Can a Foreign Property Owner Stop the Demolition of a Risky Building in Turkey? (2026 Updated Guide)

Can a foreign property owner stop the demolition of a risky building in Turkey? Learn about objections, administrative lawsuits, suspension of execution, demolition deadlines, strengthening and urgent legal remedies in 2026.

Whether a foreign property owner can legally prevent or temporarily stop demolition depends primarily on the stage of the risky building procedure, whether the risky building determination has become final, whether statutory deadlines remain open, whether there is a genuine legal or technical defect, and whether effective judicial protection can be obtained before demolition occurs.

Under the current framework, owners or their legal representatives may object to a risky building determination within 15 days from the final day of the relevant local announcement. If no objection is submitted or the objection is rejected, the risky building determination becomes final. The administration can then proceed to the evacuation and demolition stage.

Once the process has reached that stage, merely saying “I do not consent to demolition” will generally not stop it. Current official guidance provides that owners may be given a period of up to 90 days to evacuate and demolish the risky building, after which administrative evacuation and demolition mechanisms can be used.

For foreign owners, Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya recommends identifying the exact procedural stage immediately. A challenge that may have been straightforward during the initial objection period can become substantially more difficult once demolition is imminent.

First Question: Has the Building Officially Been Declared Risky?

Do not assume that a contractor, building manager or another apartment owner can independently decide that the building must be demolished.

A risky building determination is a formal technical and administrative process.

The assessment report is prepared through the authorized system and reviewed by the competent administration. If deficiencies or errors are identified during administrative review, the report can be returned to the institution or organization that prepared it for correction.

Therefore, the first document a foreign owner should obtain is the actual risky building assessment report.

The second is the administrative record showing what happened after that report was submitted.

The Best Opportunity to Stop Demolition May Be Before the Risky Building Decision Becomes Final

The earlier an owner acts, the greater the range of potential remedies.

Under the current notification system, information concerning the risky building determination is posted on the building, owners are informed through the electronic government system, and the determination is announced at the relevant local administrative office for fifteen days.

The determination is deemed notified on the final day of that local announcement.

From that date, the owners or their legal representatives have 15 days to object to the risky building determination.

This is the ordinary statutory mechanism for challenging the technical determination before the demolition stage progresses.

Can a Foreign Owner File the Objection?

Yes.

Foreign nationality does not eliminate an owner’s right to challenge the risky building determination.

An owner may also act through a legal representative where the applicable representation requirements are satisfied.

This can be particularly important for foreign owners who are outside the country when the risky building procedure begins.

The power of attorney should be carefully drafted so that the representative has the authority necessary to obtain the administrative file, submit objections and pursue appropriate proceedings without unnecessarily granting broad authority to sell the property or transfer ownership rights.

What Happens After an Objection Is Filed?

The objection is reviewed by a technical committee.

Current official guidance states that the committee examines the risky building assessment technically as a whole. It is not restricted solely to the specific objection ground written in the owner’s petition.

The committee ultimately determines whether the structure is risky or not.

This distinction is important.

The objection process is not a vote among apartment owners.

It is a technical review of the risky building assessment.

What Type of Arguments Can Help Stop the Process?

A challenge should focus on actual legal or technical problems.

Depending on the building and assessment, these may involve the identification of the structure, technical methodology, structural information, testing, calculations or compliance with the applicable technical assessment principles.

Procedural irregularities may also require examination.

The argument should not simply be:

“I do not want my apartment demolished.”

The relevant question is whether the risky building determination itself was lawfully and technically established.

Can an Independent Engineer Help?

Yes, particularly where the owner alleges that the official technical assessment is incorrect.

An independent engineer may review the official report and identify concrete technical deficiencies.

However, a private engineering opinion does not automatically cancel the official risky building status.

It can provide technical support for the owner’s objection or litigation strategy, but the official administrative status must change through the legally recognized procedure.

What If the Technical Objection Is Successful?

If the risky building determination changes following the statutory review, the process should reflect that new legal and technical status.

This can prevent the building from proceeding toward demolition on the basis of an overturned risky building determination.

