Editorial and Publishing Policy

This page explains how the articles on this site are produced: which sources they are written from, how court decisions are used in them, who reviews them before publication, and when an article is updated.

Last updated: 30 September 2026

Sourcing chain

Statutory provisions and time limits are taken from primary sources, from the official text in force; they are not written from memory or from a secondary account. The statutory provision on which each legal statement rests is given in parentheses at the end of the sentence (for example TCK m.134/1), so that every statement can be verified at its source.

Nothing that cannot be traced to a source is written. A time limit, an amount or a rule whose source cannot be shown does not enter the text; gaps are not filled by guesswork.

Where the statutory text leaves a question open, this is not concealed: the article states what the provision does and does not regulate. Presenting an open question as settled would leave the reader with false confidence.

How court decisions are used

Since 21 September 2026, articles that are newly written or updated do not quote court decisions or cite them by docket number. Their basis is legislation: statutes, the Constitution, regulations and communiqués. Decisions are read at the research stage to understand how a rule works in practice; only a conclusion that can be stated on the basis of a statutory provision enters the article.

Articles published before that date and not yet updated may still contain quotations from decisions. Those quotations were located through the Court of Cassation’s official Karar Arama decision-search system and reproduced verbatim from the text of the decision with a full citation (chamber, docket and decision numbers, date); a dissenting opinion, the prosecutor’s submission or the reasoning of a quashed lower-court judgment was not presented as the view of the Court of Cassation. When such an article is updated, it is rewritten under the current criterion on this page.

Review by a lawyer

The legal articles on this site are prepared under the responsibility of a lawyer registered with the bar, who reads and reviews them before publication. Two separate questions are asked at that stage: does the stated rule match the text of the provision, and does that provision genuinely govern the question the article discusses. The second is a professional judgment; a provision that shares the topic’s words does not thereby regulate the matter.

The byline on every article carries the author’s name and title. No unsigned legal content is published on this site: behind the text stands a person subject to professional rules and disciplinary responsibility.

The reporting and the assessment are kept apart. What the law says is shown by its statutory basis; the conclusion drawn from it is given as the author’s reasoned view. No prediction, percentage or guarantee as to the outcome of a case is offered.

Use of AI tools

Drafts of the articles and their foreign-language versions are prepared with AI-assisted tools. These tools help with structure and language; statutory text, time limits and amounts are taken not from the tool’s memory but from the official sources described above.

Every article and every translation is read by the lawyer before publication and goes through the review described in the previous section. Responsibility for the article lies with the lawyer named in the byline.

Cover images are illustrative and represent the topic; some of them are generated with AI. None of them depicts a case or event discussed in the article.

Update criterion

The update date shown on an article is entered only when the content has been re-examined against legislation and changed. Bulk or approximate dates are not used to make a page look fresh in search results: if the content has not changed, the update date does not change either.

The “Legal Sources” section at the end of an article lists the legislation referred to in brackets in the text and the official pages linked in it, each linked to the official source. The “Legislation last checked” date shows the day on which the wording and current status of those provisions were read again; if the check found no change, the text and its update date may stay the same. That date is not entered in bulk or by estimate either.

When legislation changes, the figures, time limits and rules in the relevant article are updated. In criminal matters, whether a later statute is more favourable to the accused is assessed separately and added to the text where required.

Corrections

If you believe you have found an error in an article, you can write to halit@bahcecilaw.com. Verified errors are corrected, and the correction is reflected in the article's update date.

The limits of this policy

Nothing stated here means that the articles on this site constitute legal advice. The sourcing and checking discipline is intended to strengthen the accuracy of an article, not its applicability to a particular matter. On that distinction, see the Legal Notice.