Can a Foreign Shipowner Be Criminally Liable in Turkey? Complete Legal Guide – 2026 Updated

Can a foreign shipowner face criminal liability in Turkey? This 2026 guide explains criminal investigations involving foreign vessels, shipowners, directors, masters, maritime accidents, fatalities, pollution, smuggling, vessel seizure, and legal defence.

Foreign shipowners operating in Turkish ports and waters may face a difficult question when a serious accident, pollution event, cargo violation, customs investigation, or other maritime incident occurs: Can the foreign shipowner itself be held criminally liable in Turkey?

The short answer requires an important distinction.

Under Article 20 of the Turkish Criminal Code, criminal responsibility is personal. The Code also provides that punitive criminal sanctions cannot generally be imposed on legal entities, although legally prescribed security measures concerning legal entities are reserved. (WIPO)

This means that where a vessel is owned by a foreign corporation, the corporate shipowner should not simply be treated as though it were a natural person who can be sentenced to imprisonment.

However, this does not mean that the corporate structure eliminates criminal exposure.

Depending on the facts, Turkish prosecutors may investigate natural persons acting for or within the shipowning structure, including directors, managers, technical personnel, masters, officers, crew members, or other decision-makers whose individual acts or omissions allegedly contributed to an offence.

At the same time, the vessel or corporate assets may face legally authorized security, seizure, detention, administrative, or other protective measures.

For international shipping companies, the real legal question is therefore not merely whether “the shipowner” is criminally liable. It is:

Which individual made or controlled the relevant decision, what duty did that person have, where did the conduct occur, and what consequences can Turkish law impose?

Does Turkish Criminal Law Apply to Foreign Shipowners?

Potentially, yes, where Turkish criminal jurisdiction exists.

Foreign nationality does not automatically prevent a person from becoming subject to a Turkish criminal investigation.

The vessel’s foreign flag also does not create absolute immunity from Turkish law whenever the ship enters Turkish territorial jurisdiction.

The precise jurisdictional analysis depends on the location and nature of the alleged offence and the applicable rules of Turkish and international law.

Turkey’s marine casualty investigation regime expressly provides for investigation of very serious casualties occurring within Turkish territorial waters regardless of the vessel’s flag. Serious casualties and maritime incidents involving foreign-flagged ships within Turkish territorial waters may also be investigated under the applicable rules. (Ulaşım Emniyeti)

A safety investigation is not the same as a criminal prosecution, but this framework illustrates that a foreign flag does not prevent Turkish authorities from responding to serious maritime incidents within Turkish waters.

Corporate Liability vs. Personal Criminal Liability

This is the starting point for every foreign shipowner.

Article 20 of the Turkish Criminal Code establishes the principle of individual criminal responsibility and states that no person can be held responsible for another person’s conduct. It also provides that punitive sanctions cannot be imposed on legal entities, subject to security measures specifically provided by law. (WIPO)

Accordingly, investigators must determine the responsibility of natural persons individually.

For example, a foreign shipowning company may have:

• a board of directors;
• commercial managers;
• technical managers;
• a Designated Person Ashore;
• superintendents;
• a master;
• officers;
• engineers.

The existence of a casualty does not automatically make every person in this chain criminally responsible.

The investigation must determine who acted, who failed to act despite a relevant duty, what that person knew, and whether the requirements of a particular criminal offence are satisfied.

Negligence Is Particularly Important in Maritime Accidents

Article 22 of the Turkish Criminal Code addresses negligence and establishes that negligent conduct is punishable where the relevant offence is expressly defined as punishable through negligence. (WIPO)

This becomes particularly important after maritime casualties involving death or bodily injury.

Investigators may ask whether a responsible individual:

• ignored known technical deficiencies;
• failed to maintain safety equipment;
• disregarded navigational risks;
• allowed an inadequately trained crew member to perform critical duties;
• ignored fatigue or rest-hour problems;
• failed to implement safety procedures;
• knowingly postponed essential repairs.

Criminal responsibility nevertheless cannot be inferred simply from the fact that an accident occurred.

The causal relationship between the alleged failure and the resulting harm must be examined.

Criminal Liability After a Fatal Maritime Accident

A fatality aboard a vessel is one of the circumstances most likely to produce serious prosecutorial scrutiny.

Consider an engine-room explosion that kills a crew member.

