OFAC, EU, and UK Sanctions Compliance for Ships Calling at Turkish Ports: 2026 Legal Guide

OFAC, EU and UK Sanctions Compliance at Turkish Ports | 2026 Guide

A 2026 legal guide to OFAC, EU, and UK sanctions compliance for ships calling at Turkish ports, covering vessel screening, ownership, cargo, AIS activity, oil price-cap rules, detention risks, contractual exposure, and practical compliance measures.

Introduction

Ships calling at Turkish ports may face sanctions-related risks even where the voyage, cargo, shipowner, or charterparty has no obvious connection with the United States, the European Union, or the United Kingdom.

Modern maritime sanctions regimes do not focus exclusively on the vessel’s flag or the geographical location of the port call. They may also examine the nationality of the parties, ownership and control structures, currencies and banks used for payment, insurance providers, technical managers, cargo origin, cargo destination, end-users, ship-to-ship transfers, and the services supplied during the voyage.

Turkey applies its own customs, anti-money laundering, counter-terrorist financing, strategic trade control, and United Nations sanctions framework. OFAC, EU, and UK sanctions do not automatically become Turkish domestic law merely because a vessel enters a port in Turkey. Nevertheless, foreign sanctions may directly affect a transaction when a sufficient jurisdictional connection exists or when European, British, or American banks, insurers, brokers, ship managers, classification societies, or other service providers participate in the operation.

Accordingly, shipowners, charterers, operators, port agents, cargo interests, freight forwarders, insurers, and financial institutions should complete a documented sanctions assessment before a vessel calls at a Turkish port.

Why Foreign Sanctions Matter for Ships Calling at Turkish Ports

A Turkish port call does not isolate a shipping transaction from international sanctions exposure.

A voyage may become subject to foreign restrictions because it involves:

• A United States person or company
• A person established or incorporated in an EU Member State
• A United Kingdom person or company
• A designated vessel, entity, bank, or beneficial owner
• Payments cleared through the United States financial system
• Insurance or reinsurance supplied by an EU or UK provider
• Brokering, financing, certification, classification, or technical services supplied from a sanctioning jurisdiction
• Restricted Russian oil or petroleum products
• Controlled military, nuclear, dual-use, or advanced technology items
• A prohibited destination, end-user, sector, or commercial activity

OFAC administers multiple economic and trade sanctions programs that may impose asset-blocking measures or transaction restrictions. The scope differs between sanctions programs and must therefore be assessed on a transaction-specific basis.

EU sanctions may include asset freezes, trade restrictions, transport measures, sectoral prohibitions, and limits on maritime and related services.

UK financial sanctions are implemented and enforced by the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation. OFSI’s maritime guidance specifically addresses businesses and individuals operating in or with the shipping sector.

Does Turkey Enforce OFAC, EU, and UK Sanctions?

The legal position requires careful distinction.

Turkey is not generally required to incorporate every unilateral OFAC, EU, or UK sanctions measure into Turkish domestic law. A Turkish company does not necessarily violate Turkish law solely because it enters a transaction prohibited by a foreign sanctions regime that has no applicable jurisdictional connection.

However, this does not mean foreign sanctions can safely be ignored.

A shipping transaction may still be interrupted when:

• The payment involves a foreign sanctioned bank
• A correspondent bank refuses to process the funds
• A P&I Club withdraws or suspends cover
• A charterer terminates the fixture
• A bunker supplier refuses service
• A classification society declines continued support
• A cargo insurer invokes a sanctions exclusion
• A foreign port later denies entry
• A designated person owns or controls the vessel or cargo
• Turkish laws concerning customs, smuggling, money laundering, terrorism financing, proliferation financing, or strategic goods are implicated

Turkey implements United Nations Security Council measures relating to terrorist financing and asset freezing under Law No. 6415.

Law No. 7262 also establishes procedures for implementing relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions concerning the financing of weapons-of-mass-destruction proliferation.

Therefore, every transaction should be examined under both Turkish law and any foreign sanctions regime that may apply through the parties, services, payment chain, insurance, ownership structure, or contractual arrangements.

OFAC Compliance for Ships Calling at Turkish Ports

When May OFAC Sanctions Apply?

