Introduction

Can a detained student’s enrollment be cancelled by the university? This study aims to analyze whether a detained university student’s enrollment can be cancelled by the university due to their detention, the legal conditions for such a process, the student’s right to file a lawsuit, and the conditions for the success of such a lawsuit. The analysis is based on the examination of decisions from the Council of State and Regional Administrative Courts. The examination reveals the balance between the student’s constitutional right to education and their administrative and academic obligations arising from university regulations. The study examines enrollment cancellation procedures under two main categories: cancellation as a disciplinary penalty, and cancellation due to non-fulfillment of academic/administrative obligations.

Detention Alone Is Not a Reason for Enrollment Cancellation: Judicial decisions are consistent in stating that merely being detained is not a sufficient reason for a student’s enrollment to be cancelled by the university. The existence of additional conditions is sought for the enrollment cancellation process.

Reasons for De-registration are Divided into Two:

De-registration as a Disciplinary Penalty: This type of de-registration (expulsion from a higher education institution) requires the student to have a final conviction decision issued against them for specific offenses listed in the Higher Education Institutions Student Disciplinary Regulation (for example, membership in a terrorist organization). An ongoing investigation or prosecution is not sufficient for this process.

De-registration for Academic/Administrative Reasons: If the student is unable to fulfill their academic obligations due to their detention, such as failing to renew course registration or failing to complete courses or their thesis within the maximum study period, their registration may be cancelled.

The Student’s Active Role is Critically Important: It is vital for a detained student to inform the university of their situation and request a leave of absence. A student who does not make this request is held responsible for their academic obligations, and therefore, their de-registration is deemed lawful.

Detention is a Justifiable and Valid Excuse: Many court decisions accept detention as a justifiable and valid excuse for requesting a leave of absence, failing to renew registration, or being unable to attend exams. It is unlawful for the university to arbitrarily reject this excuse.

Right to File a Lawsuit and Procedural Requirements: A student whose registration has been cancelled has the right to file an annulment lawsuit in the administrative court. However, the success of the lawsuit depends on the reason for the cancellation of registration and the legal avenues pursued by the student. Specifically, not filing a lawsuit in a timely manner against interim actions, such as the rejection of a request to freeze registration, can negatively affect the lawsuit filed against the final registration cancellation.

1. Cancellation of Registration as a Disciplinary Penalty and the Requirement of a “Final Conviction”

Judicial decisions are clear that the most fundamental condition for expulsion from school as a disciplinary penalty is a final conviction issued against the student. Mere detention, being under investigation, or even being dismissed from public service by a decree-law (KHK) is not sufficient for this action.

In the decision of the 8th Chamber of the Council of State, numbered 2018/5813 E., 2020/3849 K., this principle was expressed as: “…it was concluded that there was no final decision issued by judicial courts indicating that the plaintiff committed any or all of these acts or engaged in such actions/activities, such as establishing an organization with the intent to commit a crime, and therefore, an expulsion penalty from a higher education institution could not be imposed without such a decision issued pursuant to Article 9/1-a of the Regulation.” Similarly, in the decision numbered 2021/3240 E., 2022/114 K., the cancellation of registration based on a conviction that was found not to be final because an appeal process was later initiated, was also deemed unlawful.

Furthermore, for a disciplinary penalty to be applied, the offense must have been committed while the student’s student status was still ongoing. In the decision of the 8th Chamber of the Council of State, numbered 2023/2769 E., 2024/3513 K., it was stated that “…the plaintiff was not a university student on the date the conviction became final, and therefore, it is not possible to penalize the plaintiff with a disciplinary penalty for an action that did not occur during their student period…”, ruling that enrollment cannot be canceled due to actions prior to student status.

2. Enrollment Cancellation Due to Academic and Administrative Reasons

This category covers situations where detention indirectly leads to enrollment cancellation, and different approaches are observed in judicial decisions.

Student’s Obligation: Request for Enrollment Freezing The most common situation is when the student fails to notify the university of their detention and request to freeze their enrollment. In such cases, courts interpret the student’s passivity against them. In the decision of the 8th Chamber of the Council of State, numbered 2021/5364 E., 2021/3699 K., the enrollment cancellation due to academic failure was found lawful, based on the reasons that the student “did not submit a petition to the defendant administration stating they were excused” and that “their ability to benefit from rights such as enrollment freezing was dependent on their request.” Similarly, in the decision numbered 2022/2425 E., 2024/2906 K., the case was dismissed, emphasizing that “the plaintiff, who was detained, had no application to the defendant administration for freezing their doctoral program enrollment.”

