Can Owners Be Forced to Leave Their Apartments During Urban Transformation in Turkey? (2026 Updated Guide)

Can apartment owners be forced to leave during urban transformation in Turkey? Learn about compulsory evacuation, risky building notices, the 90-day period, utility disconnection, police assistance, court remedies and foreign owner rights.

Yes. Under the urban transformation framework, apartment owners can ultimately be required to leave a building when the statutory conditions for evacuation have been satisfied.

Private ownership does not give an owner an unlimited right to continue occupying a building after its risky building status has become final. Once the risky building determination is final, the competent administration can initiate the evacuation and demolition procedure. Owners and occupants are given a period not exceeding 90 days to evacuate and demolish the building. If they do not comply, compulsory administrative measures may follow.

Those measures can include termination of electricity, water and natural gas services, compulsory evacuation with law-enforcement assistance and administrative demolition. Where access is obstructed, the current implementing regulation expressly allows closed doors or areas to be opened under the prescribed procedure so that evacuation can be carried out.

For foreign owners, Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya emphasizes that there is an important distinction between being forced to leave a lawfully finalized risky building and being deprived of ownership. Evacuation does not automatically mean that the owner’s underlying property, land-share or redevelopment rights disappear.

When Can Compulsory Evacuation Begin?

Compulsory evacuation does not normally begin merely because a contractor or another apartment owner says that the building will undergo urban transformation.

For an ordinary risky building, there must first be a formal risky building determination.

Owners must be given the opportunity to challenge that determination through the applicable statutory procedure. If no timely objection is made, or if the objection is rejected, the risky building determination becomes final.

Only after finalization does the process move to the evacuation and demolition stage.

Therefore, an owner who is being told to leave should first determine whether the risky building decision has actually become final.

How Is the Evacuation Decision Notified?

Current rules prescribe a specific notification procedure.

For a risky building, the evacuation and demolition record is posted on the building, owners are informed through the electronic government system, and the matter is announced at the relevant local administrative office for fifteen days.

The evacuation and demolition action is deemed notified on the final day of that local announcement. The structures subject to evacuation are also announced through the competent authority’s publication mechanism.

This rule can be particularly important for foreign property owners who spend significant periods outside the country.

What If the Owner Never Personally Received a Letter?

The absence of a conventional letter does not necessarily mean that the evacuation procedure has not been legally notified.

Current notification rules do not depend exclusively on personal postal delivery.

An owner should therefore distinguish between:

“I personally did not know about the evacuation.”

and

“The administration failed to complete the legally required notification procedure.”

These are different issues.

If notification is disputed, the administrative file should be obtained and the actual building posting, electronic notification and local announcement chronology should be examined.

How Long Do Owners Have to Leave?

For a finalized risky building, the administration gives a period not exceeding 90 days for evacuation and demolition.

The official notice must also indicate that if the building is not evacuated and demolished within the period granted, administrative evacuation and demolition may follow.

The wording “not exceeding 90 days” is important.

Owners should not automatically assume that everyone receives exactly 90 days beginning on the date they personally discover the notice.

The actual period and legally relevant notification date should be established from the administrative file.

Can One Apartment Owner Refuse to Leave?

An individual owner may challenge an unlawful administrative process through the appropriate legal remedies.

However, one owner does not have an automatic personal veto over the evacuation of the entire building merely because that person owns an apartment.

If the risky building determination has lawfully become final and the evacuation and demolition procedure has progressed in accordance with the statutory framework, one owner’s refusal does not necessarily prevent implementation.

The issue is therefore not how many owners oppose evacuation.

The critical question is whether the administrative process is legally valid.

Can the Authorities Physically Remove an Owner?

Yes, where the statutory conditions for compulsory evacuation are satisfied.

The current implementing regulation specifically addresses cases in which evacuation is obstructed. Where entry into the building or independent unit is refused, doors are locked or not opened, or similar conduct prevents evacuation, the administration can request written authorization from the competent administrative authority and sufficient law-enforcement assistance.

Following that authorization, evacuation can be carried out through law-enforcement officers, including opening or arranging the opening of closed doors or areas where necessary.

Therefore, locking an apartment does not create an indefinite right to remain in possession.

Can Police or Other Law-Enforcement Officers Be Involved?

Yes.

Risky buildings that owners fail to evacuate and demolish within the applicable period can be evacuated and demolished with law-enforcement support provided through the competent administrative authority.

This is why physical resistance should never be confused with legal resistance.

