawsuits.

Restriction Code Groups and Commonly Encountered Codes

The following list broadly outlines the explanations commonly used in practice. Since the scope of the codes may vary depending on the administrative system and the specific case, this table does not substitute for an official transaction document.

Code group	General area of use	Important notice
G codes	Administrative assessments associated with general security, national security, or specific types of offenses	A code does not, by itself, imply a final conviction or sentencing.
C codes	Entry bans, visa/residence permit violations, illegal entry and exit, judicial or administrative incidents	Certain C codes indicate the duration, while others indicate the nature of the incident.
V codes	Immigration procedures such as visas, residence permits, address registration, work permits, or invitations to leave Turkey	Not every V code constitutes an entry ban; some records serve as status or transaction tracking.
N codes	Prior permissions, administrative fines, expenses, or unfulfilled obligations	It should not be assumed that the code and all related proceedings are automatically lifted upon payment of the debt.
O codes	International protection files and administrative records associated with this status	International protection decisions, entry bans, and deportation orders must be examined separately.

Group G: Records associated with security and criminal allegations

Code	Subject matter associated in practice	Key consideration in legal assessment
G-26	Assessment of illegal organization activity	Personal connection, recency, and underlying information must be investigated.
G-34	Allegation or record of forgery of documents	The owner of the document, the outcome of the criminal case, and its finalization status are crucial.
G-42	Assessment in connection with drug offenses	Ongoing investigations must be distinguished from final convictions.
G-43	Assessment in connection with smuggling offenses	The specific case file and the individual's connection to the act must be examined.
G-48	Procuring, pimping, or related acts	Administrative findings, the criminal file, and incident reports must be evaluated together.
G-65	Assessment in connection with the crime of theft	Finalization of the judgment, acquittal/decision of non-prosecution (KYOK), and identity matching are of significant importance.
G-82	Assessment of activities against national security	An individualized and reviewable basis for abstract security statements is required.
G-87	Foreigner deemed undesirable in terms of public security	The timeliness, verifiability, and connection of the intelligence information to the individual are examined.

Regarding the difference between the G-87 code and a criminal conviction, its effect on residency and citizenship procedures, the administrative application and litigation process in our G-87 restriction code guide detailed explanations can be found.

Group C: Entry bans and violation records

Code	Subject matter associated in practice	Point to consider
C-101 to C-105	Entry bans of varying durations depending on visa, visa exemption, or residence permit violations	The duration of the violation, method of departure, payment of fines, and the official ban date must be verified.
C-113	Illegal entry or exit	Entry-exit records and incident reports must be examined.
C-114	Foreigner undergoing judicial proceedings	The investigation/prosecution outcome and current risk must be evaluated.
Ç-115	Foreigner released from a penal institution	The nature of the conviction and the deportation proceedings are handled separately.
Ç-117	Detection of unauthorized employment	The employment relationship, inspection report, and permit or exemption status are critical.
Ç-135	Administrative fine record due to visa/residence violation	A monetary fine and an entry ban are not the same procedure.
Ç-136	Record associated with deportation travel expenses	The amount of the debt, the payment authority, and its effect on entry must be verified.
Ç-138	Record associated with inadmissible passenger processing at the border gate	The INAD procedure, entry ban, and stated grounds must be examined together.
Ç-141	Subjection of entry into Turkey to the authorization of competent authorities	Pre-clearance and visa processes are evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
Ç-149	Entry ban/restriction record based on public order or public security grounds	Whether the administration provides concrete, individualized, and reviewable grounds is decisive.
Ç-150	Allegation of entry using a forged passport/document or one belonging to another person	Document examination, intent, identification, and the criminal file are of significance.
Ç-151	Record associated with the allegation of migrant smuggling	Criminal investigation and administrative risk assessment must be distinguished from one another.