The investigation may examine whether the event resulted from an unexpected mechanical defect or from a dangerous condition known long before the casualty.

Relevant evidence could include maintenance records, class recommendations, previous defect reports, repair requests, safety-management documentation, internal communications, engine logs, and statements from engineering personnel.

If shore management repeatedly received warnings concerning a dangerous defect but deliberately postponed essential repairs, the investigation may extend beyond the crew.

Conversely, if management properly maintained the vessel and the casualty resulted from an independent operational decision aboard the ship, the analysis may point elsewhere.

The title “shipowner” alone does not determine criminal liability.

Can a Foreign Company Director Be Criminally Liable?

Potentially, but not merely because they are a director.

A foreign director’s personal criminal exposure must be connected to their own conduct and legal responsibilities.

Relevant questions may include:

Did the director know about the dangerous condition?

Did the director have responsibility or authority to correct it?

Did the director personally instruct the vessel to continue operating despite the risk?

Did the director participate in concealment or falsification?

The corporate hierarchy should therefore be reconstructed carefully.

In large international shipping groups, responsibility may be divided among the registered owner, ISM manager, technical manager, commercial manager, crewing company, and charterer.

A proper defence should identify the actual decision-making structure rather than assuming that every senior corporate officer was operationally responsible.

Can the Master Be Criminally Liable?

Potentially, yes.

The master possesses substantial responsibilities for navigation and vessel safety.

Following a collision, grounding, or other navigational casualty, investigators may examine:

• passage planning;
• lookout;
• safe speed;
• radar use;
• bridge resource management;
• COLREG compliance;
• helm orders;
• communications;
• weather conditions;
• fatigue;
• pilotage.

However, being master does not create automatic criminal responsibility.

The evidence must establish the individual’s conduct and its relationship with the casualty.

Some incidents may principally result from technical-management failures, defective equipment, cargo conditions, third-party conduct, pilotage issues, or circumstances outside the master’s reasonable control.

What About the Technical Manager?

Technical managers can become highly relevant where an accident involves vessel condition.

Investigators may examine whether the technical manager received earlier reports concerning:

• machinery defects;
• structural problems;
• fire-safety systems;
• lifesaving appliances;
• steering equipment;
• navigation systems;
• pollution-control equipment;
• overdue maintenance.

Emails between the vessel and shore management can therefore become important evidence.

A foreign shipowner should implement immediate evidence preservation following a serious casualty rather than allowing ordinary email-retention or data-deletion systems to remove potentially relevant material.

Maritime Pollution and Criminal Exposure

Marine pollution can generate several different types of liability simultaneously.

A pollution incident may result in administrative penalties, environmental claims, clean-up expenses, insurance disputes, and potentially criminal proceedings where the statutory requirements of an offence are satisfied.

The risk becomes particularly serious where authorities suspect deliberate conduct or concealment.

Examples may include allegations involving falsified environmental records, illegal discharges, deliberate bypassing of pollution-prevention equipment, or false waste documentation.

The distinction between an accidental technical malfunction and intentional manipulation can therefore be decisive.

Customs and Smuggling Offences

Foreign shipowners can also become involved in criminal investigations relating to cargo.

Examples of high-risk allegations include:

• concealed goods;
• prohibited cargo;
• fraudulent customs documents;
• intentionally false cargo declarations;
• manipulated seals;
• undeclared goods;
• controlled substances or products;
• deliberate concealment of cargo origin.

Discovery of unlawful cargo aboard a ship does not automatically make the shipowner criminally responsible.

Investigators must examine knowledge, participation, control, and the responsibilities of the relevant individuals.

For this reason, owners should preserve booking records, bills of lading, manifests, chartering communications, shipper instructions, container documentation, and cargo declarations.

False Maritime Documents

Document-related allegations can significantly increase criminal exposure.

Potentially relevant records include:

• statutory ship certificates;
• crew certificates;
• bills of lading;
• manifests;
• cargo certificates;
• safety records;
• environmental records;
• insurance documents.

An administrative documentation error should not automatically be equated with deliberate falsification.

However, intentionally creating, altering, or knowingly using fraudulent documentation may create substantially greater legal consequences depending on the circumstances and applicable offence.

Port State Control Detention Does Not Mean Criminal Guilt

Foreign shipowners should distinguish criminal proceedings from Port State Control.