If an owner believes the evacuation is unlawful, the appropriate response is to evaluate administrative and judicial remedies.

A physical confrontation with officials does not replace those remedies.

What If the Owner Locks the Door and Leaves the Country?

That does not necessarily stop the process.

The implementing regulation expressly provides a mechanism for entering closed buildings and independent units where evacuation is being obstructed. With the required written authorization and law-enforcement assistance, closed doors or areas can be opened or caused to be opened so that evacuation can proceed.

Foreign owners should therefore not attempt to protect their property merely by leaving it locked.

Instead, they should arrange reliable legal representation and monitoring of the administrative process.

Can Electricity, Water and Natural Gas Be Disconnected?

Yes.

If owners do not demolish the risky building within the period granted, the administration may request that electricity, water and natural gas services no longer be provided or that existing services be terminated.

Under the current regulation, the relevant institutions are required to comply with such a request.

This means that remaining physically inside the apartment may become both legally and practically unsustainable.

Can an Owner Prevent Utility Disconnection by Refusing Consent?

No automatic consent requirement protects an individual owner in this situation.

Utility termination forms part of the statutory enforcement mechanism after the applicable conditions have been satisfied.

If the owner believes that the underlying risky building or evacuation procedure is unlawful, the issue should be challenged through the proper administrative or judicial route.

Refusing to sign a document presented by a utility provider is not equivalent to obtaining a court order preventing implementation.

Can Owners Be Forced Out Before the 90-Day Period Expires?

The exact administrative timetable applicable to the individual building must be examined.

The ordinary risky-building framework requires the administration to grant a period not exceeding 90 days for evacuation and demolition.

If an owner believes compulsory evacuation is being attempted contrary to the legally applicable timetable, the official notice and administrative file should be reviewed immediately.

Do not rely solely on verbal statements from a contractor, building manager or another owner concerning the deadline.

Can the Government Demolish the Building After Owners Are Removed?

Yes.

Where owners fail to demolish a finalized risky building within the period granted, the building is reported to the competent administrative authority and evacuation and demolition can be carried out or arranged by the administration with law-enforcement support.

Where implementation requires it, the competent urban transformation authority can also undertake demolition procedures directly.

Owners therefore cannot permanently stop demolition merely by refusing to appoint their own demolition contractor.

Can Every Owner Be Required to Agree Before Demolition?

No.

The current framework provides that a demolition permit for a risky building can be issued upon an application by one or more owners or their representatives once the required conditions are satisfied.

The consent of every owner is not required for issuance of the demolition permit.

An individual owner should therefore not assume:

“I did not sign, so neither evacuation nor demolition can proceed.”

The statutory process is more important than individual consent.

Can Owners Be Reported for Preventing Evacuation?

The current implementing regulation contains a specific provision concerning obstruction.

Where persons obstruct risky building assessment, evacuation or demolition procedures, the administration or competent directorate records the situation and may submit a criminal complaint under the relevant provisions of criminal law.

This makes physical obstruction particularly risky.

An owner who disputes the process should preserve legal objections through formal procedures rather than attempting to prevent officials from carrying out an enforceable administrative action.

Can an Owner Challenge the Original Risky Building Decision Instead?

Potentially, but timing is critical.

Before the risky building determination becomes final, owners or their legal representatives can object within 15 days from the final day of the relevant local announcement.

The objection is reviewed by a technical committee, which examines the risky building assessment technically as a whole rather than being limited only to the precise argument written in the objection petition.

If an owner believes the building was incorrectly classified as risky, this early technical objection stage can be extremely important.

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

If no objection was submitted within the ordinary period, the risky building determination becomes final.

That does not mean every possible legal question automatically disappears, but it significantly changes the situation.

The owner should obtain the complete administrative file and determine whether any judicial remedy remains available concerning the relevant administrative action.

The notification chronology is particularly important.

Do not assume either that nothing can be done or that a lawsuit can be brought indefinitely.

Can Owners File a Lawsuit Against Compulsory Evacuation?

Depending on the administrative action, procedural history and applicable deadlines, judicial review may be available.

However, the owner should identify exactly what is being challenged.

The original risky building determination, its notification, a later evacuation measure and a subsequent demolition action are not necessarily the same administrative act.

This distinction can affect the litigation strategy and deadlines.

The complete administrative file should therefore be reviewed before proceedings are initiated.

Does Filing a Lawsuit Automatically Allow the Owner to Stay?

No.

Filing a lawsuit should not automatically be treated as permission to continue occupying the building.

