

What happens when a foreigner is called to a Turkish prosecutor’s office? Learn about prosecutor statements, criminal investigations, the right to a lawyer and interpreter, right to remain silent, detention risks and what foreign suspects should do.
Receiving a call, summons or police notification requiring attendance at a Public Prosecutor’s Office in Turkey (Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığı) can be alarming for a foreign national, particularly when the person does not understand why they have been called or whether they are attending as a suspect, witness or complainant. For foreign suspects, the most important point is that attending a prosecutor’s office does not automatically mean that the person has been charged, arrested or found guilty of a crime. Under Turkish criminal procedure, the investigation stage begins when competent authorities learn of a suspected offence and continues until an indictment is accepted. The Criminal Procedure Code expressly defines a person under suspicion during this investigation stage as a “suspect” (şüpheli).
A prosecutor has a central role in the Turkish criminal investigation system. Under Article 160 of Criminal Procedure Code No. 5271 (Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu – CMK), when a prosecutor learns of circumstances creating an impression that an offence may have been committed, the prosecutor must investigate whether there is a basis for bringing a public prosecution. Importantly, the prosecutor is required to collect and preserve evidence both against and in favor of the suspect and to protect the suspect’s rights.
For foreigners, understanding what may happen before entering the prosecutor’s office can prevent serious mistakes during one of the most important stages of a Turkish criminal investigation.
The Public Prosecutor’s Office is responsible for conducting criminal investigations and determining whether the evidence justifies bringing criminal charges before a court.
Turkish criminal procedure distinguishes between the investigation stage (soruşturma) and the prosecution or trial stage (kovuşturma). The investigation runs from the competent authorities becoming aware of a suspected offence until acceptance of an indictment. The prosecution stage begins when the indictment is accepted and continues until the judgment becomes final.
Therefore, a foreigner questioned by a prosecutor will frequently still be at the investigation stage.
This distinction matters because the prosecutor is investigating whether sufficient grounds exist to commence a criminal case; the foreigner has not necessarily become a defendant before a criminal court.
There are many possible reasons.
A foreigner may have been identified as a suspect following a criminal complaint, police investigation, financial investigation, traffic incident, workplace accident, customs inspection, corporate dispute, alleged fraud, physical altercation or another event.
Foreign company directors and investors may also become involved in investigations arising from commercial transactions where another party alleges fraud, breach of trust, forgery or another criminal offence.
The first question should therefore be:
In what legal capacity have I been summoned?
Being questioned as a suspect is fundamentally different from being heard as a witness or complainant.
No.
A summons to provide a statement should not automatically be confused with an arrest or apprehension warrant.
Article 145 CMK provides that a person whose statement or interrogation is required may be summoned and that the reason for the summons is stated; the summons also warns of compulsory appearance if the person fails to attend.
Foreign nationals should therefore not ignore an official summons simply because they live outside Turkey or intend to leave Turkey soon.
Counsel should first determine what the summons concerns and what procedural status applies.
The precise procedure depends on the case.
Typically, identity and case information will be verified before the relevant procedural action takes place. If the foreign national is being questioned as a suspect, the safeguards governing suspect statements apply.
Article 147 CMK requires identification of the suspect, explanation of the alleged offence, notification of the right to legal counsel, notification of the right not to make a statement about the accusation and an opportunity to request collection of concrete evidence that may remove suspicion.
The statement is recorded in an official report.
For foreigners, interpretation may also be necessary where the person cannot adequately communicate in Turkish.
The suspect must be informed of the alleged offence.
Article 147 expressly provides that the accusation against the suspect or defendant is to be explained.
This is critical.
A foreigner should understand what conduct is being investigated before attempting to provide detailed explanations.
For example, simply being told that the investigation concerns “fraud” may not be enough for the foreigner to intelligently explain a complex commercial transaction without understanding which transaction, payment or representation is under investigation.
Yes.
