Can Turkey reject a citizenship application for national security or public-order reasons? Learn which citizenship routes are affected, whether a criminal conviction is required, how security assessments work and how a refusal may be challenged in 2026.

Yes. A Turkish citizenship application can be rejected because the applicant is considered to present an obstacle concerning national security or public order. This is not a secondary consideration: it is expressly included in Turkish Citizenship Law No. 5901 and applies to several major routes for acquiring Turkish citizenship.

For general naturalization, Article 11 requires the applicant to have no condition constituting an obstacle concerning national security or public order. The same basic requirement also appears in exceptional citizenship and marriage-based citizenship.

This means that completing five years of residence, owning property, making an investment, operating a company, being married to a Turkish citizen or otherwise satisfying the ordinary requirements does not necessarily guarantee approval if the citizenship authorities identify a national-security or public-order obstacle.

However, a security-based refusal is an administrative decision. Depending on the facts and procedural history, its legality may be challenged before the administrative courts. A national-security label should therefore not automatically be treated as making judicial review impossible.

For applicants in Ankara, Istanbul, Izmir, Mersin, Bursa and throughout Turkey, a security-based citizenship refusal requires careful examination of both the citizenship file and any underlying criminal, immigration or security-related records.

Is National Security an Express Citizenship Requirement?

Yes.

Current official guidance for general naturalization lists eight principal conditions. The eighth requires the foreign applicant to have no circumstance constituting an obstacle concerning national security and public order.

This requirement operates independently from the other conditions.

An applicant may therefore:

have completed five years of qualifying residence;

speak Turkish;

have sufficient income;

have a profession;

demonstrate an intention to settle permanently;

and otherwise satisfy the general naturalization requirements,

but still face refusal because of the national-security or public-order assessment.

Does the Security Requirement Apply Only to Five-Year Citizenship Applications?

No.

It applies across several citizenship routes.

Exceptional citizenship under Article 12 is also conditional upon the applicant having no national-security or public-order obstacle. Current official guidance expressly confirms this requirement.

Marriage-based citizenship similarly requires that the foreign spouse have no condition constituting an obstacle concerning national security or public order.

The issue is therefore relevant not only to long-term residents but also to investors, spouses of Turkish citizens and applicants using other naturalization routes.

Can an Investment Citizenship Application Be Rejected on Security Grounds?

Yes.

Making the required investment does not create unconditional citizenship.

Investment-based applicants proceed within the exceptional citizenship framework, and the national-security and public-order condition remains applicable.

Therefore, an applicant may satisfy the applicable property, deposit, investment or other financial criteria but still fail to obtain citizenship if the competent authorities identify a qualifying security or public-order obstacle.

This is why investment compliance and citizenship approval should never be treated as identical questions.

Can a Citizenship-by-Marriage Application Be Rejected for Security Reasons?

Yes.

A foreigner married to a Turkish citizen must satisfy the conditions governing marriage-based acquisition, including the absence of a national-security or public-order obstacle.

Marriage to a Turkish citizen therefore does not override a security assessment.

Similarly, having Turkish citizen children does not automatically eliminate this requirement.

Is a Criminal Conviction Required for a National-Security Refusal?

Not necessarily.

A criminal conviction and an administrative national-security assessment are legally different concepts.

Citizenship authorities conduct an administrative assessment. Consequently, the absence of a final criminal conviction does not necessarily mean that no security or public-order issue can ever be considered.

At the same time, this does not mean that every allegation, investigation or intelligence-related record automatically establishes a lawful basis for refusal.

The factual foundation and legal reasoning of the administrative decision can become central issues in judicial review.

Can an Ongoing Criminal Investigation Affect Citizenship?

Potentially, yes.

An ongoing criminal investigation can create problems during citizenship proceedings depending on its nature and the citizenship route involved.

Official procedural guidance concerning citizenship applications specifically refers to applicants who are being prosecuted, convicted or detained among circumstances that may prevent an application from proceeding at the preliminary stage.

However, the existence of a criminal investigation should not automatically be equated with guilt.

An allegation, investigation, prosecution and final conviction represent different procedural stages.

What If the Applicant Was Acquitted?

An acquittal can be extremely important evidence.

If the citizenship authorities relied directly or indirectly on criminal allegations and the applicant later receives a final acquittal, that decision should be examined in connection with the citizenship refusal.

The applicant should preserve the complete criminal judgment rather than merely providing a short document stating that the case ended.

The reasoning may demonstrate why the allegations were not established.

However, an acquittal does not necessarily mean that every separate administrative assessment automatically disappears. The citizenship authority’s actual reasoning must still be identified and reviewed.

