

A foreign student sells, rents or gives another person access to a bank account, IBAN, bank card or SIM card in Turkey. Learn about fraud, money laundering, investigation, account freezing, evidence, defense and immigration consequences.
Foreign students in Turkey can face serious criminal investigations after selling, renting, lending or otherwise allowing another person to use their bank account, IBAN, debit card, online banking credentials or SIM card. A student may believe that they are simply receiving money in exchange for temporary use of an account or telephone line. However, if the account or SIM card is subsequently used for online fraud, unlawful money transfers, identity-related offenses or laundering criminal proceeds, investigators may examine whether the student knowingly participated in the criminal activity.
The fact that a bank account or SIM card was registered in the student’s name does not by itself answer every question of criminal responsibility. The prosecution must evaluate the applicable offense, the student’s conduct, knowledge, intent and connection with the underlying transactions. At the same time, statements such as “I only rented my account” or “I did not know what they were doing” should not be treated as automatically eliminating criminal exposure. The complete evidence must be examined.
Fraud networks frequently seek accounts belonging to people who are not directly connected with the principal organizers. Money obtained from victims can be transferred through these accounts before being withdrawn, transferred again, converted into other assets or sent elsewhere.
SIM cards may similarly be used to open accounts, receive verification codes, communicate with victims or operate digital services.
A foreign student who gives another person control over these tools can therefore become connected to a much larger criminal investigation.
A bank account is opened for use by its account holder subject to banking, identification and security requirements. Giving another person practical control over the account can create serious legal and contractual consequences.
The criminal-law question becomes particularly important when the account receives proceeds of fraud or another offense.
Potentially, depending on the evidence.
Investigators may examine whether the student knowingly participated in a fraudulent scheme, assisted others in carrying it out or intentionally provided the financial infrastructure through which criminal proceeds were received or transferred.
Criminal responsibility should be determined individually. Ownership of the account alone should not substitute for analysis of intent and participation.
Lack of direct communication with the victim can be important, but it does not necessarily end the investigation.
The prosecution may investigate whether the student knowingly provided an account to another person while understanding that it would be used for criminal activity.
Accordingly, the defense should examine the student’s role in the entire transaction chain.
That statement can create significant problems if it is made without understanding its legal implications.
Investigators may immediately ask:
Why was the account provided?
How much was the student paid?
Who requested it?
Why did that person need someone else’s account?
Did the student provide the bank card?
Were online banking credentials provided?
Who controlled the telephone connected to the account?
Did the student receive verification codes?
Were funds withdrawn personally?
Did the student receive a percentage of incoming transfers?
Did similar transactions occur previously?
The answers can materially affect the criminal assessment.
Calling the arrangement a “rental” does not determine its legal character.
If the student temporarily provides an account, bank card or credentials in exchange for payment and the account is used in criminal activity, investigators can examine what the student knew and intended when granting access.
A SIM card registered to a foreign student can become important evidence if another person uses it to communicate with fraud victims, create digital accounts or receive authentication messages.
Investigators may examine subscriber information, communication records and connections between the telephone line and other evidence, subject to applicable criminal-procedure rules.
An account or telephone line being registered in the student’s name establishes an important factual connection. It does not automatically establish that the student personally performed every transaction or communication.
The defense should distinguish between legal registration and actual use or control.
This can become one of the central questions.
Relevant evidence may include login records, device information, transaction records, ATM withdrawals, transfer instructions, security notifications and other digital or banking evidence lawfully obtained during the investigation.
If criminal proceeds were withdrawn in cash, investigators may examine the relevant ATM transactions and available evidence concerning the person who performed the withdrawals.
If another person consistently controlled withdrawals, this may become important to the defense, although the surrounding circumstances still need to be examined.
A defense should not treat hundreds of transactions as a single unexplained amount.
Prepare a timeline identifying incoming transfers, outgoing transfers, cash withdrawals, recipients and any amounts retained by the student.
This can help establish the student’s actual role.
Receiving payment for allowing another person to use an account can be highly relevant.
Investigators may ask whether the payment shows knowledge of an unusual or unlawful arrangement. The defense should therefore explain the genuine circumstances rather than conceal the payment.
Where an account is used to receive and move proceeds generated by criminal activity, investigators may examine whether additional offenses concerning criminal proceeds are implicated.
Such allegations require analysis of the specific statutory elements and the student’s knowledge and conduct.
A major risk arises where the same account receives transfers from several alleged fraud victims.
What initially appears to the student to be one disputed transfer can develop into a much broader investigation.
The complete transaction history should therefore be reviewed.
Different victims may report fraud in different cities. As a result, a foreign student can encounter several investigations arising from transactions involving the same bank account.
Defense counsel should determine whether the files concern the same alleged scheme and whether procedural coordination issues arise.
A foreign student should understand the accusation, relevant transactions and procedural rights before providing a substantive defense.
Guessing about transfers can create inconsistencies that later become difficult to explain.
A foreign suspect who cannot adequately understand Turkish should request interpretation necessary to understand the proceedings and communicate effectively.
A student should not sign a statement containing terminology they do not understand.
If an interpreter inaccurately translates the student’s explanation, the issue should be identified before signing whenever possible.
If the problem is discovered later, the circumstances and difference between what was said and what was recorded should be documented and raised through the appropriate defense procedure.
A lawyer can review the accusation, explain the significance of account transactions and help prevent an incomplete or misleading statement.
Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya emphasizes that account-use cases should be analyzed through the transaction history and digital evidence rather than through a single general explanation.
Preserve messages with the person who requested the account or SIM card, payment records, social-media conversations, telephone numbers, usernames, bank notifications and any evidence showing how the arrangement began.