Acceptance of Detention as a “Justifiable and Valid Excuse” However, many decisions automatically accept detention as a valid excuse. In the decision numbered 2020/417 E., 2020/733 K. of the 4th Administrative Litigation Chamber of Samsun RMC, it was stated that “it is clear that the student’s detention is also counted among the justifiable and valid excuses for freezing registration” and that the university should accept the request to freeze registration. In the old but consistent decision numbered 1996/5242 E., 1999/2738 K. of the 8th Chamber of the Council of State, it was stated that “it is undisputed that detention falls within the scope of acceptable excuses” . In the more recent decision numbered 2022/124 E., 2023/8141 K., it was also ruled that the student’s failure to request to freeze registration would not prevent detention from being considered a valid excuse.

Different Approaches: Acting by Proxy and the Administration’s Discretion In some decisions, it has been argued that operations such as registration renewal can be done by proxy, and therefore, detention is not an absolute excuse. In the decision numbered 2021/247 E., 2023/2910 K. of the 8th Chamber of the Council of State, it was stated that “detention is not an impediment to renewing registration, and that registration renewal procedures can be carried out by proxy even in cases of detention”, and the deregistration was affirmed. However, in the decision numbered 2019/3938 E., 2022/6430 K., the Council of State found this approach to be insufficient and overturned the decision, stating that it should be investigated whether the student’s detention dates and registration dates actually overlapped. This situation indicates that the courts meticulously examine the specific circumstances of the case.

3. Right to File a Lawsuit and Procedural Conditions to Be Considered

A student whose registration has been cancelled reserves the right to file an annulment lawsuit in the administrative court. However, certain procedural points must be considered for the success of the lawsuit:

Filing a Lawsuit Against the Correct Action: As emphasized in the decision of the 8th Chamber of the Council of State, numbered 2022/1178 E., 2024/718 K., the student must first file a lawsuit against the refusal of their request for a leave of absence. If a lawsuit is not filed against this interim action in a timely manner, this point cannot be raised in a subsequent lawsuit filed against the registration cancellation action taken at the end of the maximum period, and the lawsuit is dismissed.

Lawsuit Filing Period: The period for filing a lawsuit against administrative actions is 60 days from the day following the notification or learning of the action. The decision of the 8th Chamber of the Council of State, numbered 2024/107 E., 2024/5975 K., indicates that notification via e-mail and the response given to it can be considered the date of “learning” (ıttıla) and will initiate the period.

Proof of Justification: For the lawsuit to be successful, it is essential to prove that the inability to fulfill academic obligations was based on a valid justification, such as detention. In the decision of the 8th Chamber of the Council of State, numbered 2021/7515 E., 2024/2947 K., the court confirmed the student’s detention dates with a writ from the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office and, accepting this as a proven justification, annulled the registration cancellation action. A document suggestion.

Conclusion

In light of the reviewed court decisions, it is unlawful to disenroll a university student solely due to their detention. Disenrollment can occur either as a result of a final conviction for offenses specified in the Higher Education Institutions Student Disciplinary Regulations (disciplinary penalty) or due to the student’s inability to fulfill academic obligations because of detention (e.g., maximum period expiry, failure to re-register) (academic/administrative reasons).

In disenrollment processes as a disciplinary penalty, a “final conviction” and “the offense being committed during the student period” are absolute requirements. In cases of disenrollment for academic reasons, the most critical factor is the student proactively requesting to freeze their registration by informing the university about their detention. Although detention is generally accepted as a valid excuse, lawsuits filed by students who do not exercise this right usually result against them. While a dis-enrolled student has the right to file a lawsuit, the success of the case depends on filing the lawsuit against the correct administrative action in a timely manner and proving the excuse with concrete evidence.

Why is Expert Legal Support Necessary?

Student disenrollment procedures due to detention involve highly technical and unforgiving administrative judicial processes, including disciplinary provisions, final conviction requirements, maximum study period, re-registration obligations, excuse evaluation, and lawsuit filing deadlines. As court decisions indicate, even seemingly minor errors such as filing a lawsuit against the wrong action, failing to request registration freezing on time, or inability to prove the overlap between detention dates and registration periods can lead to the rejection of the case.

Therefore, especially in regions with a high student population and dense university campuses, such as Istanbul, Tuzla, Pendik, Kartal, Maltepe, Kadıköy, Ataşehir, Ümraniye, Gebze, Dilovası, Çayırova, it is of vital importance that administrative lawsuits related to student deregistration processes are handled by a **specialist lawyer**.

2M Law Office aims to protect the student’s right to education by providing professional legal support in all stages of arrest – registration freezing – deregistration – disciplinary process – annulment lawsuit – stay of execution. The contributions a specialist lawyer can provide are:

Proper presentation of arrest as a “justifiable excuse”

Legal compliance in following registration freezing/renewal processes

Determination of the appropriate timeframe for filing a lawsuit against which action

Identification of procedural errors in the university’s processes

Documentation of arrest dates and academic periods

Ensuring the student’s registration is reactivated by requesting a stay of execution

The right to education is a Constitutional right, and to prevent its loss due to legal errors, proceeding with a specialist lawyer from start to finish is the most accurate and safest approach in the student’s favor.