What If the Investigation Ends Without Prosecution?

A final decision closing the criminal investigation without prosecution can similarly be significant.

If a citizenship application remains pending or has been refused because of allegations connected with that investigation, the applicant should consider formally submitting the favorable outcome.

The citizenship authority should not be assumed to update every file automatically as soon as another government authority reaches a decision.

Can Police or Security Records Affect Citizenship?

Potentially.

Citizenship procedures involve administrative examination, and current official information confirms that citizenship applications are evaluated by the competent citizenship authority with particular attention to national-security and public-order obstacles.

The existence of an administrative or security-related record can therefore become relevant.

But the decisive legal question in a disputed case is not simply whether some record exists.

It is whether the resulting administrative decision complies with the law and is supported by a legally sufficient individualized basis.

Can Immigration Restriction Records Affect a Citizenship Application?

Potentially.

Previous immigration measures may become relevant depending on their basis. These could include removal proceedings, entry restrictions, residence cancellations or other immigration measures connected with allegations concerning public order or security.

However, the existence of an immigration measure does not automatically establish that every future citizenship application must be rejected.

The applicant should examine the original reason for the immigration measure, whether it was challenged and whether it remains legally effective.

Does a Previous Removal Decision Automatically Prevent Citizenship?

Not automatically in every case.

The reason for the removal decision matters.

A historical removal decision resulting from an immigration-status violation is materially different from a decision based on serious public-security allegations.

Similarly, if the removal decision was later annulled by a court, that judgment may become highly important in the citizenship proceedings.

Applicants should therefore avoid treating all previous immigration records as equivalent.

Can an Entry Restriction Affect Citizenship?

Potentially.

An entry restriction connected with public-order or national-security allegations may become relevant during a citizenship security assessment.

Where the restriction has been removed, expired or annulled, the applicant should preserve documentation proving that development.

If an underlying administrative measure has already been judicially annulled, continued reliance on the same factual basis in a later citizenship refusal may require particularly careful legal examination.

Can Foreign Social or Professional Connections Cause a Security Refusal?

Security assessments can involve complex factual circumstances, but citizenship should not be described as lawfully rejectable merely because a foreigner has ordinary international social, professional or business relationships.

Foreign executives, investors and entrepreneurs frequently have international connections.

Where an application is rejected, the question should be whether the administration has identified a legally relevant national-security or public-order obstacle rather than merely relying on the applicant’s foreign status or normal international activity.

Can Bank Transactions Become Relevant?

Potentially, depending on the circumstances.

Unusual financial transactions may attract scrutiny where they are connected with a wider investigation or identified security concern.

But an international bank transfer, foreign investment or transfer between legitimate businesses should not automatically be equated with a national-security problem.

Applicants involved in substantial international commercial transactions should maintain clear records explaining the legitimate source and purpose of funds.

Can Citizenship Be Rejected Because of Public Order Rather Than National Security?

Yes.

The statutory language contains both concepts.

Article 11 refers to circumstances constituting an obstacle concerning national security and public order.

Therefore, a citizenship refusal may concern public-order considerations even where the case does not involve an allegation traditionally associated with national security.

The administration’s precise reasoning should be identified rather than treating every refusal as a security case.

Does Meeting Every Other Citizenship Requirement Override the Security Assessment?

No.

The requirements operate cumulatively.

For example, under general naturalization, completing five years of uninterrupted qualifying residence does not override a national-security or public-order obstacle.

Similarly, qualifying for exceptional citizenship does not remove the security requirement.

This is why applicants should not assume that satisfying an investment threshold or residence period creates an unconditional right to citizenship.

Does Meeting the Conditions Create an Absolute Right to Citizenship?

No.

Naturalization is not simply an automatic administrative transaction triggered when a checklist is completed.

Citizenship authorities evaluate whether the statutory conditions are met, including national-security and public-order considerations. Current official information confirms that applications are evaluated before qualifying cases proceed to the final decision stage.

Therefore, “I satisfied all financial requirements” or “I completed five years” is not, by itself, a complete answer to a security-based refusal.

Must the Administration Explain the Security Reason?

This can become one of the central issues in litigation.

Security-related administrative decisions sometimes involve information that is not fully disclosed to the applicant.

However, the existence of security considerations does not automatically eliminate judicial review.

The administrative court can examine the legality of the refusal within the applicable procedural framework.

The applicant’s lawyer should therefore obtain and analyze the refusal decision, administrative case file and any material that can legally be examined during proceedings.

Can Secret or Classified Information Be Used?

Security litigation can involve information that is not freely accessible to the applicant.