An annulment action and a request for interim judicial protection are separate procedural issues.

If an owner wants implementation prevented while the court examines the legality of the disputed administrative action, the availability of suspension of execution should be evaluated separately.

The existence of a pending lawsuit alone should not be assumed to stop evacuation.

Why Is Interim Judicial Protection Important?

Because evacuation may quickly be followed by demolition.

Once the building is physically demolished, a later judicial decision cannot restore the original structure.

Where there is a genuine legal basis for challenging the administrative process, timing can therefore be decisive.

An owner facing imminent compulsory evacuation should determine immediately whether there is any effective judicial measure capable of affecting implementation.

Can a Foreign Owner File a Challenge While Living Abroad?

Yes.

Foreign ownership does not by itself eliminate the procedural rights attached to the property.

An appropriately authorized legal representative may be able to obtain the administrative documents, file proceedings and follow the case on behalf of the owner.

However, the power of attorney should be carefully drafted.

Authority to challenge evacuation does not necessarily require unrestricted authority to sell the apartment, transfer the land share, mortgage the property or sign any redevelopment agreement.

Can Strengthening Prevent Compulsory Evacuation and Demolition?

Strengthening may be an alternative to demolition where the statutory requirements can be satisfied in time.

Under the current regulation, if strengthening is sought instead of demolition, the owners must establish within the period granted for demolition that strengthening is technically possible, obtain the required ownership decision, prepare the strengthening project and obtain the necessary permit.

The strengthening work must then be completed within the period determined by the permitting authority. After completion, an application can be made for removal of the risky building notation from the title record.

A last-minute statement that owners would prefer strengthening does not itself stop compulsory evacuation.

Is Strengthening the Same as Saying the Risky Building Report Is Wrong?

No.

These are different legal and technical positions.

Challenging the risky building assessment means arguing that the structure should not have been classified as risky.

Strengthening generally proceeds on the basis that structural intervention is necessary but seeks to remedy the building rather than replace it through demolition.

Owners should determine which approach is supported by the technical evidence.

Does Being Forced to Leave Mean Losing Ownership?

No.

This distinction is extremely important.

Compulsory evacuation removes people and belongings from the unsafe structure. It does not automatically transfer the owner’s underlying property rights to the government, contractor or other owners.

After demolition, the owner’s registered land share becomes especially important.

The redevelopment process then determines how the parcel will be used and what future property rights may arise.

What Happens to the Apartment After Evacuation?

If the risky building process continues to demolition, the physical apartment eventually ceases to exist.

However, the owner’s legal and economic interest does not simply disappear with the walls of the apartment.

The registered land share, redevelopment decisions, contractor agreement and replacement-property allocation become increasingly important.

Owners should therefore prepare for the post-demolition stage before leaving the building.

Check the Land Share Before Vacating

Obtain a current title record.

Confirm the registered ownership share attached to the apartment.

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

Under the current redevelopment framework, specified decisions concerning the future use of the parcel may be taken by the simple majority of co-owners calculated according to their ownership shares.

This means that the registered land share can have significant practical consequences after evacuation and demolition.

Can Redevelopment Decisions Be Made Before the Building Is Demolished?

Yes.

The current regulation expressly provides that, for risky buildings, specified decisions concerning redevelopment can be made without requiring the existing structure to have already been demolished.

These decisions can include reconstruction and other methods of redeveloping the parcel and, where unanimity cannot be achieved, may be taken by the applicable simple majority according to ownership shares.

Owners should therefore monitor redevelopment decisions even while the old building remains standing.

Can the Other Owners Choose a Contractor While I Am Challenging Evacuation?

Potentially, redevelopment procedures may continue depending on the stage reached and whether any legally effective judicial measure prevents relevant action.

An owner should not assume that challenging evacuation automatically freezes every private or statutory redevelopment process.

Obtain owner-meeting records, proposed agreements and statutory notices.

Otherwise, the owner may focus entirely on remaining in the apartment while important decisions concerning the future property are being made.

Do I Have to Sign the Contractor Agreement Before Leaving?

No. Vacating a risky building and accepting a particular redevelopment agreement are separate issues.

An owner may be required to leave a finalized risky building without being required to accept every contractual term proposed by a contractor.

The redevelopment agreement should be reviewed independently.

The replacement unit, floor, orientation, net and gross area, land share, parking, storage, owner contributions, completion period, temporary rent, delay provisions, guarantees and contractor default should be clearly addressed.

