The first hours after a person is taken into custody are among the most critical phases of criminal proceedings; the rights exercised — or left unexercised — during this period may shape the course of the entire file. The rights of the suspect are regulated in detail in Articles 90 to 148 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CMK). This article examines apprehension (yakalama) and police custody (gözaltı), the rights that must be read to the suspect before a statement is taken, and the rules on the length of custody, on the basis of the legislation in force as at 17.09.2026. The powers and responsibilities of law enforcement (kolluk), the public prosecutor (Cumhuriyet savcısı) and the judgeship differ at every stage of the process; knowing how those powers are allocated matters, because it allows the suspect and defence counsel (müdafi) to identify correctly which right may be exercised at which stage.
- As a rule, police custody may last no more than 24 hours from the moment of apprehension (CMK m. 91/1).
- For offences committed collectively (toplu suç), that period may be extended by the public prosecutor’s decision in one-day increments for up to three further days; the total period may not exceed four days (CMK m. 91/3).
- Before a statement is taken, the suspect must be informed of the offence alleged, the right to remain silent, the right to choose defence counsel and the right to have a relative notified (CMK m. 147).
- A suspect who is not in a position to choose a lawyer may ask for defence counsel to be assigned by the bar association (baro); counsel is mandatory for offences carrying a maximum penalty of more than five years’ imprisonment (CMK m. 150).
- A statement obtained by prohibited methods such as pressure, threat, deception or exhaustion may not be used in evidence, even if the suspect consents to it (CMK m. 148).
What Are Apprehension and Police Custody?
Apprehension is the temporary restriction of a person’s liberty because that person is suspected of an offence or because a warrant of apprehension or a detention order has been issued against them. Keeping the apprehended person deprived of liberty, until the reason for the apprehension and the allegations against them fall away or for as long as the purpose of the investigation requires, is called police custody.
Conditions for Apprehension
Under CMK m. 90, anyone who witnesses an offence being committed may make an apprehension, even if not a law enforcement officer, where the offence is committed in flagrante delicto (suçüstü) and there is a risk that the perpetrator will flee or that their identity cannot be established immediately. Law enforcement officers are additionally empowered to take a person into custody without waiting for the public prosecutor’s order in cases where delay would be prejudicial; the exercise of that power must be reported to the prosecutor without delay.
The Difference Between Taking a Statement and Interrogation
In CMK terminology, “taking a statement” (ifade alma) refers to the hearing of the suspect by law enforcement or by the public prosecutor, while “interrogation” (sorguya çekme) refers to the hearing of the suspect or the accused by a judge or a court. The distinction matters, because the power to interrogate belongs to judges and courts alone; law enforcement may not interrogate the suspect, it may only take a statement.
Photo: Sandstein, Source: Wikimedia Commons (CC BY 3.0)
The First Steps Applied to an Apprehended Person
Once the apprehension has been carried out, law enforcement is obliged to have the apprehended person’s state of health examined, to carry out a search of the person or their belongings where necessary, and to draw up a record of apprehension (tutanak). The medical examination is repeated at the beginning and at the end of the custody period, with the aim of forestalling any allegation of ill-treatment during custody. The lawfulness of the apprehension is one of the first matters to be examined in any objection raised at a later stage. The record of apprehension must set out in detail the date, time and place of the apprehension, the officers who carried it out and the reason for it; where this information is incomplete or incorrectly recorded, it may lay the ground for a later dispute about whether the apprehension was lawful.
Handcuffing and the Principle of Proportionality
Handcuffing a person who has been apprehended or taken into custody must be confined to situations in which there is a risk of flight or of harm to themselves or to others; the measure must be applied in accordance with the principle of proportionality, on the basis of an assessment of the concrete risk. Routine handcuffing without reasons may be regarded as a practice capable of being contrary to human dignity.
Length of Custody: The First 24 Hours and Extensions
Once law enforcement has completed the necessary formalities, the apprehended person is reported to the public prosecutor without delay. Police custody may last no more than 24 hours from the moment of apprehension; the time necessarily spent travelling to the nearest judge or court to the place of apprehension is not included in that period.
| Situation | Maximum Period | Deciding Authority |
|---|---|---|
| Individual offence | 24 hours | Law enforcement / public prosecutor |
| Collectively committed offence (with extension) | 4 days in total (24 hours + 3 days) | Written order of the public prosecutor |
| Objection to the custody decision | Without delay | Criminal judgeship of peace (sulh ceza hakimliği) |
Procedure for Extension in Collectively Committed Offences
Under CMK m. 2/1-k, a collectively committed offence is defined as an offence committed by at least three persons, irrespective of whether there is an intention to act in concert between them. For offences of this kind, the public prosecutor may extend the custody period in one-day increments where this is unavoidable, for instance because of difficulty in gathering the evidence or because of the number of suspects; the extensions may not, however, exceed three days in total, so that the overall custody period cannot go beyond four days.