Article 149 CMK provides that a suspect or defendant may benefit from the assistance of one or more defense lawyers throughout the investigation and prosecution stages. During the investigation stage, up to three lawyers may be present during the taking of a statement. The law further states that the lawyer’s right to meet the suspect, remain present during the statement or interrogation and provide legal assistance cannot be prevented or restricted.
This is particularly important for foreigners because misunderstandings about Turkish criminal procedure can have consequences extending beyond the criminal investigation itself.
In serious or unfamiliar criminal matters, obtaining legal advice before providing a substantive statement can be extremely important.
A foreign suspect may believe that immediately explaining everything will end the investigation.
Sometimes a detailed explanation is strategically appropriate.
In other cases, providing an unprepared statement before understanding the allegation or available evidence can create inconsistencies that later become difficult to explain.
The decision whether to provide a detailed statement should therefore be made after considering the particular criminal file.
Article 154 CMK provides that a suspect or defendant may meet defense counsel without requiring a power of attorney and may communicate with counsel in an environment where others cannot hear the conversation. Communications with counsel are also protected under the statutory framework.
This means the foreign suspect should normally have an opportunity to discuss the situation with counsel before deciding how to respond to substantive allegations.
Article 147 requires suspects to be informed of the right to choose defense counsel and provides that where the person cannot choose counsel and wishes to receive legal assistance, counsel is appointed through the bar. Article 150 separately regulates circumstances involving appointed and mandatory defense counsel.
Whether mandatory representation applies depends on the circumstances, including factors identified in Article 150.
Foreign nationality itself does not eliminate these procedural protections.
Yes, where the person cannot adequately communicate in Turkish.
Article 202 CMK provides the framework for interpretation in criminal proceedings. Official Turkish judicial authorities are maintaining interpreter lists for 2026 specifically for suspects, defendants, victims and witnesses who cannot adequately express themselves in Turkish during investigations and prosecutions. (ANKARA ADLİYESİ)
A foreign suspect should not pretend to understand Turkish merely to make the procedure finish more quickly.
Criminal terminology can be difficult even for someone who speaks conversational Turkish.
That depends on the person’s actual ability to understand the proceedings.
Someone may be perfectly capable of ordering food, conducting basic business or holding an everyday conversation in Turkish while still being unable to understand expressions concerning intent, participation, evidence, criminal liability or procedural rights.
Where comprehension is uncertain, accurate interpretation can be essential.
A statement can later become an important piece of evidence.
Yes.
Article 147 CMK expressly requires the suspect or defendant to be informed that they have a legal right not to provide an explanation concerning the alleged offence.
The constitutional protection against self-incrimination is also significant. The Turkish Constitutional Court has emphasized that no person may be compelled to provide a statement that incriminates themselves, and it has treated the right to remain silent and privilege against self-incrimination as constitutional protections. (Anayasa )
This does not mean remaining silent is always strategically preferable.
It means the decision should be informed rather than made under the mistaken belief that answering every question is legally compulsory.
There is an important distinction.
Article 147 requires the suspect’s identity to be established and states that the suspect or defendant must answer questions concerning identity correctly.
This is different from the right not to explain the alleged offence.
Therefore:
Correct identification is required. A substantive confession or explanation concerning the accusation cannot simply be compelled.
Yes.
Article 147 specifically requires the suspect to be reminded that they may request collection of concrete evidence for the purpose of removing suspicion and must be given an opportunity to present matters in their favor.
This can be especially important in commercial and financial investigations.
A foreign investor accused of fraud may have contracts, invoices, banking documents, emails or board resolutions demonstrating the legitimate commercial basis of the disputed transaction.
Those documents should be identified strategically rather than overlooked.
Yes.
Article 160 CMK states that the prosecutor must collect and preserve evidence both for and against the suspect and protect the suspect’s rights while investigating the material truth.
This principle is important because the prosecutor’s role is not legally limited to collecting evidence that supports conviction.
A defense lawyer can therefore identify exculpatory evidence and request that relevant investigative steps be taken.
