A person sentenced to one year or more of imprisonment for an intentional offence cannot become a civil servant (Civil Servants Law (DMK) art. 48/A-5). Because the minimum penalty for the use offence under Turkish Criminal Code (TCK) art. 191 is two years, and for trafficking under art. 188 ten years, a conviction for a drug offence is as a rule a bar to public employment. By contrast, postponement of the public prosecution and deferral of the announcement of the verdict (HAGB) are not convictions and do not create this bar. However, disciplinary sanctions may also be imposed on serving civil servants.
What does each decision mean?
| Decision | Is it a conviction? | Does it appear on the criminal record certificate? |
|---|---|---|
| Postponement of the public prosecution (TCK art. 191(2)) | No | No; only in a special system accessible to the prosecutor’s office and the court, Code of Criminal Procedure (CMK) art. 171(5) |
| Deferral of the announcement of the verdict (HAGB) | No; the judgment has no legal effect | No; in the special system (CMK art. 231(13)) |
| Decision of non-prosecution / acquittal / discontinuance | No | No |
| Conviction to imprisonment | Yes | As a rule, yes; in the criminal record until the sentence has been executed, then in the archive |
Those who want to become civil servants
Under DMK art. 48/A-5, a candidate for the civil service:
- must not have been sentenced to imprisonment of one year or more for an intentional offence. This bar remains even if the periods of deprivation of rights under TCK art. 53 have passed;
- must also not have been convicted, regardless of the length of the sentence, of listed offences such as embezzlement, bribery, theft, fraud, forgery and smuggling.
Drug offences are not named in this second list. However, where the sentence imposed is one year or more, the first rule applies. Even for the use offence, the lowest possible sentence, with the reduction for good conduct, is 1 year and 8 months, so this threshold is exceeded.
For posts requiring a security investigation (such as police, military personnel and candidate judges and prosecutors), postponement or HAGB decisions may also be taken into account in the security investigation and archive check. For these posts, the relevant special legislation should be checked separately.
Serving civil servants: discipline runs separately
- Ongoing criminal proceedings for the same incident do not delay the disciplinary investigation. Whether or not the civil servant is convicted also does not prevent a disciplinary penalty (DMK art. 131).
- In practice, using or possessing drugs may be treated as “disgraceful and shameful conduct of a nature and degree incompatible with the status of a civil servant” under DMK art. 125/E-g and lead to dismissal from the civil service.
- In less serious cases, lighter penalties such as a reprimand (kınama) may also be imposed on the ground of “conduct undermining the sense of respect and trust”.
- The nature of the post matters in deciding which penalty is imposed. The Council of State (Danıştay) found dismissal from the civil service lawful for a prison guard working in a prison, despite an HAGB decision.
Is a drug offence a “disgraceful offence”?
There is no separate category of “disgraceful offence” (yüz kızartıcı suç) in the TCK. The expression appears in some special laws and in disciplinary legislation. In short:
- Drug offences are not listed among the “bar regardless of the length of the sentence” offences in DMK art. 48.
- Nevertheless, in disciplinary law a drug-related act may be treated as “disgraceful and shameful conduct” and form the basis for dismissal from the civil service.
When is the criminal record deleted?
- From the criminal record to the archive: Once the sentence has been fully executed, the information in the criminal record is deleted and moved to the archive record (Criminal Records Law art. 9). It no longer appears on the criminal record certificate.
- Complete deletion from the archive (Criminal Records Law art. 12):
- as a rule, five years after the date on which the conditions for archiving were met;
- for convictions causing a deprivation of rights under art. 76 of the Constitution or under laws other than the TCK, fifteen years if a decision on the restoration of forfeited rights is obtained, and thirty years without such a decision.
For convictions that cause a deprivation of rights under other laws, such as the bar on public employment, the longer period and an application for the “restoration of forfeited rights” (memnu hakların iadesi) may become relevant. For this application, three years must have passed since the sentence was fully executed and the person must not have committed a new offence during that period (Criminal Records Law art. 13/A). Which period applies must be assessed separately according to the specific conviction.
Driving licence bar: A person with a criminal record for drug offences cannot obtain a driving licence. We explain this in our article on driving licences.
Recent decisions
- Court of Cassation 10th Criminal Chamber, 10.02.2026, E. 2024/8967, K. 2026/1385: A court had restored forfeited rights only twelve days after the prison sentence for drug trafficking had been fully executed. The Chamber stated that, under Criminal Records Law art. 13/A, such a decision cannot be made before three years have passed since execution and that the application should have been rejected, and reversed the decision in the interest of the law (kanun yararına bozma). Decision text
- Court of Cassation 10th Criminal Chamber, 16.06.2025, E. 2023/23209, K. 2025/6654: A person convicted of possessing drugs for personal use had applied for the restoration of forfeited rights; the application was rejected on the ground that the conviction did not mention any deprivation of rights. The Chamber stated that the person may make this application even if the judgment mentions no deprivation of rights, and that the existence of a criminal record archive entry also falls within the concept of “forfeited rights”, and reversed the rejection in the interest of the law. Decision text
- Council of State 12th Chamber, 24.02.2025, E. 2023/500, K. 2025/940: A prison guard had received an HAGB decision for possessing drugs for personal use. The Chamber found his dismissal from the civil service under DMK art. 125/E-g for the same act lawful. The nature of the act and the fact that he worked in a prison were taken into account; it was stated that assessing the proportionality of the penalty fell within the administration’s discretion. The regional administrative court’s decision annulling the dismissal was reversed. Decision text
This article is for general information only and is not legal advice. For your specific situation, please seek advice from a lawyer.