IMO describes Port State Control as the inspection of foreign ships in national ports to verify compliance with international requirements concerning vessel condition, equipment, manning, and operation. (Uluslararası Denizcilik Örgütü)

A vessel may therefore be detained because serious deficiencies make it unsafe or non-compliant.

That does not automatically mean anyone committed a criminal offence.

However, an inspection can uncover evidence that subsequently becomes relevant to another investigation.

For example, investigators may discover that a safety-critical deficiency had been repeatedly reported but deliberately concealed.

The regulatory deficiency and potential criminal conduct must then be analyzed separately.

Marine Casualty Investigation Is Also Different from Criminal Investigation

Turkey has a specialized Transport Safety Investigation Center responsible for safety investigations.

Its current framework includes the national By-Law on the Investigation of Marine Casualties and Incidents together with the IMO Casualty Investigation Code and related international instruments. (Ulaşım Emniyeti)

Crucially, the Turkish marine casualty rules state that the safety investigation is not conducted to identify criminal responsibility or apportion blame or liability. (Ulaşım Emniyeti)

The purpose is preventive.

This means that a serious casualty can generate both:

a technical safety investigation and
a separate criminal investigation.

Foreign shipowners should not assume that every interview, document request, or expert inspection belongs to the same proceeding.

Evidence That May Become Critical

Modern maritime criminal investigations can be extremely evidence-intensive.

Relevant evidence may include:

• VDR recordings;
• AIS information;
• ECDIS data;
• radar records;
• bridge audio;
• deck and engine logbooks;
• Oil Record Books;
• maintenance systems;
• defect reports;
• photographs and video;
• CCTV where available;
• crew rest records;
• safety-management records;
• emails between ship and shore;
• cargo documentation.

Evidence preservation should begin immediately following a serious incident.

The company should avoid altering, deleting, reconstructing, or retrospectively “correcting” records.

Can Turkish Authorities Seize the Vessel?

Potentially, where a legally sufficient basis exists.

However, several different measures can immobilize a vessel, and they should not be confused.

The ship may potentially face a:

Port State Control detention because of safety deficiencies;

criminal seizure connected with an investigation;

customs restriction concerning cargo or alleged violations;

administrative restriction imposed under another regulatory framework; or

precautionary ship arrest securing a qualifying maritime claim.

Each measure has different legal requirements and remedies.

The owner’s lawyer should immediately identify the written legal basis for any restriction preventing departure.

Does Criminal Seizure Mean Permanent Confiscation?

No.

Temporary seizure during an investigation should not automatically be confused with final confiscation.

Permanent confiscation requires the substantive and procedural conditions prescribed by the applicable Turkish legislation.

This distinction is commercially critical because shipowners sometimes receive information that a vessel has been “seized” and incorrectly assume that ownership has already been permanently lost.

The exact judicial order and statutory basis should be reviewed before conclusions are drawn.

Can the Shipowner’s Representatives Be Prevented from Leaving Turkey?

Measures affecting individuals depend on Turkish criminal procedure, the nature of the alleged offence, available evidence, and the procedural decision of the competent authorities.

Foreign masters and managers should therefore avoid assuming that they are free to depart merely because the vessel itself has not been arrested.

Likewise, the commencement of an investigation does not automatically mean every foreign individual involved will be detained.

Procedural status should be established separately for each person.

What Should a Foreign Shipowner Do Immediately?

Following a serious incident, the shipowner should rapidly coordinate legal, technical, and insurance responses.

The company should determine:

1. which Turkish authority is investigating;
2. whether anyone is formally considered a suspect;
3. whether the vessel is restricted;
4. what evidence has been requested or secured;
5. whether VDR and electronic records require urgent preservation;
6. whether a casualty investigation is running separately;
7. whether P&I and hull insurers have been notified;
8. whether independent technical experts are required.

The company should also establish a clear communication protocol.

Uncoordinated statements from the master, managers, local agents, and corporate headquarters can create serious evidentiary problems.

2026 Maritime Enforcement Environment in Turkey

There is no sound basis for describing 2026 as introducing an entirely new general criminal-liability system for foreign shipowners. The core principles remain grounded in existing Turkish criminal legislation, including the personal responsibility principle under Article 20 and negligence provisions under Article 22 of the Turkish Criminal Code. (WIPO)

However, maritime safety enforcement and casualty investigation remain active.