This creates a difficult balance between legitimate national-security interests and effective judicial protection.

A citizenship applicant may therefore receive a refusal without knowing every underlying detail at the initial stage.

That makes the administrative lawsuit especially important because the legality and factual foundation of the decision can be examined through judicial proceedings subject to the rules governing protected information.

Can a Security-Based Citizenship Refusal Be Challenged in Court?

Yes, depending on the procedural circumstances.

A citizenship refusal is an administrative decision and can be subject to administrative judicial review.

The lawsuit should focus on the legality of the refusal.

Potential issues may include whether the administration relied on an adequate factual basis, whether the information actually relates to the applicant, whether outdated or incorrect records were used, whether favorable developments were ignored and whether the administrative assessment complies with constitutional and administrative-law requirements.

Can Courts Review Discretionary Citizenship Decisions?

Administrative discretion does not mean complete immunity from judicial review.

Courts do not simply replace the administration’s citizenship assessment with their own preference, but administrative discretion must still remain within legal boundaries.

A useful illustration comes from Constitutional Court case law concerning citizenship refusal. In a case involving refusal of naturalization, the Constitutional Court found a violation of the right to respect for private life after examining the authorities’ treatment of the applicant and the judicial process.

Although that particular case concerned a good-character assessment rather than a national-security refusal, it demonstrates an important principle: citizenship-related administrative decisions are not automatically beyond constitutional scrutiny merely because citizenship acquisition involves administrative discretion.

Does an Administrative Court Automatically Grant Citizenship If the Refusal Is Annulled?

No.

Annulment of a refusal and direct acquisition of citizenship are different legal consequences.

If a court finds the administrative refusal unlawful and annuls it, the administration must act in accordance with the judgment.

The authorities may then need to reconsider the citizenship application.

A successful lawsuit should therefore not be advertised as an automatic court order granting citizenship.

Can Incorrect Identity Information Cause a Security Problem?

Potentially.

Foreign applicants sometimes have differences in the spelling of names, dates of birth, transliteration or passport records.

If information belonging to another person is incorrectly associated with the applicant, serious problems can arise.

A security-based refusal should therefore be checked carefully for possible identity confusion.

Passport history, previous names, citizenship records and other identifying information may be essential evidence.

What If the Security Record Is Very Old?

Age alone does not automatically make a record irrelevant.

However, the passage of time, subsequent conduct and the present relevance of the information may become important when assessing whether an applicant currently constitutes a national-security or public-order obstacle.

Where a refusal appears based entirely on an old event, the applicant should determine precisely what happened, how the matter ended and whether later official decisions altered its legal significance.

What If Another Court Already Cleared the Applicant?

That decision can be highly significant.

Suppose an applicant previously challenged an immigration or administrative measure based on the same allegations and obtained a final judgment annulling that measure.

If the citizenship authority later relies on substantially the same allegations, the earlier judgment should be submitted and its legal effect carefully examined.

The administration cannot simply be assumed to have considered every earlier judicial development automatically.

Can Family Members’ Activities Affect the Applicant?

Citizenship assessment should ultimately concern the applicant’s own legal position.

Where a refusal appears to be based primarily on allegations concerning a spouse, relative, business partner or other third party, the individualized basis of the decision can become a major issue in judicial review.

The applicant should establish their own conduct and relationship to the alleged facts rather than allowing association alone to remain unexplained.

Can a Security Refusal Affect a Residence Permit?

A citizenship refusal and immigration status are legally separate.

A refusal of citizenship does not automatically mean that a valid residence or work authorization disappears.

However, if the underlying security assessment also leads immigration authorities to take separate action, such as cancellation of residence status, an entry restriction or removal proceedings, those measures may require separate legal challenges.

The applicant should therefore identify every administrative decision individually.

Can a Security Refusal Lead to Removal?

Not automatically.

Refusing citizenship and removing a foreigner from Turkey are different administrative actions governed by different statutory frameworks.

A citizenship refusal does not itself constitute a removal decision.

If removal proceedings are initiated separately, the foreigner must examine and challenge that decision under the immigration-law procedures and deadlines applicable to removal.

Practical Example: Five-Year Residence Applicant

A foreign professional in Ankara has completed more than five years of qualifying residence, speaks Turkish, works lawfully and satisfies the financial requirements. The citizenship application is nevertheless rejected because the authorities identify a national-security obstacle.

Completing five years does not override Article 11’s security requirement.

The applicant should obtain the refusal, examine any known criminal or immigration records and evaluate an administrative lawsuit against the decision.

Practical Example: Foreign Investor

A foreign investor in Istanbul satisfies the financial conditions for exceptional citizenship but receives a security-based refusal.