The owner should subsequently verify that the relevant administrative and title records have been updated appropriately.

What If the Objection Is Rejected?

If the objection is rejected, the risky building determination becomes final.

The same consequence follows when no timely objection is filed.

At this stage, the strategy changes significantly.

The question is no longer simply whether an administrative technical objection can be filed. The owner must consider whether judicial review is available and whether demolition must be addressed urgently through appropriate interim judicial protection.

Can a Foreign Owner File a Lawsuit to Stop Demolition?

Judicial review may be available where the owner alleges that the relevant administrative action is unlawful.

The exact lawsuit depends on the administrative action being challenged and the stage reached by the procedure.

This distinction is critical.

A lawsuit challenging the original risky building determination is not necessarily identical to a dispute concerning a later evacuation or demolition measure.

The administrative file should therefore be reviewed before deciding which action should be challenged.

Does Filing a Lawsuit Automatically Stop Demolition?

No.

This is perhaps the most important practical point for a foreign property owner facing imminent demolition.

The existence of a lawsuit should not automatically be interpreted as meaning that demolition has been suspended.

If implementation of the disputed administrative action must be prevented while the lawsuit is pending, the availability of suspension of execution or another applicable interim judicial remedy should be examined separately.

Waiting for the ordinary litigation process to finish may not provide effective protection where physical demolition is approaching.

Why Is Suspension of Execution So Important?

Because demolition is physically irreversible.

If an apartment building is demolished while judicial proceedings continue, a later favorable judgment cannot physically restore the former structure.

This makes the timing of judicial protection particularly important in risky building disputes.

An owner who believes that the administrative process is unlawful should therefore not wait until demolition machinery arrives before examining whether urgent judicial protection is necessary.

Does Requesting Suspension of Execution Guarantee That Demolition Will Stop?

No.

Requesting interim protection and obtaining it are different matters.

The court must evaluate the applicable legal requirements and the particular circumstances of the case.

An owner should therefore never assume:

“My lawyer filed the case, so demolition is automatically frozen.”

The actual judicial decision must be checked.

What If the 15-Day Objection Period Has Already Expired?

This makes the situation more difficult, but the complete administrative file should still be examined.

Under the ordinary procedure, the risky building determination becomes final when no timely objection is submitted.

However, whether another judicial remedy remains available depends on the specific administrative action, notification chronology and applicable judicial deadlines.

An owner who missed the technical objection period should therefore avoid two opposite mistakes.

Do not automatically assume that nothing can be done.

But also do not assume that a lawsuit can be filed indefinitely.

The dates must be established immediately.

What If I Was Abroad and Did Not Know About the Risky Building Decision?

Living abroad does not automatically suspend the statutory process.

Current official guidance provides that the risky building determination is posted on the structure, notified through the electronic government system and announced at the relevant local administrative office. The determination is deemed notified on the final day of that local announcement.

Therefore:

“I personally found out yesterday”

does not necessarily mean:

“My 15-day objection period started yesterday.”

Foreign owners should obtain the official notification records before calculating any deadline.

Can Incorrect Notification Help Stop Demolition?

Potentially, notification irregularities can be legally important.

The notification procedure is directly connected to the owner’s ability to exercise statutory rights.

If the owner alleges defective notification, the complete administrative record should be examined to determine whether the legally required building posting, electronic notification and local announcement procedures were completed.

Merely stating that an overseas letter was never received does not automatically establish defective notification.

What Happens Once the Risky Building Determination Becomes Final?

After finalization, the administration moves to the evacuation and demolition procedure.

Current official guidance provides that the evacuation and demolition notification is made through the prescribed statutory mechanisms and that owners and occupants are given a period not exceeding 90 days for evacuation and demolition.

The exact deadline applicable to the individual building should be established from the official documents.

Do not simply assume that every owner automatically has 90 days from the date they personally hear about demolition.

Can I Stop Demolition by Refusing to Vacate?

No.

Refusing to leave the property is not a substitute for an administrative objection or judicial remedy.