Yes, where those matters are relevant to the investigation.
Financial and corporate investigations may involve questions concerning bank transfers, company ownership, invoices, contracts, accounting records, cryptocurrency transactions or relationships between companies.
Foreign company directors should be particularly cautious about answering complex financial questions from memory.
Where transactions occurred years earlier or involved several entities, documentary verification may be necessary before providing detailed explanations.
Digital evidence may become relevant in a criminal investigation, but accessing, searching, examining or seizing devices raises separate procedural questions depending on the circumstances and legal basis.
A foreign suspect should not assume that every request concerning a telephone, laptop or account is merely an informal conversation.
Where digital evidence is involved, counsel should determine the precise legal basis of the requested action.
Searches are separate investigative measures governed by criminal-procedure rules.
The fact that the foreigner has been called to provide a statement does not itself mean that every residence, hotel room, office or device can automatically be searched without the applicable legal basis.
If a search has already occurred, counsel should obtain and examine the relevant search and seizure records.
The statement must be documented.
Article 147 requires the statement or interrogation to be recorded in an official report containing information including where and when it occurred, who was present and whether the required procedural safeguards were followed. The report records that its contents were read by the person giving the statement and defense counsel and signed; refusal to sign and the reason must also be recorded.
Article 169 additionally provides that investigation procedures are documented and that the relevant portions are read to or made available for reading by the participants before signature.
Foreign suspects should therefore take the statement record seriously.
A foreign suspect should never treat signature as an insignificant formality.
The person should understand what the document says and whether it accurately reflects the statement given.
If interpretation has been inaccurate or the written record materially differs from what the suspect actually said, the issue should be addressed before signing.
This is one reason why having both competent interpretation and criminal counsel can be particularly valuable.
Statements must be based on free will.
Article 148 CMK prohibits methods interfering with free will, including mistreatment, torture, administering drugs, exhaustion, deception, force or threats and other physical or psychological interventions. Unlawfully obtained statements cannot be evaluated as evidence merely because the person ostensibly consented to them.
The Constitutional Court also recognizes the constitutional importance of the right against compelled self-incrimination. (Anayasa )
Several outcomes are possible.
The prosecutor may continue the investigation and request additional evidence. The person may be allowed to leave while the investigation remains pending. Further statements or investigative procedures may be required.
Where sufficient suspicion ultimately exists to justify prosecution, the prosecutor prepares an indictment. Article 170 provides that an indictment is prepared when the evidence collected at the end of the investigation creates sufficient suspicion that an offence was committed.
Where sufficient evidence for prosecution cannot be obtained, Article 172 provides for a decision of no grounds for prosecution (kovuşturmaya yer olmadığına dair karar).
Therefore, providing a prosecutor statement does not automatically mean a criminal case will be filed.
The outcome depends on how the person came before the prosecutor and what measures are being considered.
A suspect may provide a statement and leave without detention.
In other cases, the prosecutor may consider that a judicial measure is necessary and initiate the relevant procedure before the competent judge.
Foreigners should therefore not assume that being taken to the prosecutor automatically means they will be arrested, but they should equally avoid assuming that they will automatically leave immediately after the statement.
A prosecutor does not simply make the final judicial detention decision personally.
Where detention is sought, the relevant judicial procedure must be followed and the competent judge evaluates whether statutory detention requirements are satisfied.
This distinction is important.
Prosecutor investigation and judicial detention are connected, but they are not the same decision-making process.
Depending on the circumstances, judicial-control measures may become relevant instead of detention.
These can include restrictions such as an international travel prohibition or reporting obligations.
Therefore, a foreign suspect may leave the courthouse without being imprisoned but still face important restrictions.
The written judicial decision should always be reviewed before the foreigner assumes they can immediately leave Turkey.
A criminal travel restriction should be distinguished from an informal request by the prosecutor.
Where a prohibition on leaving Turkey is imposed as judicial control, the applicable judicial procedure is required.