Rights That Must Be Read Before a Statement Is Taken (CMK m. 147)
Under CMK m. 147, certain matters must be brought to the suspect’s attention, in order, before the statement is taken; a failure to do so may mean that the statement obtained is treated as unlawfully obtained evidence.
Notification of the Alleged Offence and the Right to Silence
The suspect is first told what offence is alleged. They are then reminded that they have the right not to make statements that might incriminate them, that is, the right to remain silent. The suspect need not answer any question put to them; that choice cannot be construed as evidence against them.
Choosing Defence Counsel and Mandatory Representation
The suspect is informed that they have the right to choose defence counsel and that, if they are not in a position to do so, they may ask for counsel to be assigned to them by the bar association. Under CMK m. 150, where the suspect is a child, is deaf or mute, or is disabled to a degree that prevents them from conducting their own defence, or where they face an offence carrying a maximum penalty of more than five years’ imprisonment, the assignment of counsel by the bar association is mandatory and does not depend on a request.
Notification of Relatives and the Right to Have Evidence in One’s Favour Collected
Under CMK m. 95, one of the relatives of the person taken into custody is notified without delay. The suspect is also reminded that they may request the collection of concrete evidence in order to clear themselves of suspicion, and that they may give information about their personal and financial circumstances.
Meeting Defence Counsel and the Confidentiality of the Meeting
Under CMK m. 154, a suspect in custody may exercise the right to meet defence counsel at any time and without a power of attorney being required. Such meetings take place in confidence, in a setting where others cannot overhear them; the content of the meeting may not be recorded and may not be added to the investigation file. Although the statute allows restrictions on meetings with counsel in exceptional circumstances for certain categories of offence, those restrictions are construed narrowly and may be applied only by a reasoned decision. Counsel also has the right to examine the documents in the file at the investigation stage; that power of examination may, however, be restricted by decision of the public prosecutor in exceptional circumstances where it might jeopardise the confidentiality of the investigation. An objection against such a restriction may likewise be brought before the criminal judgeship of peace.
Prohibited Methods of Taking a Statement (CMK m. 148)
Under CMK m. 148, statements obtained by methods that affect the suspect’s free will — ill-treatment, torture, the administration of drugs, exhaustion, deception, the use of force or threats, or the promise of an unlawful advantage — are prohibited. A statement obtained by prohibited methods may not be used in evidence, even if the suspect subsequently consents to it. In addition, a statement taken by law enforcement without counsel present may not form the basis of the judgment unless the suspect confirms it before a judge or a court.
Photo: MartinD, Source: Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 4.0)
After Custody: Judicial Control and Pre-Trial Detention
When the custody period comes to an end, the suspect is either released or, at the request of the public prosecutor, brought before the criminal judgeship of peace with an application for judicial control measures (adli kontrol) or for pre-trial detention (tutuklama). Judicial control covers measures alternative to detention, such as a ban on leaving the country, signing in at set intervals, and restrictions on residence and travel. Detention, by contrast, is an exceptional measure that may be ordered only by a judge, with regard to the principle of proportionality, where there is strong suspicion that an offence has been committed and one of the grounds for detention listed in the statute (such as a risk of flight or a risk of tampering with the evidence) is present. The suspect also has the right to have counsel present when brought before the judge; at that stage the suspect may repeat or change the statement given during custody, or continue to exercise the right to remain silent.
Special Rules for Child Suspects
For child suspects, the special provisions of both the CMK and the Child Protection Act No. 5395 apply; the presence of defence counsel when the child’s statement is taken is mandatory regardless of age, and it is also envisaged that an expert such as a pedagogue, psychologist or social worker should, where possible, be involved in the process. Taking a child into custody is regarded as a more exceptional measure than it is for adults, and efforts are made to keep it as short as possible.
Additional Rights of a Foreign National Suspect
Where a foreign national is taken into custody, CMK m. 95/2 requires that the person be reminded that, if they so request, the consulate of the State of which they are a national will be informed of the situation. That right is also secured by international conventions and is important if a foreign suspect is to exercise the right of defence effectively.