Current official guidance states that where a risky building is not demolished within the period granted, the administration can proceed with evacuation and demolition. If evacuation is obstructed, the process may be carried out with law-enforcement assistance following the prescribed authorization.

Physical resistance can therefore create additional problems without addressing the legality of the underlying administrative decision.

Can Electricity, Water and Natural Gas Be Disconnected?

Yes.

Once the relevant period has expired and the risky building has not been demolished, the administration may request that electricity, water and natural gas services no longer be supplied or that existing services be terminated.

A foreign owner should therefore not attempt to delay the process simply by continuing to occupy the apartment.

The correct approach is to use the appropriate legal remedies while they remain effective.

Can One Foreign Owner Stop Demolition if All Other Owners Want It?

Potentially, an individual owner can challenge an unlawful risky building determination or administrative action even if the other owners support redevelopment.

Technical legality is not determined by majority preference.

If the assessment contains a genuine technical or legal defect, the fact that other owners want a new building does not automatically cure that defect.

However, being the only owner who opposes demolition does not create a personal veto.

If the risky building determination is legally valid and has become final, the individual owner’s refusal does not necessarily prevent the statutory demolition procedure.

Does the Government Need Every Owner’s Consent to Demolish the Building?

No.

Current official guidance provides that a demolition permit for a risky building can be issued upon the application of one or more owners or their representatives once the applicable conditions have been satisfied, without requiring the consent of all owners.

This means that withholding a signature does not automatically stop demolition.

Owners should distinguish between consent and legal challenge.

They are not the same thing.

Can the Authorities Demolish the Building Themselves?

Yes.

If owners fail to demolish a finalized risky building within the period granted, the administration can carry out or arrange the evacuation and demolition.

Current law also permits the competent public authority to carry out the relevant assessment, evacuation and demolition procedures directly where implementation requires it.

Therefore, an owner cannot indefinitely block demolition by refusing to hire a demolition contractor.

Who Pays for Administrative Demolition?

The fact that the administration carries out demolition does not necessarily mean that the government ultimately bears the cost.

Current official guidance provides that expenses incurred by the administration for risky building assessment, evacuation and demolition can be collected from owners according to their ownership shares under the applicable public receivables enforcement framework.

Allowing the administration to carry out demolition can therefore have financial consequences for the owners.

Can Strengthening Stop Demolition?

Potentially, strengthening may provide an alternative in an appropriate case, but it should not be treated as an automatic right to delay demolition.

The technical feasibility of strengthening must be established and the applicable ownership, project, permit and procedural requirements must be satisfied within the relevant period.

This option should be investigated early.

A last-minute statement that “we want to strengthen the building” does not itself stop a legally progressing demolition procedure.

Is Strengthening the Same as Challenging the Risky Building Report?

No.

These are two fundamentally different strategies.

A technical objection argues that the building should not have been classified as risky in the first place.

Strengthening accepts that structural intervention is required but seeks to remedy the building rather than replace it through demolition and reconstruction.

Owners should determine which position is actually supported by the engineering evidence.

Can a Contractor Decide Whether Demolition Will Stop?

No.

A redevelopment contractor should not be treated as the authority deciding whether the official risky building process continues.

A contractor may negotiate reconstruction terms with owners, but that is different from the statutory risky building procedure.

Foreign owners should be cautious if a contractor says:

“Sign our agreement and we can stop the demolition.”

or

“If you refuse our agreement, the government will immediately demolish your apartment.”

The official administrative file, not the contractor’s statement, determines the legal stage of the demolition process.

Do Not Sign an Unfavorable Contractor Agreement Just Because Demolition Is Approaching

The possibility of demolition can create enormous pressure on owners.

However, the demolition process and the redevelopment agreement are separate legal matters.

Even if demolition can no longer realistically be prevented, the owner still needs to protect the economic value of the property.

Before signing, determine precisely what replacement property will be received.

The agreement should address the replacement unit, floor, orientation, net and gross area, land share, parking, storage, construction specifications, owner contributions, temporary rent, completion deadline, delay consequences and contractor default.