Can the Contractor Force Me Out?

A private contractor does not acquire governmental enforcement powers simply because it has reached an agreement with other owners.

If compulsory evacuation is taking place under the urban transformation framework, the legal basis should be identified from the administrative procedure.

A contractor’s demand to hand over the keys should therefore be distinguished from an official evacuation action.

Foreign owners should request the relevant documents rather than relying solely on the contractor’s explanation of the process.

What If the Contractor Has Not Paid the Promised Temporary Rent?

A contractor’s failure to pay contractual temporary rent may create a separate contractual dispute.

It does not automatically create a right to remain indefinitely inside a finalized risky building.

The owner may need to pursue contractual remedies against the contractor while separately addressing the statutory evacuation process.

Do not confuse an unpaid contractual claim with a legal suspension of evacuation.

What If No Replacement Apartment Has Been Guaranteed?

This can create a serious financial risk, but it does not necessarily invalidate a lawful evacuation requirement.

The owner should address replacement-property rights through the redevelopment process.

Before accepting a redevelopment agreement, determine exactly what property will be received after construction.

Vague promises such as “you will receive an equivalent apartment” may be insufficient if the contract does not define the future unit.

Should Owners Document Their Apartments Before Leaving?

Absolutely.

Before vacating, photograph and record the apartment comprehensively.

Document the floor, orientation, internal layout, balconies, view, parking, storage and important fixtures or characteristics.

Keep available architectural plans and property documents.

For commercial property, record frontage, entrance position, visibility, ceiling height and other commercially significant characteristics.

After demolition, proving the condition and characteristics of the former property may become considerably more difficult.

What Happens to Personal Belongings During Compulsory Evacuation?

Owners should remove important possessions before the procedure reaches the compulsory stage.

The statutory framework expressly contemplates evacuation of the building, including situations where access is obstructed.

Important identity documents, business records, valuables and personal belongings should therefore be secured early.

Foreign owners who cannot travel should arrange appropriate assistance rather than leaving valuable property inside a building facing imminent evacuation.

Who Pays if the Administration Has to Evacuate and Demolish the Building?

The owners may ultimately bear those costs.

Current official guidance states that where owners fail to carry out the required evacuation and demolition and the administration performs or arranges the work, owners are responsible for the expenses according to their ownership shares.

Those amounts can be pursued under the public receivables collection procedure.

Refusing to cooperate can therefore create financial consequences without preserving the owner’s right to remain.

Can Owners Receive Rental Assistance After Leaving?

The current implementing regulation provides rental-assistance mechanisms for qualifying persons.

For qualifying owners of risky buildings outside designated risk and reserve areas, the regulation provides an assistance period of 18 months. Rental-assistance applications are generally made within one year from evacuation or demolition, subject to the applicable eligibility requirements and documentation.

Public rental assistance should be distinguished from temporary rent promised by a private redevelopment contractor.

They are separate sources of potential payment.

Can Tenants Also Be Required to Leave?

Yes. The evacuation procedure concerns removal of occupants from a building that is progressing toward demolition; it is not limited to the registered owner personally residing in the apartment.

Landlords should therefore manage the existing lease relationship rather than waiting for compulsory enforcement.

Possession, deposits, keys and other lease-related matters should be documented.

The current regulatory framework also contains specific assistance provisions for qualifying tenants and certain other occupants.

What If the Owner Refuses to Leave Because They Disagree With the Other Owners?

Disagreement among owners concerning the contractor, replacement units, construction payments or redevelopment model does not necessarily invalidate the separate evacuation of a finalized risky building.

These disputes must be distinguished.

An owner can challenge an unfavorable redevelopment decision where there is a legal basis while still being subject to a lawful evacuation requirement.

Using physical occupation of the risky building as leverage in a contractor dispute can expose the owner to unnecessary risk.

What If Compulsory Evacuation Is Scheduled Very Soon?

Obtain the complete administrative file immediately.

Confirm whether the risky building determination became final.

Check the notification chronology.

Obtain the evacuation and demolition notice.

Verify the deadline.

Determine whether any lawsuit is pending.

Most importantly, determine whether any court order currently prevents implementation.

If there is a genuine basis for urgent judicial protection, it should be evaluated before evacuation and demolition become irreversible.

At the same time, secure personal belongings and document the existing apartment.

What If Law-Enforcement Officers Are Already at the Building?

Do not physically obstruct officials.

Identify the administrative action being implemented and preserve available documentation concerning the process.