Group V: Visa, residence, and immigration procedure records

Code	Subject matter associated in practice	Legal connection
V-69	Record associated with the revocation of a residence permit	The lawfulness of the residence revocation and the associated entry ban are examined together.
V-70	Suspicion of a forged or marriage of convenience	May affect family residence and citizenship processes through marriage; evidence of family unity is important.
V-71	Failure to be found at the declared address	The timing and method of the address audit and evidence of actual residence are evaluated.
V-84	Entry record subject to the condition of applying for residence within a specified period	It is checked whether the document issued upon entry and the application obligation have been fulfilled.
V-88	Record linked to the invalidity or revocation of the work permit	The revocation of the work permit, right of residence, and deportation proceedings are examined separately.
V-137	Invitation to leave Turkey procedure	The departure period granted pursuant to Article 56 of Law No. 6458 and related procedures are of importance.
V-154	Procedural record regarding the filing of a lawsuit against the deportation decision	It should not be evaluated solely as a ground for negativity; the outcome of the lawsuit must be entered into the system.
V-157	Record related to the rejection of the residence permit application	The grounds for the rejection procedure, its service, and the litigation period must be examined.

Regarding which documents may be used in procedures carried out as a result of address verification residence permit address inspectionand, in terms of the termination of a granted residence permit, annulment of residence permit and annulment action you may consult our guides. For records related to employment status revocation of work permit our article can also be reviewed.

N and O group records

Group N codes are mostly associated with pre-permissions, administrative fines, departure or deportation expenses, and administrative obligations. In practice, code N-82 subjects entry into the country to pre-permission; whereas certain records such as N-95, N-96, N-97, N-119, N-120, N-135, N-136, and N-168 through N-172 may appear in connection with various fines, expenses, or obligations. The N-99 record can be associated with the effect of Interpol or international search information on the migration system.

In cases where an international search record is alleged to exist, it must be investigated separately whether the record actually exists in the Interpol system, the type of notice, the requesting country, the actions taken by Turkish authorities, and the criminal proceedings, if any. For detailed information removal of red notices and Interpol searches you may review our article.

Group O records may appear in administrative processes related to international protection applications and status. In practice, the O-100 code is associated with situations such as the withdrawal or rejection of an international protection file, or the inability to establish contact with the file. However, the outcome of an international protection decision, an entry ban, and a deportation proceeding are not the same. Regarding the international protection process you can benefit from our international protection application guide .

How to Check a Restriction Code?

There is no general and reliable e-Government screen displaying all restriction codes. A foreigner usually learns of the code when they are refused entry to the country at the border gate, when a visa application is rejected, during a residence procedure, or when an administrative decision is served upon them.

The visa rejection form, INAD document, deportation decision, residence/work permit decision, and notifications in the possession of the foreigner must be collected.
A written request for information and documents must be submitted to the Provincial Directorate of Migration Management or the authority understood to have issued the action.
Through legal counsel, inquiries should be made regarding the code in the administrative file, the date of the decision, the duration, the legal basis, and the competent authority.
If a lawsuit has been filed, it should be requested that the administrative file and the underlying information and documents be obtained from the administration within the scope of the court's ex officio investigatory power.

Being told verbally that "a code exists" must not be deemed sufficient. Written documentation should be obtained as much as possible for the calculation of deadlines and the determination of the correct defendant administration. Submitting an application for information does not in any case suspend the statute of limitations for filing a lawsuit; the conditions under Article 11 of the İYUK must be evaluated separately.

How to Remove a Restriction Code?

There is no single petition or single authority applicable to everyone for the removal of a restriction code. The path to be followed is determined according to the legal basis of the code.