Protect Your Land Share Even If You Cannot Stop Demolition

If the building will ultimately be demolished, the legal focus shifts.

Your existing apartment may physically disappear, but the registered land share becomes critically important.

The land share can influence redevelopment decisions and the owner’s position in the future project.

Obtain a current title record and confirm the registered share before demolition.

Also check mortgages, attachments, usufruct rights and other title restrictions.

Document Your Apartment Before Demolition

If demolition appears likely, preserve evidence immediately.

Take detailed photographs and videos of the apartment.

Record its floor, orientation, room configuration, balconies, view, parking and storage.

Keep architectural plans and relevant property documents.

For a commercial unit, document frontage, visibility, entrance location and other characteristics affecting commercial value.

Once the structure has been demolished, reconstructing this evidence can be difficult.

What Happens to My Ownership After Demolition?

Physical demolition does not simply erase the owner’s underlying property rights.

The legal and economic position increasingly becomes connected to the land share and redevelopment arrangements.

Owners must therefore monitor decisions concerning the new project even if litigation about demolition is continuing.

Do not assume that the future redevelopment process will wait for your lawsuit unless a legally effective decision requires it to do so.

Can Other Owners Make Redevelopment Decisions While I Am Challenging Demolition?

Potentially, yes, depending on the stage and any judicial measures in effect.

An owner should continue monitoring owner meetings, contractor selection and redevelopment proposals.

The existence of a dispute about the risky building process should not lead the owner to ignore notices concerning the future property.

Otherwise, the owner may focus entirely on preventing demolition while important decisions concerning the replacement property are being made.

Can My Ownership Share Be Sold if I Refuse the New Project?

A dissenting owner’s share may potentially become subject to the special statutory sale procedure where the applicable legal requirements are satisfied.

This should not be confused with demolition itself.

The majority decision, notification, valuation and sale procedure require separate legal examination.

A foreign owner should treat any notice concerning the proposed sale of an ownership share as urgent.

Ignoring it because a separate demolition lawsuit is pending can create serious additional risks.

What If Demolition Is Scheduled for Tomorrow?

This requires immediate review of the actual documents.

Determine whether the risky building assessment became final.

Obtain the evacuation and demolition notice.

Check when the notification was legally completed.

Determine whether any judicial proceedings already exist.

Verify whether any court order currently prevents implementation.

If there is a potential basis for urgent judicial protection, it must be evaluated immediately.

At the same time, remove essential belongings and preserve evidence of the existing property. Legal strategy should never create unnecessary personal safety risks.

What If Demolition Has Already Started?

The practical situation becomes substantially more difficult once physical demolition begins.

Immediately determine whether any judicial or administrative measure currently prevents demolition and whether the demolition is being conducted under valid administrative authority.

However, do not physically interfere with demolition operations.

The legal response should focus on urgent judicial and administrative remedies and preservation of evidence.

Photographs, videos, administrative documents and records showing the timing of demolition may become relevant.

What If the Building Has Already Been Completely Demolished?

At that point, the question is no longer simply how to stop demolition.

The legal analysis may shift toward the consequences of the completed administrative action, potential remedies if the procedure was unlawful, and protection of the owner’s land and redevelopment rights.

The owner should obtain the complete administrative record and preserve evidence concerning the former building.

At the same time, monitor all decisions concerning the new development.

What Documents Should a Foreign Owner Obtain Immediately?

The most important documents generally include the complete risky building assessment report, title record, administrative review documents, risky building notification records, local announcement dates, any objection petition, technical committee decision, evacuation and demolition notice, and any subsequent demolition-related administrative documents.

If litigation has already started, obtain the court petition, administrative defense, interim decisions and any expert reports.

If redevelopment negotiations have begun, obtain the owner-meeting records and proposed contractor agreement separately.

2026 Practical Legal Strategy

The first priority is determine whether the risky building determination is final. If the ordinary 15-day objection period remains open, technical objection may still be the immediate remedy. The period runs from the final day of the relevant local announcement.

The second priority is obtain the full technical report. If the assessment is allegedly incorrect, arrange technical review and identify concrete defects rather than relying on general disagreement with demolition.