If there is an existing court decision preventing implementation, that issue should be raised immediately through the appropriate legal channels.

Otherwise, any challenge to the legality of the evacuation should be pursued through formal judicial or administrative procedures.

Physical resistance can create additional legal problems and does not substitute for an effective court order.

2026 Practical Legal Strategy

The first priority is verify the legal status of the building. Determine whether the risky building assessment has actually become final.

The second priority is check the earlier objection process. Owners or their legal representatives have an ordinary 15-day period, calculated from the final day of the relevant local announcement, to challenge the risky building determination before finality.

The third priority is obtain the official evacuation and demolition documents. Do not rely exclusively on statements from the contractor, building manager or other owners.

The fourth priority is calculate the correct deadline. The administration may grant a period not exceeding 90 days for evacuation and demolition.

The fifth priority is evaluate any remaining judicial remedy promptly if the risky building or evacuation procedure is allegedly unlawful.

The sixth priority is distinguish litigation from interim judicial protection. A pending lawsuit should not automatically be treated as a court order stopping evacuation.

The seventh priority is do not rely on physical resistance. Current rules allow compulsory evacuation with law-enforcement support and, where required, entry through closed doors or areas.

The eighth priority is protect the owner’s property position. Obtain the current title record, confirm the land share and investigate mortgages and other restrictions.

The ninth priority is preserve evidence of the apartment before leaving.

The tenth priority is continue monitoring redevelopment after evacuation. Leaving the building does not mean abandoning the owner’s rights concerning the land, contractor agreement or replacement property.

The central principle is:

Yes, owners can ultimately be forced to leave their apartments during an urban transformation process when the risky building determination has become final and the statutory evacuation requirements are satisfied. However, compulsory evacuation does not automatically eliminate ownership. An owner who believes the process is unlawful should use the available administrative and judicial remedies promptly rather than relying on refusal, locked doors or physical occupation of the building.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Can an apartment owner legally be forced to leave a risky building?

Yes. Once the risky building determination is final and the statutory evacuation process has been completed, compulsory evacuation can ultimately be carried out with administrative authorization and law-enforcement assistance.

2. How long are owners given to leave?

For an ordinary finalized risky building, the administration gives a period not exceeding 90 days for evacuation and demolition.

3. Can police assist with compulsory evacuation?

Yes. The current framework provides for law-enforcement assistance where evacuation is obstructed or owners fail to comply within the applicable period.

4. Can officials enter a locked apartment?

Where the statutory conditions are satisfied, the current regulation permits closed doors or areas to be opened or caused to be opened under written administrative authorization and with law-enforcement assistance for compulsory evacuation.

5. Can electricity, water and natural gas be disconnected?

Yes. If the risky building is not demolished within the period granted, the administration may request termination or non-provision of these services.

6. Does filing a lawsuit automatically stop compulsory evacuation?

No. Filing an administrative lawsuit should not automatically be treated as suspension of implementation. The need for interim judicial protection must be evaluated separately.

7. Can I stay because I am a foreign property owner?

Foreign ownership does not create an exemption from a lawfully progressing risky building evacuation procedure.

8. Do I lose ownership if I am forced to leave?

No. Compulsory evacuation does not automatically eliminate the underlying ownership interest. The land share and redevelopment rights remain important.

9. Can I be charged for administrative evacuation and demolition?

Yes. Owners can be responsible according to their ownership shares for evacuation and demolition expenses incurred by the administration, and those amounts can be collected under the applicable public receivables procedure.

10. What should I do if I am being told to leave immediately?

Obtain the official risky building and evacuation file, verify the notification and deadline, determine whether any administrative or judicial remedy remains available, check whether any court order currently prevents implementation, secure personal belongings, document the apartment and protect your title, land-share and redevelopment rights.

Protecting Your Rights During Compulsory Evacuation

Being required to leave an apartment during urban transformation can be particularly difficult for foreign owners who live outside the country or discover the process after statutory notifications have already begun.

The most important step is to separate the different legal issues. The validity of the risky building determination, compulsory evacuation, demolition, ownership of the underlying land and the future redevelopment agreement are related but legally distinct matters.

Even where evacuation can no longer be prevented, substantial property rights may still require protection.

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

Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya assists foreign property owners with reviewing risky building and compulsory evacuation files, examining notification and deadlines, evaluating administrative litigation and urgent interim judicial remedies, protecting title and land-share rights, reviewing redevelopment decisions and contractor agreements, and safeguarding replacement-property rights following demolition.

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