OFAC sanctions may become relevant where a transaction involves:

• A United States citizen or permanent resident
• A company incorporated in the United States
• A United States-controlled entity where the relevant sanctions program extends to it
• Goods, technology, or services subject to applicable United States restrictions
• A sanctioned vessel, person, company, bank, or government
• A United States dollar payment processed through the United States banking system
• Conduct designed to evade or cause a violation of OFAC restrictions

OFAC sanctions programs are not identical. Some impose broad territorial or sectoral restrictions, while others focus on designated persons, vessels, entities, or specific prohibited activities.

The presence of a United States dollar payment does not automatically establish that every element of a transaction is prohibited. Nevertheless, dollar-clearing frequently introduces United States financial institutions into the payment chain, creating substantial screening and rejection risks.

OFAC Vessel Screening

Before accepting a voyage involving a Turkish port, companies should screen:

• The vessel’s current name
• IMO number
• Former names
• Current and former flags
• Registered owner
• Commercial operator
• Technical manager
• Bareboat charterer
• Time charterer
• Beneficial owners
• Banks and insurers
• Cargo seller and purchaser
• Shipper and consignee

Screening by name alone is inadequate. Vessel names, corporate names, and flags may change, while the IMO number generally provides a more stable vessel identifier.

OFAC’s official sanctions search tool applies fuzzy-search logic to names appearing on the SDN List and relevant non-SDN lists.

OFAC’s 50 Percent Rule

A company may be treated as blocked even when it is not expressly named on the SDN List if one or more blocked persons directly or indirectly own, individually or collectively, at least 50 percent of that company.

For maritime transactions, this requires examination of corporate ownership beyond the registered owner shown in ordinary vessel databases. Layered shareholding, nominee directors, trusts, offshore companies, and recently transferred ownership may require enhanced investigation.

Control without 50 percent ownership does not automatically produce the same result under OFAC’s ownership rule. However, the involvement of a designated controller, director, manager, or agent may still create serious transaction and facilitation risks.

OFAC Maritime Red Flags

OFAC maritime advisories identify deceptive practices that may indicate sanctions evasion, including:

• Disabling or manipulating AIS
• Falsifying vessel or cargo documents
• Concealing cargo origin
• Physically altering vessel identification
• Frequent name or flag changes
• Suspicious ship-to-ship transfers
• Voyage patterns inconsistent with declared trade
• Complex ownership changes shortly before a transaction

OFAC’s maritime advisory addresses deceptive shipping practices associated with jurisdictions including Iran, North Korea, and Syria.

An AIS interruption is not automatically proof of sanctions evasion. Technical failures, piracy concerns, safety risks, or poor satellite coverage may provide legitimate explanations. The company should nevertheless investigate and document the reason.

EU Sanctions Compliance for Turkish Port Calls

When Do EU Sanctions Apply?

EU sanctions generally bind:

• EU nationals, whether inside or outside the European Union
• Companies incorporated under the law of an EU Member State
• Conduct occurring wholly or partly within EU territory
• Business conducted on board aircraft or vessels under the jurisdiction of an EU Member State
• Certain services provided by EU operators

A non-EU ship calling at a Turkish port may therefore still be affected where the shipowner, operator, insurer, bank, broker, manager, or other service provider falls within EU jurisdiction.

EU sanctions may prohibit making funds or economic resources available, directly or indirectly, to designated persons. This may affect freight, hire, demurrage, port expenses, bunkers, agency payments, insurance proceeds, and cargo payments.

EU Vessel and Ownership Screening

Shipping companies should screen the consolidated EU sanctions resources and verify whether:

• The vessel is expressly designated
• The owner or operator is listed
• A designated person owns or controls a counterparty
• A transaction concerns a restricted sector
• Maritime transport or associated services are prohibited
• A specific port-access restriction may affect a subsequent EU port call

The EU Sanctions Map provides access to applicable sanctions regimes and includes information concerning designated vessels.

EU ownership and control analysis is not limited to a mechanical shareholding percentage. Depending on the relevant regulation and official guidance, control may be established through voting rights, management powers, contractual influence, appointment rights, or other decisive influence.

EU Port-Access and Maritime Restrictions

Although a vessel may initially call at a Turkish port, EU transport restrictions can affect its next destination, commercial viability, or access to EU maritime services.

EU measures concerning Russia have included port-access restrictions for certain vessels and restrictions connected with AIS manipulation and unnotified ship-to-ship transfers in specified circumstances.