Do not delete communications after learning about the investigation.
Messages may show whether the student was deceived, understood the unlawful purpose or actively coordinated transactions.
The complete conversation can be more informative than isolated screenshots.
Creating conversations after the investigation begins or manipulating screenshots can create additional legal problems.
Preserve original devices and original data wherever possible.
If the student’s phone is seized, investigators may examine relevant digital evidence within the applicable criminal-procedure framework.
The defense should evaluate the legal basis and scope of any digital search and the integrity of the resulting evidence.
Accounts associated with suspicious transactions may become subject to restrictions or freezing measures depending on the investigation and applicable legal authority.
The student should determine the legal basis of the restriction rather than repeatedly attempting to move funds.
Potentially. If the account contains scholarship payments, salary, family transfers or other legitimate funds, preserve evidence establishing their source.
The treatment of funds depends on the specific freezing or seizure measure and the criminal investigation.
A SIM card or associated device may become relevant evidence. If authorities seize a telephone or SIM, the student should obtain or preserve the relevant seizure documentation and evaluate available procedures concerning return when continued retention is no longer necessary.
Depending on the alleged offense, evidence and statutory conditions, detention or a request for judicial measures may become possible.
However, being linked to an account used in fraud does not itself mean that pretrial detention is inevitable.
The specific evidence and procedural requirements must be evaluated.
A criminal investigation involving a foreign student can also create questions under immigration law depending on the nature and development of the case.
Criminal proceedings and immigration proceedings are legally distinct. A student should therefore evaluate both rather than assuming that the result of one automatically determines the other.
Not every criminal investigation automatically produces the same immigration consequence.
The student’s residence position should be examined according to the actual administrative action, if any, and the applicable immigration framework.
Depending on the allegations, procedural developments and immigration-law assessment, deportation-related proceedings may potentially arise.
If a deportation decision or other immigration measure is issued, its legal basis and challenge procedure should be examined separately and promptly.
Foreign-student status does not exempt a person from Turkish criminal law.
However, student status, residence history, education, fixed address and other personal circumstances may form part of the broader factual picture where relevant to procedural decisions.
Some students are recruited through advertisements promising easy income for “renting” an account, receiving transfers or registering telephone lines.
If the student was deceived about the true purpose, preserve the advertisement, communications and payment arrangement.
The defense should demonstrate the circumstances rather than relying solely on the phrase “I did not know.”
Knowledge and intent are fact-sensitive questions. Continuing to provide access after suspicious transactions, repeated victim transfers or unusual requests may be examined differently from an isolated incident.
A chronological reconstruction is therefore important.
A prompt report, preservation of evidence and cooperation in identifying the actual user may become factually relevant.
The precise legal effect depends on the alleged offense and circumstances.
Provide available identifying information concerning the person who obtained the card, credentials or SIM.
Telephone numbers, social-media profiles, bank transfers, meeting locations and other lawful evidence may help investigators identify the actual participants.
Account ownership alone should not establish criminal guilt, but the reverse is also true: merely saying another person used the account does not automatically establish innocence.
A persuasive defense should connect the explanation with objective evidence.
For every disputed transaction, identify:
the date;
the alleged victim;
the amount;
the receiving account;
the subsequent transfer or withdrawal;
the device or method used where available;
and the person alleged to have controlled the funds.
This can reveal whether the prosecution’s theory matches the actual evidence.
If the prosecution assumes that the registered account holder personally performed every banking action, compare that assumption with technical, banking and physical evidence.
Criminal responsibility should be based on individualized evidence.
The amount retained by the student can be important. Receiving a small fixed payment, receiving a percentage of criminal proceeds and personally controlling all funds present materially different factual scenarios.
Potentially, when continued retention is no longer required and the applicable legal conditions permit return.
A formal request may be appropriate depending on the procedural stage.
The student should stop allowing anyone else to use the account or SIM card, preserve all communications, obtain the relevant criminal-file information through lawful procedures, identify disputed transactions, avoid contacting alleged victims in a way that could be misunderstood, avoid deleting digital evidence and obtain legal assistance before giving an uninformed statement.
Not automatically. Criminal responsibility depends on the applicable offense and evidence concerning the person’s knowledge, intent and participation. However, knowingly providing an account for criminal use can create serious exposure.
Potentially. Investigators may examine whether the student knowingly assisted the scheme in another way.
The actual control of the account should be investigated using available banking, digital and transaction evidence.
Yes. If the SIM is subsequently connected with criminal activity, investigators may examine why it was provided and who actually controlled it.
No. Those messages may be important evidence and should be preserved.
Potentially, depending on the investigation and legal basis of the relevant measure.
Potentially. Preserve bank records and documentation proving the lawful source of legitimate funds.
No automatic conclusion should be drawn. Criminal and immigration proceedings require separate legal analysis.
The student should ensure that they understand the accusation and statement through appropriate interpretation and should not sign a record they cannot understand.
The central issue is usually not merely whose name appears on the bank account or SIM card, but who actually controlled it, what the foreign student knew, what they intended and what objective digital, banking and communication evidence proves about their role.
Cases involving bank accounts, IBANs and SIM cards can quickly develop into investigations concerning online fraud, suspicious transfers, criminal proceeds, multiple victims, frozen bank accounts, seized phones and immigration consequences.
Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office assists foreign students and other foreign nationals facing criminal investigations in Turkey. Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya provides legal assistance in analyzing bank and digital evidence, preparing statements and defense strategy, challenging unsupported allegations, seeking return of seized property and addressing related immigration-law risks.
Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
Mobile: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Address: Mevlana Boulevard No:221, Yıldırım Tower, Office No:148, 06520 Balgat, Çankaya, Ankara, Turkey