Status	Priority action	Critical risk
Code or procedure not yet known	Request for written information and procedural file	Missing the statute of limitations while conducting research only
Manifest clerical error, name similarity, or acquittal/KYOK decision exists	Documented administrative application and, if necessary, a simultaneous litigation plan	Miscalculation of the effect of the administrative application on time limits
Executive entry ban or restriction procedure has been served	Annulment lawsuit within the statutory period; stay of execution depending on the case file	Lawsuit filed with the wrong authority, wrong procedure, or in an incompetent court
Additionally, there is a deportation decision	Separate lawsuit against the deportation decision within 7 days	Assuming that a restriction lawsuit preserves the deportation period
Administrative detention exists	Objection to the criminal judgeship of peace	Assuming that the lawsuit filed in the administrative court will automatically release the person from the GGM
There is a need for temporary entry into Turkey for a specific legitimate purpose	Evaluation of a special-purpose/annotated visa or entry permit through a foreign representative office	Assuming that the approval of the application is guaranteed

1. Administrative Application

Pursuant to Article 11 of the İYUK, interested parties may, prior to filing a lawsuit, request from the superior authority—or from the authority that performed the act, if there is no superior authority—the revocation, withdrawal, modification, or issuance of a new act regarding the administrative action. This application is not mandatory. An application made within the statutory filing period and to the correct authority may suspend the running limitation period. If the administration fails to respond within 30 days, the request is deemed implicitly rejected, and the remaining limitation period for filing a lawsuit resumes.

An administrative application can be particularly effective when there is an incorrect identity match, an expunged criminal record, an acquittal, a non-prosecution decision, an overturned conviction, a paid judicial fine, or strong documentation that emerged after the action. However, miscalculating the limitation period for filing a lawsuit while awaiting the rejection of the application may result in a severe loss of rights.

2. Annulment action in the administrative court

If the executive act upon which the restriction record is based is unlawful in terms of one of the elements of authority, form, reason, subject matter, or objective, an annulment action may be filed. The court does not conduct a review of expediency by substituting itself for the administration; it reviews the legality of the administrative act.

In files based on security grounds, the court may investigate which institution produced information regarding the foreigner, the date and content of such information, and the connection of this information to the individual as well as its current validity. The presence of classified information does not eliminate judicial review. However, it cannot be said that every piece of intelligence is necessarily invalid. The assessment is made based on the nature of the information and whether it possesses sufficient weight to justify the administrative act.

3. Visa with remarks or special entry permit

A foreigner subject to an entry ban to Turkey may apply for a visa through a diplomatic or consular mission abroad for education, work, family reunification, medical treatment, or another legitimate purpose. Law No. 6458 allows for entry to be permitted for a specific period without requiring the entry ban to be lifted first. In practice, this pathway is referred to as a "visa with remarks" (meşruhatlı vize) or a special-purpose visa.

However, a visa with remarks is not an administrative act that automatically deletes a right or restriction code. The probability of achieving a positive outcome may be more limited in cases involving severe security-related records. Even if a visa is granted, the legal status of the existing restriction record and subsequent residence/work procedures must be additionally reviewed.

Statute of Limitations / Filing Period for Restriction Code Annulment Lawsuits

General statute of limitations: 60 days

If no specific litigation period is prescribed with respect to a restriction record or entry ban, an annulment action must, as a rule, be filed within 60 days starting from the day following the written notification. If no written notification has been made, the date on which the content and definitive nature of the act were reliably learned may become a matter of dispute. Border gate documents, visa refusal forms, official letters, notifications, and application responses must be preserved.

Special period for deportation orders: 7 days

If a deportation order has been served alongside a restriction code, the deadline for applying to the administrative court against this order is, as a rule, 7 days pursuant to Article 53 of Law No. 6458. An administrative application filed for the restriction record or the 60-day general period does not extend the 7-day period applicable to the deportation order.

Different judicial authority in administrative detention

For a foreigner held under administrative detention in a removal center, objections against the administrative detention order shall be lodged with the criminal judge of peace. Requesting the annulment of the restriction code before the administrative court does not automatically terminate administrative detention. The measure restricting personal liberty must be addressed separately.

How to Determine the Competent and Authorized Court?

As a rule, the judicial branch having jurisdiction over restriction or entry ban proceedings is the administrative judiciary. The competent court is determined not by the name of the code, but by which authority enacted the final executive act and the nature of the dispute.