A shipowner should therefore assess the entire voyage rather than examining the Turkish port call in isolation.

A vessel may complete cargo operations in Turkey yet subsequently face:

• Refusal of access to an EU port
• Withdrawal of EU insurance or brokerage services
• Banking rejection
• Problems with classification or technical support
• Contractual termination by an EU counterparty
• Investigation concerning cargo origin or prior ship-to-ship transfers

UK Sanctions Compliance for Ships Calling at Turkish Ports

When May UK Sanctions Apply?

UK sanctions may apply to:

• British nationals anywhere in the world
• Companies incorporated under UK law
• Conduct occurring within the United Kingdom
• Transactions involving UK financial institutions
• UK-based brokers, insurers, reinsurers, lawyers, managers, and service providers
• Activities connected with UK-controlled maritime services

OFSI’s maritime guidance is directed not only at shipowners but also at port operators, insurers, financial institutions, brokers, charterers, and other maritime participants.

UK Ownership and Control Risks

A company may be treated as subject to an asset freeze where it is owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by a designated person.

The review should examine:

• Share ownership
• Voting rights
• Rights to appoint or remove directors
• Ability to direct company affairs
• Contractual control
• Informal influence supported by evidence
• Trust, nominee, and offshore structures

The OFSI consolidated list search assists with identifying designated persons and entities, but OFSI expressly states that using the search function does not remove the obligation to conduct appropriate due diligence.

UK Maritime Reporting and Information Duties

UK-connected persons may have reporting or information obligations where they know or reasonably suspect that a person is designated or that a sanctions breach has occurred.

Incomplete, inaccurate, or delayed responses to OFSI information requests may create separate enforcement exposure. OFSI has previously highlighted enforcement action involving a maritime company for an information-related offence.

Companies should preserve screening records, communications, charterparty documents, invoices, payment records, cargo documents, AIS data, and internal decision-making files.

Russian Oil Price-Cap Compliance

Ships calling at Turkish ports may face heightened risk when transporting Russian-origin crude oil or petroleum products.

The price-cap framework can restrict the provision of maritime transport and associated services by participating jurisdictions when Russian oil is sold above the applicable cap.

Relevant services may include:

• Maritime transport
• Insurance
• Reinsurance
• Financing
• Brokering
• Flagging
• Customs-related services
• Technical assistance

EU operators may provide maritime transport and related services for covered Russian crude oil and petroleum products only where the relevant price-cap conditions are satisfied.

The Price Cap Coalition maritime advisory warns that deceptive actors may seek access to coalition services while transporting Russian oil sold above the applicable price cap.

Required Price-Cap Documentation

Depending on the company’s role, appropriate documentation may include:

• Price attestations
• Purchase invoices
• Sales contracts
• Freight and insurance breakdowns
• Ancillary cost records
• Bills of lading
• Certificates of origin
• Payment evidence
• Counterparty declarations
• Records establishing the cargo loading date and product classification

A price attestation should not be accepted blindly where contradictory documents, implausible pricing, opaque intermediaries, or unusual payment structures exist.

Cargo and End-Use Screening

A vessel may be free from designation while the cargo remains prohibited.

Shipping companies should identify:

• The true description of the cargo
• HS or customs classification
• Origin and destination
• Seller and purchaser
• Consignor and consignee
• End-user
• Intended end-use
• Export-control status
• Dual-use characteristics
• Military, nuclear, aerospace, energy, or advanced-technology applications
• Licensing requirements

Turkey’s strategic trade control framework provides for customs controls concerning strategic goods and may require assessments from competent authorities where the strategic nature of an item is suspected.

Turkish export procedures also subject military, dual-use, and nuclear-related items to applicable authorization mechanisms.

False cargo descriptions, incorrect HS codes, fabricated certificates of origin, or concealed end-users may result in customs penalties, detention, seizure, or criminal investigation in Turkey independently of foreign sanctions exposure.

Sanctions Risks Involving Port Agents in Turkey

Port agents may face exposure when arranging:

• Pilotage
• Towage
• Berthing
• Bunker supplies
• Crew changes
• Cash-to-master deliveries
• Repairs
• Spare parts
• Waste disposal
• Provisions
• Port and customs payments

An agent should not assume that its limited operational role removes sanctions risk.