The same guarantees governing statements and interrogation apply in investigations into aggravated fraud, one of the categories of offence committed through information systems that may likewise set a custody process in motion.
The Consequences of Unlawfully Obtained Evidence in the Proceedings
Under CMK m. 206 and m. 217, findings obtained unlawfully may not be admitted in evidence and may not form the basis of the judgment. A failure to inform the suspect of their rights, the absence of subsequent confirmation of a statement taken without counsel, and statements obtained by prohibited methods are assessed within this framework and may be removed from the file. For that reason, a defence strategy must examine with care not only the content of the statement but also the procedure by which it was taken; a procedural shortcoming may become a strong point of defence on the merits.
Objection to Custody
The apprehended person may object before the criminal judgeship of peace — personally or through their defence counsel, legal representative, spouse, or a blood relative of the first or second degree — against the apprehension itself and against the public prosecutor’s written order extending the custody period. The judge concludes the examination as quickly as possible; if the judge finds the custody unlawful, they order the immediate release of the person concerned.
Illustrative Scenario (Hypothetical)
The following example is entirely fictional and is not based on any real client or file; it has been prepared purely as an illustration in order to explain how the process works.
In a fictional scenario, a suspect referred to as (Y) is apprehended on suspicion of theft from a shop and taken into custody. Before taking the statement, law enforcement informs (Y) of the offence alleged, of the right to remain silent, of the right to choose defence counsel, and of the right to ask that a relative be notified. (Y) states that they cannot afford to retain a lawyer, and counsel is assigned by the bar association. After a confidential meeting with counsel, the statement is taken; (Y) exercises the right to remain silent and does not answer certain questions. At the end of the 24-hour custody period (Y) is released, and the investigation is continued by the prosecutor’s office under judicial control measures. This fictional example shows how the proper reading of rights and the support of counsel operate from the very beginning of the process.
In the same fictional scenario, had law enforcement taken (Y)’s statement without informing them of the right to choose counsel and before a lawyer arrived, that statement could not have formed the basis of the judgment unless (Y) confirmed it before the judge. This second possibility shows how a procedural shortcoming can directly affect the assessment of evidence at later stages of the file.
Frequently Encountered Breaches of Rights
The problems encountered most often in practice are a failure to inform the suspect of their rights in the proper form, the taking of a statement before counsel arrives despite a request for counsel, delay in notifying relatives, and extension of the custody period without reasons. Procedural shortcomings of this kind may result in evidence obtained thereafter being treated as unlawfully obtained and left out of account in the proceedings. An incomplete medical examination, or records of the custody process that have not been kept in full, are likewise significant failings that may lead to a lack of evidence if an allegation of ill-treatment is later raised.
Breaches of rights at the investigation stage also affect the course of the action that will later be heard; in technical files such as the offence of causing zoning pollution, for example, observing the procedural guarantees at the moment the first statement is taken is likewise of great importance. The current text of the Code of Criminal Procedure is available on the legislation page of the TBMM (the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye), and the relevant decisions of the Yargıtay (the Court of Cassation) through the Yargıtay Decision Search system. For general information on access to a lawyer and the rights of defence counsel, you may also consult the resources of the Union of Turkish Bar Associations (Türkiye Barolar Birliği).
The procedural guarantees that arise during the statement and interrogation process apply in the same way in investigations into economic offences such as a complaint concerning a dishonoured cheque; for details you may look at our article on the procedure for a dishonoured cheque complaint. Because a suspect’s statement may in some cases also form the basis of administrative sanction decisions, our article explaining how to bring an action against tax and administrative fines may also be a useful guide. Since the unlawful acquisition or disclosure of personal data may in addition be the subject of a criminal investigation, you may at that point also wish to look at our article examining the data breach notification obligation under the KVKK (the Personal Data Protection Law).
What Will the Other Side Do?
At the statement and interrogation stage, the investigating authority on the other side also has a strategy for showing that its acts complied with the procedure; a suspect who is prepared for that strategy will find it easier to prove any breaches of rights afterwards.
The argument that the rules of procedure were fully observed. The investigating authority will assert that the custody and statement formalities were carried out in accordance with the legislation. That assertion is assessed by comparing the time entries in the custody record, the approval document of the judge on duty and the duration of each step against the statutory maximum periods.