If the administrative act has been enacted by the Presidency of Migration Management or the central organization of the Ministry of Interior, Ankara administrative courts may become relevant.
If the administrative act was issued by the governorship, the administrative court located in the jurisdiction of the relevant governorship may have jurisdiction.
If the restriction record was issued together with a local measure such as a residence permit cancellation or deportation decision, related acts and special jurisdiction rules must be examined together.
The competent authority for an administrative detention decision is the criminal judgeship of peace.

Therefore, generalizations such as "all restriction lawsuits are filed in Ankara" or "the lawsuit is filed in the province where the code was learned" are incorrect. A definitive conclusion regarding jurisdiction should not be reached without reviewing the decision document.

Can a Stay of Execution Be Requested?

Yes. Pursuant to Article 27 of the İYUK, a stay of execution may be requested if the conditions that the subject act is clearly unlawful and its implementation would cause schwer-to-compensate or irreparable damages are met together. The request is not automatically granted in every restriction lawsuit, and filing a lawsuit does not automatically stay the restriction procedure.

If the foreigner has a Turkish citizen spouse or child, ongoing medical treatment, education, business relationship, real estate, or other personal ties, these must be explained with concrete documents in terms of irreparable damage. In addition, the unlawfulness of the act must be demonstrated through identity errors, acquittal or non-prosecution (KYOK) decisions, outdated data, lack of justification, or absence of concrete evidence.

Which Documents Are Important in Restriction Code Lawsuits?

Subject matter of the dispute	Documents that may carry significance
Identity or name similarity	Passports, birth records, biometric data, criminal records belonging to a different person
Criminal investigation or conviction	Non-prosecution decision (KYOK), acquittal, reversal, finalization annotation, execution document, criminal record and archive record
Security/intelligence assessment	Travel records, employment and education documents, dates demonstrating irrelevance to the incident, official correspondence
Visa or residence violation	Entry-exit record, residence card, application document, force majeure and medical documents, payment receipt
Allegation of unauthorized employment	Inspection report, employment contract, work permit or exemption document, SSI (SGK) records
Address registration	Lease agreement/title deed, utility subscriptions, domicile document, notary-certified commitment, inspection report
Allegation of sham marriage	Joint address, joint child, cohabitation, travel, health, education, and economic life documents
Family life and proportionality	Marriage and civil registry records, children's school/health records, care relationship, status of family members

An acquittal or decision of non-prosecution does not automatically delete the restriction record in every case; however, if the basis of the administrative action is the same criminal allegation, it may constitute strong evidence. Conversely, the absence of a criminal conviction does not mean that the administration cannot make any assessment under immigration law. The grounds and proportionality of the administrative act are reviewed separately.

How Do Precedent Council of State (Danıştay) Decisions Approach Restriction Codes (Tahdit Kodları)?

There is no uniform approach in judicial decisions. While annulment or reversal decisions may be rendered in cases where the administration fails to present concrete grounds, cases may be dismissed in files where the security assessment is deemed sufficient and connected to the individual. Decisions must be evaluated within the context of their specific material facts. Current case law research Danıştay Case Search can be conducted via the system.

Ruling	Code/Subject	Conclusion and core approach
Council of State 10th Chamber, E.2020/4631, K.2024/5214, 21.11.2024	G-87	The dismissal decision was reversed, taking into account that the administration failed to submit the concrete information and documents underlying the restriction record despite the interim order, and that the record was subsequently cancelled during the proceedings. Review the decision.
Council of State 10th Chamber, E.2018/2011, K.2023/4050, 22.06.2023	O-100 / entry ban	In the dispute, the legal basis of the administrative act and the presence of a deportation order were evaluated; imposing an entry ban based on grounds not stipulated by law was found to be unlawful. Review the decision.
Council of State 10th Chamber, E.2016/3158, K.2021/4456, 30.09.2021	G-87 / entry ban	The decision dismissing the lawsuit was upheld within the scope of the security assessment in the file and the state's authority to protect public order. This decision demonstrates that not every G-87 action will be annulled automatically. Review the decision.