The investment does not guarantee citizenship because exceptional acquisition remains subject to the absence of a national-security or public-order obstacle.

The investment documentation and the security-based refusal therefore involve two separate legal questions.

Practical Example: Investigation Closed Without Prosecution

A foreign applicant in Izmir is investigated after a complaint. The investigation later ends without prosecution, but the citizenship application is rejected on security or public-order grounds.

The applicant should determine whether the refusal relies on the same allegations and submit the final criminal decision as part of the administrative challenge.

Practical Example: Marriage-Based Citizenship

A foreign spouse in Bursa has been married to a Turkish citizen for more than three years and otherwise satisfies the marriage-based requirements but receives a national-security refusal.

Marriage does not eliminate the statutory security requirement.

The refusal must therefore be analyzed on its own factual and legal basis.

Practical Example: Incorrect Security Record

A foreign business owner in Mersin discovers that a citizenship refusal appears connected with information concerning another individual with a similar name.

Identity documents, passport records, dates of birth and other distinguishing evidence can become central to demonstrating that the administrative assessment rests on incorrect information.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Can Turkish citizenship be rejected for national-security reasons?

Yes. The absence of a national-security or public-order obstacle is an express condition under major citizenship routes.

2. Does the applicant need a criminal conviction before citizenship can be rejected?

Not necessarily. A citizenship security assessment is administrative and should not be equated solely with a final criminal conviction.

3. Can exceptional or investment citizenship be rejected on security grounds?

Yes. Exceptional citizenship remains subject to the national-security and public-order condition.

4. Can citizenship through marriage be rejected for security reasons?

Yes. Marriage-based citizenship expressly includes the same security and public-order requirement.

5. Does an acquittal automatically guarantee citizenship?

No, but a final acquittal may be extremely important evidence where the citizenship assessment relied on the same allegations.

6. Can a security-based refusal be challenged?

Yes. A final citizenship refusal may be subject to administrative judicial review.

7. Can the court directly grant citizenship?

The court reviews the legality of the administrative decision. Annulment of an unlawful refusal should not be confused with an automatic judicial grant of citizenship.

8. Does a citizenship refusal automatically cancel a residence permit?

No. Citizenship and immigration status are separate, although the same underlying allegations may sometimes lead to separate immigration measures.

9. Does a citizenship refusal automatically mean deportation?

No. Removal requires a separate administrative decision under the applicable immigration framework.

10. Can incorrect security information be challenged?

Yes. Identity errors, outdated information, favorable criminal decisions, annulled immigration measures and other factual inaccuracies can be highly important in judicial review.

Legal Assistance for National-Security Citizenship Refusals in Turkey

A national-security or public-order refusal is among the most serious problems that can arise in a Turkish citizenship application. The issue can affect applicants using general naturalization, marriage-based citizenship and exceptional citizenship, including qualifying investors.

The first step is to determine exactly what administrative decision has been issued. The applicant should then examine criminal proceedings, previous immigration measures, entry restrictions, identity records, administrative litigation and any other circumstances that may have contributed to the security assessment.

A final criminal conviction is not the only possible issue in a citizenship security assessment. At the same time, the absence of a conviction does not make administrative authorities free to rely on incorrect identities, irrelevant information or an otherwise unlawful factual basis without judicial scrutiny.

Constitutional Court case law concerning citizenship decisions also demonstrates that administrative discretion in naturalization matters does not place citizenship-related decisions entirely outside constitutional review.

Firat Fesih Kaya Law Office provides legal assistance to foreign professionals, investors, entrepreneurs, spouses of Turkish citizens and long-term residents in Ankara, Istanbul, Izmir, Mersin, Bursa and throughout Turkey concerning citizenship refusals based on national security, public order, criminal investigations, immigration records and related administrative assessments.

Legal assistance may include reviewing the citizenship refusal, examining the underlying criminal and immigration history, identifying incorrect or outdated records, preparing administrative litigation, presenting acquittal or non-prosecution decisions, addressing identity confusion and coordinating citizenship litigation with any separate residence, entry-restriction or removal proceedings.

Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
Mobile / WhatsApp: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Office: Mevlana Boulevard No:221, Yildirim Tower, Balgat, Cankaya, Ankara, Turkey

The key 2026 principle is clear: a Turkish citizenship application can be rejected where the authorities determine that the applicant presents a national-security or public-order obstacle. However, such a refusal remains an administrative decision whose factual and legal basis may be examined through judicial review. Investment, marriage or five years of residence does not override the security requirement, while a security allegation does not automatically place the administration beyond judicial scrutiny.