The argument that the rights were read in full. It may be asserted that all of the suspect’s rights were read out and explained to them. That assertion is met with the signature on the rights form and, where one exists, the record showing that counsel was present.
The argument that the statement was given of free will. It will be asserted that there was no pressure and no suggestive questioning. Here, any audio or video recording made while the statement was taken, and the entries made in the record by counsel who was present, become decisive.
The argument that the search and seizure were carried out properly. That assertion is met with the written search warrant or, in cases where delay would have been prejudicial, the approval document obtained afterwards.
The argument that the evidence was obtained subsequently. The investigating authority may assert that the documents or records objected to were duly obtained at a later point. That assertion is examined against the records showing the date and method by which the evidence was obtained.
Which procedural step will become the subject of argument varies according to how the custody process actually unfolded; for that reason it is important to request and examine the records and other entries at the outset. Requesting copies of the records relating to the custody and statement process, together with any camera footage, before the process comes to an end prevents those documents from becoming difficult to obtain later. To assess in advance which arguments your file is likely to meet, you may get in touch.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the longest that police custody can last?
For individual offences it is 24 hours; for collectively committed offences it may be extended in one-day increments by written order of the public prosecutor, up to a maximum of 4 days.
What happens if the suspect cannot retain a lawyer?
If the suspect is not in a position to choose a lawyer, defence counsel is assigned to them by the bar association free of charge; for offences carrying a maximum penalty of more than five years’ imprisonment the presence of counsel is mandatory in any event.
Will exercising the right to remain silent be used as evidence against me?
No. The exercise of the right to remain silent cannot be construed as a presumption or as evidence against the suspect.
Is the presence of defence counsel mandatory when a statement is taken?
In certain situations (a child, a disabled suspect, or offences carrying a maximum penalty of more than five years’ imprisonment) the presence of counsel is mandatory; in other situations the suspect may waive that right if they do not want counsel, but where counsel is requested, no statement may be taken without counsel present.
Can a statement obtained through ill-treatment be used in court?
No. Under CMK m. 148, a statement obtained by prohibited methods may not form the basis of the judgment, even if the suspect subsequently consents to it.
How is an objection made against a custody decision?
The suspect may object before the criminal judgeship of peace personally or through their defence counsel, legal representative, spouse, or a blood relative of the first or second degree; the judge decides as quickly as possible.
Will I be detained straight away after custody?
No. At the end of the custody period the suspect is either released or brought before a judge with an application for judicial control or detention; detention may be ordered by the judge only where the conditions listed in the statute are present.
How is a child suspect’s statement taken?
When a child suspect’s statement is taken, the presence of defence counsel is mandatory regardless of age; it is also envisaged that, so far as possible, an expert such as a pedagogue, psychologist or social worker should be involved in the process.
Conclusion
The rights exercised or overlooked in the first hours of custody may directly affect the validity of the evidence at later stages of the criminal proceedings. Exercising the right to remain silent, the right to choose defence counsel and the right to have relatives notified in the proper form allows a defence strategy to be built on solid ground. To protect your rights during this process, you may find out more about our criminal law practice area. Because custody, the taking of a statement, judicial control and detention each involve different rules of procedure, acting with defence counsel from the outset matters both for the protection of rights and for the early identification of any procedural errors. Your particular situation requires an assessment specific to your file.
Table of Periods
| Period | How long | Start |
|---|---|---|
| Custody period (individual offence) | 1 day | From the moment of apprehension |
| Custody period (collectively committed offence, maximum with extension) | 4 days | From the moment of apprehension |
Sources
- tbmm.gov.tr
- Yargıtay Decision Search System
- Union of Turkish Bar Associations (Türkiye Barolar Birliği)
Related Articles
- The Distinction Between Fraud and Aggravated Fraud: Commission Through Information Systems
- The Offence of Causing Zoning Pollution (TCK 184): Unlicensed Construction
- Dishonoured Cheque Complaint: Time Limits, Judicial Fine and Payment
- Action Against Tax and Administrative Fines: Time Limits and Stay of Execution
- KVKK Data Breach Notification: The 72-Hour Rule and Article 12
This article is for general information purposes and does not take the place of legal advice. Your particular situation requires a separate assessment of your file.
This article was prepared on the basis of the legislation in force as at 17.09.2026.
Av. Yahya Köse
Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law, Real Estate Law, Lease and Eviction Law, Criminal Law, Dispute Resolution, Preventive Law
View the lawyer’s profile