Annulment Decision Obtained by Our Office in the Ç-149 Restriction Code Lawsuit

In a lawsuit filed by our office and handled by Atty. Batın Yılmaz, the Ankara 26th Administrative Court, in its decision dated 02.07.2024, numbered E.2023/2678 and K.2024/2185, annulled the entry ban to Turkey imposed under the Ç-149 restriction code.

It was stated that there was a negative assessment regarding the foreign national in terms of public order and public security; however, it could not be demonstrated upon which personal fact, action, or verifiable data this assessment was based. Although the Court requested information and documents from the relevant administration and security units, it determined that no concrete basis showing the foreign national was a threat to public order or security had been submitted, thereby finding the administrative act unlawful.

For the citation of the decision, the chronology of the dispute, the court's concrete evidence evaluation, and the anonymized decision text, you can read our review of the decision regarding the annulment of the Ç-149 restriction code. This decision is binding solely with respect to the specific dispute and does not guarantee results for other cases.

V-69 Lawsuit Followed by Our Office

In another dispute handled by our office, the Istanbul 15th Administrative Court, in its decision dated 19.07.2023, numbered E.2022/1053 and K.2023/3928, annulled the cancellation of the real estate-based short-term residence permit and the consequent V-69 restriction record / entry ban action.

The administration claimed that the foreign national had rented out the residence serving as the basis for the residence permit to someone else; however, it failed to submit a lease agreement, bank transaction records, or any other concrete evidence substantiating this claim. The Court concluded that the allegation of use for unauthorized purposes was not proven. For a detailed evaluation, you can access our decision review regarding the V-69 restriction record and the cancellation of the real estate residence permit. you can access.

What Are the Legal Consequences of the Annulment of a Restriction Code?

An annulment decision legally invalidates the administrative act subject to the lawsuit. Pursuant to Article 28 of the İYUK, the administration is obligated to fulfill the requirements of the court decision without delay and within the period stipulated by law. Nevertheless, in practice, it may be necessary to submit the decision to the Presidency of Migration Management, the relevant governorate, or border units and to monitor the updating of the record in the database.

The annulment of a restriction code does not automatically grant the foreign national a visa, residence permit, work permit, or citizenship under all circumstances. Passport validity, visa conditions, other restrictions, criminal records, or a separate deportation order may exist. Therefore, current records and other entry requirements must be checked following the decision.

Common Mistakes Made During the Restriction Code Process

Treating the code as a finalized conviction: A security- or crime-related code does not always mean a conviction.
Simply requesting the deletion of the code: A request made without identifying the underlying entry ban, deportation, or permit cancellation procedure may be incomplete.
Missing the 7-day deportation deadline: The existence of a 60-day period for restrictions does not alter the special time limit regarding the deportation decision.
Assuming that an administrative application suspends the time limit in all cases: The timing, authority, and legal nature of the application are crucial.
Filing every lawsuit in Ankara: Jurisdiction is determined based on the authority that issued the administrative act and the related procedure.
Believing that renewing the passport will delete the record: The record may be linked to identity and biometric data.
Assuming that paying the fine will remove all records: Financial debts, restrictions, and entry bans may entail separate legal consequences.
Attempting to re-enter Turkey in an uncontrolled manner: A new inadmissible passenger record, expense, or other procedure may arise.
Failing to submit the acquittal/KYOK (decision of non-prosecution) to the case file: The outcome of the criminal file may directly affect the ground element of the administrative action.
Failing to verify whether the court decision has been entered into the system: Administrative practice must be monitored following the annulment decision.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I check whether I have a restriction code via e-Devlet?

Generally, there is no e-Devlet service that details all restriction codes comprehensively. Written administrative applications, served documents, visa or border procedures, and file reviews through legal counsel are of utmost importance.

Can no one with a restriction code enter Turkey?

No. Some codes are directly linked to an entry ban, while others are related to prior authorization, fines, immigration status, or procedural records. A definitive answer cannot be given without examining the official proceeding upon which the code is based.

How long is a restriction code valid?

There is no single duration. The duration varies depending on the basis of the code, the entry ban decision, and the legal ground. The general limits under Article 9 of Law No. 6458 and the start and end dates in the decision served to the individual must be checked together.

What is the filing period for a lawsuit against a restriction code?

In restriction and entry ban procedures where no specific period is prescribed, the general period is, as a rule, 60 days. However, if there is also a deportation decision, a specific 7-day period applies to this decision.

Is it mandatory to appeal to the Directorate of Migration Management before filing a lawsuit?

Generally, it is not mandatory. An administrative application may be filed within the scope of Article 11 of the İYUK; however, the effect of the application on the litigation period must be calculated carefully.

Does filing a lawsuit automatically suspend the restriction code?

No. Filing an annulment action does not automatically suspend the restriction or entry ban. If the conditions are met, a stay of execution may be requested.

Does the G-87 code indicate that a person is a member of a terrorist organization?

No. The G-87 is an administrative record related to general security assessments; it is not, by itself, a final conviction or organizational membership decision. The underlying information and documents must be examined separately.

Does an acquittal or non-prosecution decision automatically lift the restriction code?

It does not always lift it automatically. However, if the code is based on the same criminal allegation, an acquittal or a decision of non-prosecution (KYOK) can be a crucial piece of evidence in the administrative application and the annulment action.

Does marriage to a Turkish citizen remove the restriction code?

Marriage does not remove the code automatically. A genuine and ongoing family life can be a strong factor regarding the proportionality of the interference; it is evaluated together with grounds of security and public order.

Can a foreign national file a lawsuit while outside of Turkey?

Yes. Administrative applications and litigation proceedings can be conducted in Turkey through an attorney with a duly executed power of attorney. The method of drafting and notarization of the power of attorney may vary depending on the country in which it is issued.

How long does a restriction code lawsuit take?

There is no single guaranteed completion period in the law for all restriction code lawsuits. The workload of the court, requests for information via interim decisions, hearings, and the appeal and cassation processes affect the duration. Therefore, a definitive month or outcome guarantee should not be given.

Does the removal of a restriction code guarantee entry into Turkey?

No. There may be another entry ban, visa requirement, invalid passport, criminal record, or inadmissible passenger reason. Current records and all entry requirements must be checked following the cancellation or deletion.

Conclusion and Legal Assessment

Restriction codes are not uniform sanctions. To have a code removed, the underlying administrative action, the authority that issued the action, the date, duration, concrete justification, and related decisions are as important as the name of the code. In proceedings conducted without separating entry bans, deportation, inadmissible passengers, residence permit revocations, and administrative detention, applications to the wrong court or loss of time may occur.

Although the administration has discretionary power in records based on security grounds, this power is not unlimited. The action must be based on a legal foundation, current facts specific to the individual, and a reason subject to judicial review. Conversely, it cannot be said that an annulment result will be obtained in every case merely by claiming that the code is "abstract." All information and documents in favor and against must be evaluated together.

For the practical guide specifically addressing the entry ban to Turkey, How to Lift the Entry Ban to Turkey? you may review our article.

Author Information

Attorney Batın YILMAZ
Istanbul Bar Association Bar Registry No: 77008

Compliance Statement with TBB Professional Rules and Advertising Prohibition

This content is for informational purposes only. It does not aim to advertise, secure business, acquire clients, solicit, claim professional superiority, or guarantee results for any person or institution.

While preparing the content the Professional Rules of the Union of Turkish Bar Associations and the provisions regarding the prohibition of advertising for the legal profession has been taken into consideration. The information in the article does not constitute legal advice or a definitive legal opinion regarding specific cases. The examined court decisions produce results only in terms of the relevant dispute and do not constitute a guarantee of outcome for similar cases.

Communication and Legal Information