The Transport Safety Investigation Center’s current database already records a 2026 fire casualty investigation involving FG SEVIL, while previous published investigations cover collisions, explosions, groundings, occupational accidents, and man-overboard incidents. (Ulaşım Emniyeti)

Foreign shipowners operating in Turkey in 2026 should therefore maintain effective accident-response procedures covering criminal defence, casualty investigation, technical evidence, crew representation, insurance notification, and vessel-release strategy.

Fırat Fesih Kaya assists foreign shipowners, operators, managers, masters, officers, and international shipping companies facing maritime criminal investigations and related proceedings in Turkey.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Can a foreign shipowner be criminally liable in Turkey?

Potentially, depending on what is meant by “shipowner.” Turkish criminal responsibility is personal. Natural persons acting within a foreign shipowning organization may be investigated where their own conduct satisfies the requirements of an offence. Legal entities are subject to the separate rule in Article 20 of the Turkish Criminal Code. (WIPO)

2. Can a foreign shipping company be sentenced to imprisonment?

No. A legal entity cannot be imprisoned. Turkish law distinguishes the criminal responsibility of natural persons from legally authorized security measures concerning legal entities.

3. Can a foreign company director be prosecuted in Turkey?

Potentially, where Turkish jurisdiction exists and evidence connects the director’s own conduct or legally relevant omission with an alleged offence. Corporate title alone does not establish criminal responsibility.

4. Can the master be criminally liable after a collision?

Potentially, yes, but liability is not automatic. Navigation, COLREG compliance, lookout, speed, communications, bridge management, and other evidence may need to be reconstructed before responsibility can be assessed.

5. Can a technical manager be investigated after a fatal accident?

Yes, potentially. This may be particularly relevant where evidence indicates that shore management knew of a serious safety defect and failed to address it despite having the relevant responsibility.

6. Does Port State Control detention mean a crime has occurred?

No. PSC is a regulatory inspection and enforcement mechanism concerning compliance of foreign ships with applicable international requirements. (Uluslararası Denizcilik Örgütü)

7. Is Turkey’s marine casualty investigation a criminal investigation?

No. The applicable Turkish regulation expressly states that the marine safety investigation is not intended to determine criminal responsibility, blame, or liability. (Ulaşım Emniyeti)

8. Can a foreign vessel be seized during a criminal investigation?

Potentially, where the applicable legal conditions are satisfied. The precise measure should be distinguished from PSC detention, customs restrictions, administrative measures, and commercial ship arrest.

9. What evidence should a foreign shipowner preserve?

Potentially important evidence includes VDR and AIS data, logbooks, maintenance and safety records, crew documentation, emails, cargo records, photographs, CCTV where relevant, and communications between ship and shore.

10. When should a foreign shipowner contact a Turkish maritime criminal lawyer?

Immediately after a serious accident, fatality, major injury, pollution incident, customs or smuggling allegation, criminal summons, vessel seizure, or indication that the master, manager, or crew member may be treated as a suspect.

Legal Support for Foreign Shipowners Facing Criminal Liability in Turkey

A criminal investigation involving a foreign vessel can quickly develop into parallel criminal, maritime, administrative, customs, environmental, insurance, and casualty-investigation proceedings.

The distinction between the liability of the registered shipowner, corporate directors, technical managers, master, officers, and crew can be decisive. Early preservation of VDR data, electronic communications, logbooks, maintenance records, and other technical evidence may also materially affect the defence.

Fırat Fesih Kaya provides legal assistance to foreign shipowners, international shipping companies, vessel managers, operators, masters, officers, charterers, and other maritime interests facing criminal investigations, maritime casualties, vessel restrictions, pollution allegations, customs investigations, and related proceedings in Turkey.

Early involvement of an experienced maritime lawyer can help identify the individuals actually exposed to criminal proceedings, protect procedural rights, coordinate P&I and technical experts, preserve evidence, and challenge unlawful or disproportionate vessel restrictions where appropriate.

For a case-specific assessment concerning criminal liability of a foreign shipowner, director, manager, master, or crew member in Turkey, you may contact our office.

Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
Mobile: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Address: Mevlana Boulevard No: 221, Yıldırım Tower No: 148, 06520 Balgat, Çankaya, Ankara, Turkey