Before accepting an appointment, the agent should obtain sufficient information regarding:

• The vessel
• Registered and beneficial ownership
• Ship manager and operator
• Charterers
• Cargo
• Previous and next ports
• Parties funding local expenses
• Foreign banks and insurers
• Relevant licences or authorizations

Agency agreements should permit suspension or termination where compliance information is withheld or sanctions concerns cannot be resolved.

Sanctions Risks for Turkish Shipowners and Operators

Turkish shipowners may be exposed to foreign sanctions even when neither the ship nor the company is formally designated.

Common risk points include:

• US dollar freight payments
• EU or UK P&I insurance
• European banks
• British brokers
• EU-based charterers
• Foreign classification societies
• Cargo connected with a designated sector
• A designated beneficial owner behind a counterparty
• Russian oil price-cap documentation
• A subsequent call at an EU or UK port

Commercial exclusion may occur without a formal government penalty. Banks, insurers, and charterers may adopt stricter internal risk policies than the minimum legal standard.

Sanctions Risks for Foreign Ships Calling at Turkish Ports

Foreign ships may face Turkish legal and operational consequences where sanctions concerns overlap with:

• False customs declarations
• Smuggling allegations
• Money laundering
• Terrorist financing
• Proliferation financing
• Forged documents
• Export-control violations
• Restricted military or dual-use goods
• Concealed cargo ownership
• Fraudulent certificates of origin

Turkish authorities may inspect documents, examine cargo, request technical information, suspend customs procedures, or refer the matter to the competent judicial or administrative authority.

Law No. 5549 establishes the Turkish framework for preventing the laundering of criminal proceeds and defines the role of MASAK in combating financial crimes.

Can a Ship Be Detained at a Turkish Port?

A ship is not automatically detained merely because a counterparty raises an OFAC, EU, or UK sanctions concern.

However, detention or operational restrictions may arise where:

• Turkish customs procedures are incomplete
• Cargo documentation is false or inconsistent
• A criminal investigation has commenced
• The cargo is suspected to constitute smuggled or prohibited goods
• A court orders arrest or seizure
• Port safety requirements are violated
• Turkish asset-freezing measures apply
• The vessel is connected with an enforceable maritime claim
• Authorities require further investigation before departure

Commercial parties may also stop operations without an official detention order. A terminal, bank, insurer, bunker supplier, or agent may refuse to perform because of its own sanctions obligations.

Can Cargo Be Seized or Confiscated?

Cargo may be temporarily held, seized as evidence, or subjected to confiscation proceedings where Turkish law permits such measures.

The legal consequences depend on:

• The nature of the goods
• Whether the declaration is false
• Whether import or export authorization was required
• Whether the cargo is connected with an offence
• Whether a judicial seizure order exists
• Whether the owner acted knowingly
• Whether the goods are prohibited or restricted
• Whether third-party ownership rights can be established

Temporary detention is not the same as final confiscation. Affected parties may be entitled to challenge the measure and present ownership, licensing, customs, and compliance evidence.

Potential Criminal Liability

Sanctions-sensitive voyages may lead to criminal allegations under Turkish law where the underlying conduct involves:

• Smuggling
• Forgery
• Fraud
• Money laundering
• Terrorist financing
• Proliferation financing
• Participation in a criminal organization
• False declarations
• Unlawful trade in controlled goods

Corporate employees and directors may be investigated where authorities suspect personal knowledge, instructions, concealment, or deliberate approval.

Criminal responsibility must be assessed individually. The mere existence of a compliance failure does not automatically establish intentional criminal liability.

Contractual Consequences

Sanctions clauses have become central to charterparties, bills of lading, insurance contracts, bunker agreements, financing arrangements, and agency agreements.

Possible contractual consequences include:

• Refusal to perform
• Cancellation of the voyage
• Termination of the charterparty
• Deviation
• Discharge at an alternative port
• Suspension of hire
• Claims for demurrage
• Claims for detention
• Indemnity demands
• Loss of insurance coverage
• Disputes over unsafe or unlawful orders

A broadly drafted sanctions clause does not necessarily give a party unlimited discretion. The party refusing performance should usually establish that the contractual threshold has been satisfied.

Contracts should clearly define whether performance may be refused because it is:

• Legally prohibited
• Reasonably expected to expose a party to sanctions
• Contrary to an insurer’s restrictions
• Rejected by a bank
• Inconsistent with an internal compliance policy

These standards may produce significantly different legal outcomes.

Insurance and P&I Club Risks

Sanctions exclusions may suspend or eliminate cover where payment, reimbursement, or service would expose the insurer to a prohibition.

Before calling at a Turkish port, the assured should confirm:

• Whether the voyage is covered
• Whether advance notice is required
• Whether the cargo is restricted
• Whether a sanctions exclusion applies
• Whether the insurer requires an attestation
• Whether correspondents may provide local assistance
• Whether claims payments can legally be processed

An insurer’s willingness to issue a certificate does not necessarily guarantee payment if later facts reveal a sanctions violation or material nondisclosure.

Banking and Payment Risks

A legally permissible port call may still fail because a payment cannot be processed.

Banks may freeze, reject, delay, or investigate:

• Freight
• Hire
• Demurrage
• Bunker payments
• Port disbursements
• Insurance premiums
• Cargo purchase payments
• Agency funds
• Crew wages

Payment instructions should identify all intermediary banks and currencies. The parties should also consider alternative lawful payment arrangements in advance rather than after the vessel has arrived.

Attempts to conceal a sanctioned party, alter payment descriptions, split transactions, or use unrelated third parties may increase enforcement risk and should be avoided.

Enhanced Due Diligence Red Flags

Enhanced due diligence should be conducted where any of the following exists:

• Recent change of vessel name or flag
• Unknown beneficial ownership
• Multiple offshore companies
• Nominee shareholders
• Newly incorporated charterer
• Unexplained AIS gaps
• Suspicious ship-to-ship transfers
• Unusual voyage deviations
• Inconsistent cargo documents
• Below-market freight or cargo prices
• Uncommercial payment arrangements
• Payments by unrelated third parties
• Requests to omit parties from documents
• Altered bills of lading
• Conflicting certificates of origin
• High-risk ports or jurisdictions
• Refusal to provide end-user information
• Pressure to complete the transaction urgently
• Sanctions matches dismissed without documented analysis

One red flag may have an innocent explanation. Several connected red flags may indicate that the transaction should be suspended pending legal review.

Recommended Pre-Arrival Compliance Checklist

Before a ship calls at a Turkish port, the responsible company should:

1. Screen the vessel by name and IMO number.
2. Check former names and flags.
3. Identify the registered owner and beneficial owners.
4. Screen operators, managers, charterers, shippers, consignees, and cargo interests.
5. Review OFAC, EU, UK, UN, and applicable Turkish restrictions.
6. Verify cargo classification, origin, destination, end-use, and end-user.
7. Examine AIS history and ship-to-ship transfers.
8. Review the payment currency and banks.
9. Obtain insurer and P&I Club confirmation where necessary.
10. Check whether licences, authorizations, or exemptions are required.
11. Review charterparty sanctions clauses.
12. Record the compliance decision and supporting evidence.
13. Establish an escalation procedure for possible matches.
14. Re-screen shortly before arrival and before payment or cargo release.

Sanctions screening should not be treated as a one-time onboarding exercise. Designations, ownership structures, regulations, licences, and voyage circumstances may change after the contract is signed.

What Should a Company Do After a Sanctions Match?

A potential match should not be automatically treated as either a confirmed violation or a harmless false positive.

The company should:

• Suspend the affected transaction where appropriate
• Compare full identifying information
• Confirm the vessel’s IMO number
• Verify dates of birth, addresses, ownership, and corporate identifiers
• Determine whether the match concerns an alias
• Examine direct and indirect ownership
• Identify applicable jurisdictional connections
• Review available general licences or exemptions
• Preserve records
• Obtain legal advice
• Avoid notifying the counterparty in a manner that could prejudice a lawful investigation where reporting restrictions apply

The analysis should be documented even where the result is a false positive.

Corrective Measures and Removal from Sanctions Lists

A vessel, company, or individual may seek removal from a sanctions list where the designation is incorrect, outdated, or no longer legally justified.

Possible steps include:

• Identifying the precise designation authority
• Reviewing the stated legal basis
• Collecting ownership and control evidence
• Demonstrating changes in conduct or management
• Proving mistaken identity
• Showing that the relevant designation criteria are no longer met
• Submitting a formal delisting or reconsideration request
• Challenging the decision through available judicial procedures

Removal from one sanctions list does not automatically remove the party from all other lists. Separate applications may be required before OFAC, EU institutions or Member State authorities, UK authorities, or United Nations mechanisms.

A change of vessel name, flag, ownership, or corporate structure does not by itself remove sanctions exposure where the underlying designated interest remains involved.

2026 Compliance Considerations

As of July 23, 2026, shipping companies should treat sanctions compliance as an ongoing operational function rather than an occasional legal check.

Compliance programs should account for:

• Increasing vessel-specific designations
• Expanded scrutiny of shadow-fleet activity
• Ownership and control investigations
• Russian oil price-cap documentation
• AIS manipulation
• High-risk ship-to-ship transfers
• Cargo-origin concealment
• Use of intermediaries and third-party payers
• Divergence between OFAC, EU, UK, and Turkish legal requirements
• Rapidly changing official sanctions lists and licences

A transaction approved under one regime may still be restricted under another. The compliance conclusion should therefore identify which legal systems apply and why.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Do OFAC sanctions automatically apply to every ship calling at a Turkish port?

No. A Turkish port call alone does not automatically make OFAC sanctions applicable. OFAC exposure depends on factors such as the involvement of United States persons, sanctioned parties, prohibited services, controlled goods, or the United States financial system.

2. Must a Turkish shipping company comply with EU sanctions?

A Turkish company is not automatically bound by every EU measure merely because it operates near the European Union. EU sanctions may nevertheless apply where EU nationals, EU-incorporated companies, EU territory, EU vessels, banks, insurers, or service providers are involved.

3. Can UK sanctions apply to a Turkish-flagged vessel?

Yes. UK sanctions may become relevant where the transaction involves a UK company, British national, UK bank, insurer, broker, manager, or another relevant UK jurisdictional connection.

4. Can a Turkish port authority detain a ship solely because it appears on an OFAC list?

An OFAC listing does not automatically operate as a Turkish detention order. However, the listing may trigger additional examination, commercial refusal, banking restrictions, or investigation under applicable Turkish law.

5. Should the vessel’s beneficial owner be screened?

Yes. Screening only the registered owner is insufficient. Direct and indirect ownership, control, parent companies, shareholders, and related entities should be examined.

6. Is an AIS gap proof of sanctions evasion?

No. AIS gaps may have legitimate technical or safety explanations. However, unexplained or repeated gaps near high-risk areas or ship-to-ship transfer locations should be investigated and documented.

7. Can a bank refuse a lawful freight payment?

Yes. Banks may apply internal risk policies that are stricter than the minimum legal requirements. A payment may be delayed or rejected even where the parties believe the underlying voyage is lawful.

8. What happens if cargo documents contain conflicting origin information?

The shipment may face enhanced due diligence, customs inspection, payment delays, refusal of services, cargo detention, or investigation. The inconsistency should be resolved before loading or arrival.

9. Can a sanctioned vessel be removed from an OFAC, EU, or UK list?

Potentially. The affected party may submit a delisting or reconsideration request supported by evidence. The procedure and legal test differ between sanctions authorities.

10. How often should sanctions screening be repeated?

Screening should occur during onboarding, before fixture confirmation, before loading, before arrival, before cargo release, and before major payments. Re-screening is also necessary when ownership, routing, cargo, or counterparties change.

Legal Support for Maritime Sanctions Compliance

OFAC, EU, and UK sanctions issues can expose shipowners, charterers, operators, port agents, cargo interests, and logistics companies to vessel delays, rejected payments, loss of insurance coverage, contract disputes, customs investigations, and serious reputational damage.

Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office provides legal support concerning sanctions-sensitive voyages, Turkish port calls, vessel and beneficial-ownership screening, cargo detention, customs investigations, charterparty disputes, regulatory responses, and maritime compliance programs.

Obtaining a transaction-specific legal assessment before loading or entering a port in Turkey can help identify applicable sanctions regimes, correct documentary deficiencies, protect contractual rights, and prevent avoidable operational losses.

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

Disclaimer: This publication provides general legal information as of July 23, 2026. It does not constitute legal advice. Sanctions regulations, designation lists, licences, ownership structures, and enforcement policies may change rapidly. Each transaction should be reviewed according to its specific parties, cargo, services, payment chain, and jurisdictional connections.