Legal Analysis, Restriction Codes, and the Impact of Monetary Penalties under Law No. 6458 on Foreigners and International Protection (YUKK)

In Turkey, residence permit violations, deportation (deport) decisions, and non-payment of administrative fines are critical legal issues that directly affect the process of foreigners re-entering the country. Restriction codes used in practice, such as Ç-120, Ç-105, Ç-104, Ç-114, and entry ban durations are determined according to the administration’s discretionary power and the specifics of the concrete case.

Legal status analysis concerning residence permit violations, deportation (deport) decisions, the impact of non-payment of administrative fines on the entry ban duration, and specifically for Moldovan citizens.

1. Legal Framework: Law No. 6458 on Foreigners and International Protection (YUKK)

According to Law No. 6458, as referenced in judicial decisions, the entry and exit of foreigners to and from Turkey and their deportation processes are subject to specific rules:

Reasons for Deportation: According to Article 54/1-g of the Law, a deportation decision is made against those who have a residence permit but violate the duration of residence without an acceptable reason for more than ten days after its expiration. Furthermore, Article 54/1-h also includes within this scope those who violate legal exit provisions from Turkey.

Entry Ban Durations: According to Article 9 of the Law, foreigners deported from Turkey may be prohibited from entering the country by the General Directorate or provincial governors’ offices. The duration of this ban is a maximum of five years (Art. 9/3). However, in cases posing a serious threat to public order or public security, this period can be extended up to ten years.

Relationship between Fines and Entry Ban: Article 9/4 of the Law provides an exception for foreigners who violate residence rules but apply to leave before this situation is detected by the authorities. Provided that these individuals have paid their administrative fines and have not exceeded the determined violation periods, an entry ban decision may not be taken against them.

2. Examples from Practice and Restriction Codes

Judicial decisions show that in cases of residence and visa violations, the administration applies entry bans for different periods and uses various restriction codes:

2-Year Entry Ban (Ç-104 / O-100): In the decision numbered 2023/3752 E. of the 10th Chamber of the Council of State, it is seen that a 2-year entry ban was imposed on a foreigner who violated residence for up to two years, using the codes Ç-104 and O-100.

5-Year Entry Ban (Ç-120 / Ç-105):

Ç-120 (Visa Violation/Non-Payment of Fine): In the decision numbered 2020/3217 E. of the 10th Chamber of the Council of State, a 5-year entry ban was applied with the code Ç-120 to a foreigner who violated their visa and could not pay the penalty residence fee and permit fee requested upon exit.

Ç-105 (Visa/Residency Violation): In the decision numbered 2019/438 of the Constitutional Court, it was exemplified that even a foreigner who violated a visa and paid the penalty upon exit was issued a 5-year entry ban with the code Ç-105.

1-Year Entry Ban (Ç-114): In a decision concerning Moldovan citizens (Council of State 10th Chamber, 2016/938 E. ), it was stated that in case of a judicial process or detection of a violation, a 1-year ban could be applied with the code Ç-114.

3. Consequences of Non-Payment of Fines and Judicial Review

For example, the evaluations in judicial decisions regarding the question “Did I receive a five-year entry ban because I didn’t pay the penalty?” are as follows:

Principle of Proportionality: The 10th Chamber of the Council of State (2020/3217 E.) upheld the decision of the local court which annulled a direct 5-year ban imposed on a foreigner who could not pay the fine for visa violation upon exit, finding it “contrary to the principle of proportionality”. The court emphasized that a restriction method not foreseen in the law cannot be introduced by an administrative regulation (circular).

Updating the Ban: In the decision numbered 2013/3187 of the Constitutional Court, it was stated that in case of non-payment of the fine resulting from a visa violation, the administration could facilitate the foreigner’s exit and then update or continue the existing entry ban record.

Penalty as a Condition for Entry: In some administrative practices, even if the entry ban period has expired, the non-payment of outstanding penalty fees from the past can be made a ground for refusal for a new residence or visa application. However, the Council of State (2016/2217 E. ) has ruled that in situations such as family residence permits, the condition of paying a fine cannot be imposed as a legal obligation.

4. Information Obtained from Secondary Sources

The following points are highlighted as secondary sources due to limited information in the decision texts:

Moldovan Citizens: In decisions concerning Moldovan citizens (2016/594 E. , 2016/938 E. , 2021/321 E. ), it is observed that the administration has resorted to practices such as “conditional entry”, “V-84 restriction code”, or “Ç-114 violation code”. While an automatic 5-year ban rule specific to Moldovan citizens is not included in the texts, general provisions are applied according to the nature of the violation.

Expiration of Period and Entry: When the 2-year ban imposed after a residence violation expires, the effect of the ban legally ceases (Council of State 10th Chamber, 2016/15371 E. ). However, an administrative fine unpaid upon exit may remain an obstacle in the system and might need to be collected upon entry.

Uncertainties: It is not stated in the decisions whether there is a definitive legal automatism regarding the non-payment of the fine automatically extending the 2-year ban to 5 years; this situation depends on the administration’s discretion and the restriction code (such as Ç-120) it uses.

Conclusion and Analysis

In light of court decisions; when your 2-year entry ban, imposed in 2024, expires in June, the legal effect of the ban generally ends. However, due to the administrative fine you did not pay upon exit, the administration may have designated the restriction code against you as  Ç-120 (a 5-year ban) or imposed the existing ban at its maximum limit for this reason.

If the action taken against you is limited to only 2 years, you may enter upon the expiry of this period; however, the unpaid fine will appear as a debt upon entry. If the ban has been extended to 5 years due to the unpaid fine, it is possible to file a lawsuit alleging that this action is unlawful in terms of “proportionality.” To determine the exact situation, it is recommended to query the restriction code through the Directorate General of Migration Management systems.

Frequently Asked Questions

2 yıllık deport sürem doldu. Süre sonunda sorunsuz giriş yapabilir miyim?

Eğer sistemde başka bir tahdit kodu yoksa evet. Ancak ödenmemiş para cezası girişte karşınıza çıkabilir. Ceza nedeniyle sistemde aktif bir Ç-120 varsa giriş reddedilebilir.

Cezayı ödemediğim için otomatik 5 yıl yasak mı aldım?

Hayır. Kanunda otomatik 5 yıl dönüşümü yoktur. Ancak idare Ç-120 kodu uygulamışsa fiilen 5 yıl yasak oluşmuş olabilir. Tahdit kodu sorgulanmadan kesin değerlendirme yapılamaz.

Ceza ödenmedi diye 5 yıl yasak verilirse iptal edilebilir mi?

Evet. Danıştay kararlarında ölçülülük ilkesine aykırı bulunan uygulamalar mevcuttur. Özellikle sadece para cezası ödenmemesine dayanarak en üst sınırdan yasak verilmesi iptal edilebilmektedir.

Why is Expert Lawyer Support Necessary?

In residence violation and deportation cases, the most critical element is the correct determination of the restriction code and the analysis of the legality of the administrative action.

Specifically:

Administrative detention decisions in Tuzla removal center processes

Annulment lawsuits against Ç-120 and Ç-105 codes

Conditional entry applications

Lawsuits against residence permit rejection processes require expertise. At this point, the support of a Tuzla foreign lawyer provides rapid intervention, especially in removal center procedures. Similarly, with an Istanbul foreign lawyer, it may be possible to protect the right to enter the country by requesting a stay of execution in cases filed in administrative court. Immigration law is a technical field open to the discretion of the administration. An incorrect application or a lawsuit not filed within the deadline can lead to loss of rights.