The third priority is verify notification. For foreign owners living abroad, personal discovery of the process may occur significantly later than the legally relevant notification date.

The fourth priority is identify the demolition stage. Once the risky building determination becomes final, the current framework permits a period of up to 90 days for evacuation and demolition.

The fifth priority is evaluate judicial review immediately if there is a genuine legal basis for challenging the relevant administrative action.

The sixth priority is separate the lawsuit from interim protection. Do not assume that filing proceedings automatically stops demolition. If demolition is imminent, the possibility of suspension of execution should be evaluated separately.

The seventh priority is consider strengthening early where technically and legally viable.

The eighth priority is protect the property position even if demolition cannot ultimately be stopped. Verify the title, land share, mortgages, attachments and other restrictions.

The ninth priority is preserve evidence of the existing property before demolition.

The tenth priority is monitor the redevelopment process. A failed attempt to stop demolition should not result in losing control over the replacement-property arrangements.

The central principle is:

A foreign property owner may be able to challenge or temporarily prevent demolition where there is a valid technical or legal basis, but foreign ownership itself does not create a veto over the demolition of a building whose risky status has lawfully become final. The most effective protection usually depends on acting before statutory deadlines expire and before demolition becomes physically irreversible.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Can a foreign property owner stop demolition simply by refusing consent?

No. A foreign owner’s refusal does not by itself prevent the demolition of a building whose risky status has lawfully become final.

2. How long do I have to object to the risky building determination?

Under the current ordinary procedure, an owner or legal representative may object within 15 days from the final day of the relevant local announcement.

3. Can I challenge the report while living abroad?

Yes. A foreign owner can use an appropriately authorized representative, subject to the applicable representation requirements.

4. Does filing a lawsuit automatically stop demolition?

No. Filing a lawsuit should not automatically be treated as suspension of demolition. Interim judicial protection must be considered separately.

5. Can I request suspension of execution?

Depending on the circumstances and applicable legal requirements, suspension of execution may be requested. Whether it is granted is determined by the competent court.

6. How much time is given for evacuation and demolition?

Under the current framework, owners and occupants can be given a period not exceeding 90 days for evacuation and demolition.

7. Can I stop demolition by staying inside the apartment?

No. Current law permits administrative evacuation and demolition and provides for law-enforcement assistance where evacuation is obstructed.

8. Can the administration disconnect utilities?

Yes. After expiration of the applicable period, the administration can request that services such as electricity, water and natural gas be terminated or no longer provided.

9. Can strengthening prevent demolition?

Potentially, where strengthening is technically possible and all applicable ownership, project, permit and timing requirements are satisfied. It should be investigated before the demolition process becomes irreversible.

10. What should I do if demolition is imminent?

Obtain the risky building report and demolition file immediately, verify all notification and deadline information, determine whether any administrative or judicial remedy remains available, evaluate urgent interim judicial protection, preserve evidence of the existing property and protect your title and land-share rights.

Urgent Legal Protection for Foreign Owners Facing Demolition

A foreign property owner facing the demolition of a risky building should not rely on refusal, absence from the country or disagreement with the other owners as a strategy for stopping the process.

The critical questions are whether the risky building determination was technically and legally valid, whether the statutory notification procedure was followed, whether the 15-day objection period remains available, whether judicial review can still be pursued and whether urgent interim judicial protection is required before demolition occurs.

Even where demolition cannot ultimately be prevented, substantial property rights remain to be protected. The owner’s land share, redevelopment decision, contractor agreement, title transfers and exact replacement property may determine the long-term financial outcome of the transformation.

Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office provides legal assistance to foreign homeowners and property investors facing risky building demolition and urban transformation proceedings.

Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya assists foreign property owners with reviewing risky building assessments, calculating objection and demolition deadlines, examining notification irregularities, coordinating technical review, evaluating administrative litigation and suspension-of-execution requests, protecting title and land-share rights, and reviewing redevelopment agreements and replacement-property arrangements.

Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
WhatsApp: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr