Port State Control Detention in Turkey: How to Challenge Inspection Findings – 2026 Updated Guide

Foreign ship detained after Port State Control in Turkey? Learn how to challenge PSC inspection findings, correct detainable deficiencies, request re-inspection, appeal detention, involve the flag State or class, and seek vessel release under the 2026 rules.

A Port State Control detention in Turkey can immediately disrupt an international shipping operation. A vessel scheduled to complete cargo operations and depart may instead remain alongside or at anchorage while deficiencies are corrected, surveyors attend, authorities conduct follow-up inspections, and the shipowner incurs delay, port, charterparty, and operational costs.

For foreign shipowners, however, a detention finding should not automatically be treated as legally unchallengeable.

A Port State Control Officer, or PSCO, exercises professional judgment when assessing whether deficiencies are sufficiently serious to justify detention. Where the shipowner believes that the factual findings, technical assessment, convention interpretation, or detention decision is incorrect, Turkish and Mediterranean MoU procedures provide mechanisms through which the decision may be challenged.

The strategy normally has two separate objectives:

First, secure the vessel’s release as quickly as legally possible.

Second, challenge an incorrect detention record where it may affect the vessel’s future inspection profile, commercial reputation, chartering position, flag performance, or compliance history.

These objectives should be managed simultaneously rather than confused with one another.

What Is Port State Control in Turkey?

Port State Control is the inspection of foreign ships calling at national ports to verify compliance with applicable international maritime requirements.

The Mediterranean MoU defines PSC as inspection of foreign ships to verify that their condition and equipment comply with international regulations and that the ship is properly manned and operated. (medmou.org)

Turkey participates in the Mediterranean Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control, commonly known as the Med MoU.

Foreign vessels calling at ports such as Istanbul, Ambarlı, Kocaeli, Mersin, Iskenderun, Aliaga, Izmir, Antalya, Gemlik, Tekirdag, Bandirma, and Ceyhan may therefore be subject to PSC inspections within this framework. (medmou.org)

What Does a Turkish PSC Officer Inspect?

A PSC inspection normally begins with certificates, documents, and the general condition of the vessel.

Under the Med MoU procedures, inspectors verify applicable certificates and documents and assess the overall condition of the ship, including areas such as the engine room, accommodation, and hygienic conditions.

Where there are clear grounds for believing that the vessel, equipment, or crew does not substantially comply with applicable requirements, a more detailed inspection may follow. (medmou.org)

Depending on the ship and circumstances, inspection issues can involve:

• SOLAS compliance;
• MARPOL requirements;
• STCW certification;
• ISM Code implementation;
• lifesaving appliances;
• firefighting equipment;
• navigation equipment;
• machinery;
• emergency systems;
• crew qualifications;
• manning;
• hours of rest;
• pollution-prevention equipment;
• maritime security requirements.

The existence of a deficiency does not necessarily mean that the vessel must be detained.

The central question is the seriousness of the deficiency.

When Can a Foreign Ship Be Detained in Turkey?

Detention is generally reserved for deficiencies sufficiently serious to justify preventing the vessel from proceeding to sea until appropriate corrective action has been taken.

Turkish port-authority materials demonstrate the range of possible PSC outcomes.

For example, the official Aliaga Regional Port Authority identifies outcome codes including:

10 – Vessel released

15 – Permitted until the next port

16 – Fourteen days allowed for the deficiency

17 – Deficiency to be corrected before departure

30 – Vessel detained

30/70 – Vessel detained and classification society informed

These different outcomes demonstrate an important principle: not every deficiency requires detention. (aliagaliman.uab.gov.tr)

This can become a central argument when challenging a disproportionate inspection finding.

What Are Detainable Deficiencies?

There is no practical one-line rule covering every possible detention.

The PSCO evaluates whether the deficiency creates sufficient risk under the applicable convention requirements and PSC procedures.

Examples of potentially serious issues can include substantial problems involving:

• propulsion or steering;
• firefighting capability;
• lifesaving appliances;
• emergency power;
• navigation equipment;
• watertight integrity;
• pollution-prevention systems;
• crew certification;
• safe manning;
• ISM implementation;
• hours of rest;
• maritime security.

The precise factual circumstances matter.

A minor technical malfunction for which an effective and safe alternative arrangement exists may require a different response from the complete failure of a safety-critical system.

The 2026 Rules: New IMO Port State Control Procedures

Foreign shipowners should pay particular attention to an important current development.

The IMO adopted Resolution A.1206(34), Procedures for Port State Control, 2025, replacing the previous 2023 PSC Procedures. IMO states that the updated procedures provide basic guidance for consistent inspections, identification of deficiencies, and application of PSC measures. (Uluslararası Denizcilik Örgütü)

The updated framework is particularly relevant in 2026.

IMO’s 2025 revision work updated the list of detainable deficiencies relating to areas including:

• International Safety Management Code implementation;
• Long-Range Identification and Tracking;
• seafarer certification;
• ship manning;
• hours of rest.

It also added updated guidance concerning maritime security and MARPOL Annex VI compliance. (Uluslararası Denizcilik Örgütü)

The 2026 Edition of Procedures for Port State Control, 2025 was published by IMO in July 2026. (Uluslararası Denizcilik Örgütü)

Accordingly, a detention challenge in 2026 should not rely exclusively on outdated PSC guidance.

First Step: Obtain the Complete Inspection Record

A shipowner cannot effectively challenge a detention without understanding exactly why the vessel was detained.

Immediately obtain and review:

• PSC inspection report;
• deficiency codes;
• action-taken codes;
• detention notice;
• photographs or technical evidence where available;
• applicable convention references;
• PSCO comments;
• re-inspection requirements.

Each detainable deficiency should then be analyzed independently.

The owner should ask:

Did the condition actually exist?

Was it accurately described?

Which convention requirement was allegedly breached?

Was the deficiency sufficiently serious to justify detention?

Was an alternative corrective measure available?

A technically correct deficiency can still raise a separate question about whether detention was proportionate.

Second Step: Preserve Evidence Immediately

The vessel’s condition may change quickly after an inspection.

Repairs may begin, replacement components may arrive, software may be reset, crew arrangements may change, and defective equipment may be removed.

Evidence should therefore be preserved before corrective work materially changes the condition that existed during the inspection.

Potential evidence includes:

• photographs;
• videos;
• equipment records;
• alarm histories;
• maintenance records;
• service reports;
• class records;
• statutory certificates;
• crew records;
• test results;
• spare-parts documentation.

This evidence may later become essential in demonstrating that the original PSCO finding was factually inaccurate or disproportionate.

Third Step: Correct Genuine Deficiencies Without Prejudice to the Challenge

A common strategic mistake is refusing to repair a genuine deficiency simply because the owner disputes the detention.

The commercial priority is normally to release the vessel.

Correcting the deficiency does not necessarily prevent the owner from separately challenging whether the original detention was justified.

The owner may therefore pursue two tracks:

Operational track: Correct deficiencies and obtain release.

Legal track: Preserve the right to challenge incorrect findings and the detention record.

This approach can reduce unnecessary off-hire and port-delay exposure.

Fourth Step: Involve the Classification Society

Where the deficiency concerns class or statutory certification, early involvement of the vessel’s Recognized Organization may be extremely valuable.

The surveyor may:

• inspect the alleged defect;
• witness repairs;
• conduct tests;
• confirm technical compliance;
• issue documentation;
• communicate with the flag State.

This becomes particularly important where the owner disputes the PSCO’s technical interpretation.

The Turkish PSC outcome system expressly includes a code for situations where the vessel is detained and class is informed. (aliagaliman.uab.gov.tr)

Fifth Step: Contact the Flag State

The flag State can play an important role in resolving disputed technical findings.

This is particularly useful where the disagreement concerns:

• statutory certification;
• equivalence;
• interpretation of convention requirements;
• temporary repairs;
• alternative arrangements;
• class-related findings.

Under the Med MoU review procedure, the flag State or Recognized Organization can formally request that the port State reconsider a detention decision. (medmou.org)

This provides an important route in addition to the owner’s domestic appeal.

Can a Shipowner Formally Appeal a PSC Detention in Turkey?

Yes.

The Med MoU expressly recognizes the right of the owner or operator to appeal a detention decision to a higher administrative authority or competent court according to the national law of the relevant State. (medmou.org)

For Turkey specifically, the published Med MoU appeal procedure states that the owner, operator, or representative in Turkey may appeal the detention decision to the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure. (medmou.org)

The published procedure provides a 30-day period from the date of detention for the written appeal. (medmou.org)

This deadline should be treated seriously.

A foreign shipowner should not wait for commercial negotiations, charterparty discussions, or insurance correspondence to finish before obtaining Turkish legal advice regarding the appeal.

Does an Appeal Automatically Release the Vessel?

No.

This is one of the most important practical rules.

Both the Med MoU framework and Turkey’s published appeal procedure state that an appeal against detention does not suspend execution of the detention. (medmou.org)

Therefore, filing an appeal alone should not be treated as a vessel-release strategy.

The owner should generally continue working to rectify the deficiencies and satisfy the conditions for release while the challenge proceeds.

The Med MoU Review Procedure

There is another important mechanism.

If an owner or operator does not use the national appeal procedure but still wishes to complain about the detention, the matter can potentially proceed through the Med MoU review mechanism via the flag State or Recognized Organization.

The flag State or RO may request that Turkey reconsider the detention.

If disagreement remains after reconsideration, a review request may be submitted to the Med MoU Secretariat within 90 days from the date of detention, accompanied by relevant information in English and electronic format. (medmou.org)

A Review Panel then examines the procedural and technical aspects of the inspection.

This mechanism should be distinguished from the Turkish domestic appeal process.

Challenging the Technical Basis of Detention

The strongest challenges are normally evidence-based.

Possible arguments may include:

Incorrect factual finding

The PSCO may have misunderstood the actual condition of equipment.

Incorrect convention interpretation

The officer may have applied a requirement that does not apply to the vessel, equipment, voyage, or particular circumstances.

Deficiency did not justify detention

A deficiency may exist but not be sufficiently serious to prevent departure.

Safe alternative arrangements existed

IMO PSC guidance recognizes that equipment may fail and replacement parts may not always be immediately available. Earlier PSC procedures expressly emphasized avoiding undue delay where safe alternative arrangements existed, and the current IMO framework continues to emphasize avoiding undue detention or delay. (Uluslararası Denizcilik Örgütü)

Accidental damage was improperly treated

Where a deficiency resulted from accidental damage and the applicable notification, repair, and safety conditions are satisfied, the circumstances may materially affect whether detention is justified.

Each argument should be supported by documentary and technical evidence.

Why Removing an Incorrect Detention Record Matters

Release is not always the end of the problem.

A detention can affect the vessel’s future commercial and regulatory position.

Potential consequences may include:

• enhanced PSC scrutiny;
• negative vessel compliance history;
• charterparty disputes;
• vetting complications;
• insurance concerns;
• financing questions;
• reputational impact;
• increased scrutiny of the ISM company.

Therefore, where the owner genuinely believes the detention was incorrect, challenging the record may remain commercially important even after the vessel has sailed.

What If the Deficiency Cannot Be Repaired in Turkey?

In certain circumstances, PSC procedures may permit a vessel to proceed to another port or repair yard subject to conditions.

The Med MoU framework recognizes controlled onward movement in appropriate circumstances and requires coordination with the next port and relevant authorities. (medmou.org)

This is not an automatic right.

The owner may need to demonstrate that the proposed voyage can be conducted safely and that appropriate flag State, class, or statutory arrangements exist.

A carefully prepared technical proposal can therefore be crucial.

Who Pays for Re-Inspection?

Shipowners should also budget for the financial consequences of detention.

The Med MoU provides that where inspection reveals deficiencies warranting detention, costs associated with subsequent inspections are borne by the owner or operator. It further provides that detention is not lifted until those costs are paid or sufficient security for reimbursement has been provided. (medmou.org)

This is separate from the much larger commercial losses that may arise from delay.

Commercial Consequences of PSC Detention

PSC detention can trigger disputes far beyond the administrative inspection itself.

Depending on the charterparty and circumstances, disputes may arise concerning:

• off-hire;
• cancellation;
• seaworthiness;
• maintenance obligations;
• deviation;
• delay;
• demurrage;
• indemnities;
• cargo claims.

The owner should therefore preserve not only technical evidence but also commercial records showing the timeline of inspection, repairs, re-inspection, and release.

PSC Enforcement in Turkey in 2026

Foreign owners should take Turkey’s PSC enforcement environment seriously.

The Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure announced in February 2026 that Turkish authorities conducted Port State Control inspections on 3,115 foreign-flagged vessels during 2025. (T.C. Ulaştırma ve Altyapı Bakanlığı)

At the same time, IMO’s updated 2025 PSC Procedures are now the current international guidance framework, with the 2026 Edition published in July 2026. (Uluslararası Denizcilik Örgütü)

For shipowners calling at Turkish ports in 2026, this makes pre-arrival technical and documentary compliance particularly important.

Fırat Fesih Kaya provides legal assistance to foreign shipowners, vessel operators, managers, masters, charterers, and international shipping companies dealing with PSC detention, inspection disputes, vessel-release procedures, and related maritime matters in Turkey.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Can Turkey detain a foreign vessel after a Port State Control inspection?

Yes. Where deficiencies are sufficiently serious under the applicable PSC framework, Turkish authorities may prevent the vessel from sailing until the relevant release requirements are satisfied. Turkey’s official PSC system expressly identifies detention as action code 30. (aliagaliman.uab.gov.tr)

2. Does every PSC deficiency result in detention?

No. Turkish PSC materials recognize several outcomes, including release, time to correct deficiencies, correction before departure, and detention. (aliagaliman.uab.gov.tr)

3. Can a foreign shipowner challenge a detention decision in Turkey?

Yes. The published Med MoU procedure for Turkey provides for appeal by the owner, operator, or representative to the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure. (medmou.org)

4. How long does a shipowner have to appeal a PSC detention in Turkey?

The currently published Med MoU country procedure states that the written appeal should be made within 30 days after the date of detention. (medmou.org)

5. Does filing an appeal automatically release the ship?

No. An appeal does not suspend execution of the detention decision. The owner should therefore continue working toward rectification and release. (medmou.org)

6. Can the flag State challenge a Turkish PSC detention?

The Med MoU review framework permits the flag State or Recognized Organization to request reconsideration by the port State. Further review may potentially be requested through the Med MoU procedure. (medmou.org)

7. What is the Med MoU 90-day review period?

Where the prescribed review route applies, the flag State or Recognized Organization may request review through the Med MoU Secretariat within 90 days from the detention date after the relevant reconsideration process. (medmou.org)

8. Can a vessel sail to another port for repairs?

Potentially, where the applicable PSC authority accepts an appropriate conditional voyage and the required safety, flag State, and other conditions are satisfied. It is not automatic. (medmou.org)

9. Should a shipowner challenge a detention even after the vessel has been released?

Potentially, yes. An incorrect detention record can have continuing regulatory and commercial consequences. Whether a challenge remains worthwhile should be assessed according to the vessel’s inspection history and future operations.

10. What should a foreign shipowner do immediately after PSC detention in Turkey?

Obtain the complete inspection report, preserve technical evidence, identify every detainable deficiency, begin legitimate corrective work, notify the flag State and class where appropriate, coordinate re-inspection, and obtain Turkish maritime legal advice if the findings or detention are disputed.

Legal Support for Challenging Port State Control Detention in Turkey

A PSC detention can expose a foreign shipowner to significant port costs, off-hire, charterparty disputes, cargo delays, reputational damage, additional inspections, and future regulatory scrutiny. A successful response therefore requires more than simply repairing the vessel.

Fırat Fesih Kaya provides legal assistance to foreign shipowners, international shipping companies, vessel operators, technical managers, masters, and charterers facing Port State Control detention, disputed deficiencies, re-inspection, vessel-release procedures, administrative appeals, and Med MoU-related issues in Turkey.

Where an inspection finding appears technically incorrect or the detention disproportionate, early coordination between Turkish maritime counsel, the vessel’s flag State, classification society, technical experts, and P&I interests can be critical. At the same time, genuine deficiencies should be addressed promptly so that the legal challenge does not unnecessarily prolong the vessel’s commercial detention.

For a case-specific assessment of a PSC detention or disputed inspection finding in Turkey, you may contact our office.

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