A foreign national should therefore verify whether an actual yurt dışına çıkış yasağı exists rather than relying on assumptions or verbal information.
Potentially, depending on the circumstances and subsequent judicial procedure.
For example, if the prosecutor believes that statutory grounds exist for detention, the suspect may be referred to the competent criminal judgeship for consideration of detention.
This is why serious criminal allegations should be assessed before the foreigner attends the prosecutor’s office whenever possible.
Article 148 CMK specifically provides that where it becomes necessary to obtain another statement from a suspect concerning the same incident, the subsequent statement may only be taken by the public prosecutor.
This provision can become important where a foreign suspect has already provided an earlier police statement.
Counsel should therefore obtain information concerning all previous statements before preparing for further questioning.
Statements taken by police can form part of the investigation, but Article 148 contains an important safeguard: a statement taken by law enforcement without defense counsel present cannot form the basis of judgment unless the suspect or defendant confirms it before a judge or court.
Foreigners who previously gave a police statement without understanding its significance should inform their lawyer immediately.
The previous statement should be reviewed before any prosecutor interview.
Article 153 CMK generally permits defense counsel to examine the investigation file and obtain copies, although access may be restricted by a criminal judgeship where statutory conditions concerning the purpose of the investigation are met. Certain materials—including the suspect’s statement and specified records—are protected from that restriction.
This can make file review one of the most important steps before deciding how a foreign suspect should respond to allegations.
As a general rule, investigation procedures are confidential subject to statutory exceptions and the requirement that defense rights not be harmed. Article 157 CMK expressly establishes this principle.
Foreign suspects should therefore be cautious about discussing an ongoing investigation publicly, particularly on social media or with business counterparties.
Public statements can create additional evidentiary or reputational complications.
Passport issues can involve different criminal-procedure and administrative measures.
A foreigner should not assume that being under investigation automatically means their passport can no longer be used.
The critical question is whether an applicable legal restriction—particularly a judicial travel prohibition—has actually been imposed.
Any passport seizure or retention should be analyzed according to its specific legal basis.
Potentially, unless an enforceable restriction prevents departure.
Being a criminal suspect does not automatically create an international travel ban.
However, if judicial control includes a prohibition on leaving Turkey, the person should not attempt to depart until that restriction has been lawfully removed.
This should be checked immediately after the procedure.
Criminal proceedings and immigration proceedings are legally distinct, but they can interact.
Depending on the allegation and circumstances, a foreign suspect may subsequently face immigration questions concerning residence status, deportation or administrative measures.
The existence of a prosecutor investigation should not automatically be described as cancellation of a residence permit.
The actual immigration status and any administrative decision should be examined separately.
The foreign national should have reliable identification and should coordinate relevant documentation with defense counsel.
Bringing a large quantity of documents without first determining their relevance may not always be strategically useful.
In commercial cases, for example, counsel may organize contracts, bank records, invoices, correspondence and corporate documents into a coherent explanation rather than handing over unrelated material.
Preparation should be tailored to the allegation.
A foreign suspect should avoid deleting messages, altering records, contacting potential witnesses in a manner that could be misunderstood as pressure, creating retrospective documents or discussing the case publicly without considering the consequences.
Likewise, the suspect should not guess when answering questions.
If the person genuinely cannot remember a transaction, date or conversation, attempting to reconstruct an answer spontaneously can create inconsistencies with documentary evidence.
Ignoring an official summons can create serious procedural consequences.
Article 145 provides that a person summoned for a statement or interrogation is informed of the reason and warned that compulsory appearance may follow non-attendance. Article 146 regulates compulsory appearance in qualifying circumstances.
A foreign national who cannot attend on the specified date should therefore seek legal advice rather than simply ignoring the notification.
A lawyer can undertake many procedural steps, review the available file and communicate with the authorities, but counsel cannot automatically replace the suspect where Turkish authorities legally require the suspect’s personal statement or presence.
The appropriate strategy depends on the investigation.
Foreign nationals living abroad should therefore determine whether personal attendance is required before booking travel to Turkey or ignoring a summons.
A foreigner who has an outstanding compulsory-appearance or apprehension measure may encounter criminal-procedure issues at border control.
For this reason, a person who knows that a Turkish criminal investigation exists should consider verifying their procedural status before travelling.
This is particularly important where earlier prosecutor or police summonses were missed.
Corporate investigations require particular care.
A company director may be questioned about transactions performed by employees, accountants, other directors or former management.
The director’s title alone should not be confused with personal participation in every corporate act.
Before giving a detailed statement, counsel may need to examine signature authorities, board resolutions, delegation documents, company records, contracts and accounting materials.
The objective is to distinguish corporate activity from individual criminal responsibility.
Commercial disputes sometimes develop into criminal complaints.
A failed investment, unpaid debt, terminated contract or unsuccessful business transaction does not automatically establish criminal fraud.
The prosecutor must investigate whether the conduct satisfies the elements of a criminal offence.
Foreign investors should therefore preserve contracts, negotiations, payment records and correspondence that explain the commercial background of the dispute.
These materials may significantly affect whether sufficient suspicion exists to file an indictment.
No. A summons or request to provide a statement is not itself equivalent to arrest or detention.
Yes. Article 149 CMK protects the suspect’s right to defense counsel throughout the investigation and during the statement.
Article 147 requires suspects to be informed of their legal right not to provide explanations concerning the accusation.
Yes. Article 147 states that identity questions must be answered correctly.
Where the foreign suspect cannot adequately communicate in Turkish, interpretation protections apply. Official 2026 judicial interpreter lists expressly cover suspects and defendants in investigation and prosecution proceedings. (ANKARA ADLİYESİ)
Yes. Article 147 recognizes the suspect’s ability to request collection of concrete evidence capable of removing suspicion, while Article 160 requires prosecutors to collect both incriminating and exculpatory evidence.
Where the prosecutor considers a judicial protective measure necessary, the relevant judicial procedure may be initiated. The final detention decision is not simply an informal prosecutorial decision.
Potentially, unless an active travel restriction or another legally enforceable measure prevents departure.
No. If the investigation produces sufficient suspicion, the prosecutor may prepare an indictment; where sufficient evidence for prosecution is not obtained, a decision of no grounds for prosecution may be issued.
The suspect should understand the contents and ensure the record accurately reflects what was said before signing. Interpretation should be used where necessary.
For a foreign suspect, the prosecutor interview can become one of the most consequential stages of the entire criminal investigation. Statements given at an early stage can affect later decisions concerning prosecution, detention, judicial control, international travel restrictions and the overall criminal-defense strategy.
Effective preparation should therefore begin by identifying the foreigner’s procedural status, examining the available allegations and evidence, reviewing any previous police statement, determining whether interpretation is necessary and deciding whether a substantive statement should be provided immediately or after further preparation.
Turkish criminal procedure expressly protects important suspect rights, including the right to know the accusation, receive legal assistance, remain silent concerning the alleged offence, request collection of exculpatory evidence and provide a statement based on free will.
Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office provides legal assistance to foreign nationals, tourists, expatriates, international investors, foreign employees and company executives concerning prosecutor investigations in Turkey, prosecutor statements, police interviews, criminal complaints, detention proceedings, judicial control, travel bans and criminal trials.
Legal assistance may include reviewing the investigation file where legally available, preparing the foreign suspect before the prosecutor interview, attending the statement procedure, submitting exculpatory evidence, challenging protective measures and coordinating the criminal case with immigration proceedings where necessary.
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Address: Mevlana Boulevard No:221, Yıldırım Tower, Balgat, Çankaya / Ankara
A foreign national called to a Turkish prosecutor’s office should therefore avoid treating the interview as an informal conversation. The allegation should first be understood, procedural rights should be protected, interpretation should be requested where necessary and the statement should form part of a carefully prepared criminal-defense strategy.