For the offence of possessing drugs for personal use under the Turkish Criminal Code (TCK) art. 191, the prosecutor postpones the prosecution for five years, and at least one year of supervised release (denetimli serbestlik, a form of probation) is applied within that period. Since supervised release can be extended by at most two more years, it cannot exceed three years in total. If the obligations are persistently not complied with, or drugs are used again, a public prosecution is filed. A single lapse, as a rule, does not lead to a case on its own.
How long does supervised release last?
- It is applied for at least one year (TCK art. 191(3)).
- On the proposal of the probation directorate or by the prosecutor’s decision, it can be extended in six-month periods by up to two more years.
- The five-year postponement period is separate: even after supervised release ends, using drugs again before the postponement period expires counts as a breach.
What happens during this period?
The probation directorate (denetimli serbestlik müdürlüğü) sets the obligations and appointment dates. In practice, the following are usually required:
- Guidance meetings and addiction-related programmes,
- Treatment at a health institution where necessary,
- Testing: the prosecutor refers the person to the relevant institution at least twice a year to establish whether they are using drugs (TCK art. 191(3)). In practice, a urine test is carried out.
The frequency of signing in or meetings is not set as a number in the law; the directorate draws up a plan according to the person’s situation.
When does it count as a breach?
A public prosecution is filed in the following three situations during the postponement period (TCK art. 191(4)):
- Persistently failing to comply with the obligations or the requirements of treatment,
- Again buying, accepting or possessing drugs for personal use,
- Using drugs again (a positive test falls within this).
New use during this period is not tried as a separate offence; it only counts as a ground for breach, and a case is filed for the first incident (TCK art. 191(5)).
What does “persistence” mean? Is missing one appointment enough?
No, a single missed appointment is, as a rule, not enough. The Court of Cassation (Yargıtay) treats the persistence condition as a precondition for prosecution and looks for the following sequence:
- The probation directorate’s summons letter must be properly served.
- If the person does not attend, a new notice must be served containing the warning “if you do not attend this time either, you will be deemed to have persisted”. If the person still does not apply despite this warning notice, the persistence condition is deemed to be met.
- For breaches after supervision has started, three unexcused breaches within one year count as persistence under the Probation Services Regulation (Denetimli Serbestlik Hizmetleri Yönetmeliği) art. 44(3). The Assembly of Criminal Chambers requires two justified warnings before the third breach.
If these steps were skipped and the file was closed and a case filed, the court issues a stay decision (durma kararı) and the file returns to supervised release.
The postponement decision itself must also be checked
The postponement decision must contain a warning about the consequences of failing to comply with the obligations and notice of the right to object to the criminal judgeship of peace (sulh ceza hâkimliği) within two weeks (Code of Criminal Procedure (CMK) arts. 171 and 173). Without these notices, the decision is not deemed final and the five-year period does not start. In that case, failing to attend summonses does not count as a breach either.
What happens after a breach?
- A public prosecution is filed for the first incident. The statutory penalty is two to five years’ imprisonment.
- If the same offence is committed again after this case, no further postponement is granted (TCK art. 191(6)).
- At the end of the case, if the conditions are met, the deferral of the announcement of the verdict (HAGB) or a suspended sentence may come into question. We explain these in our article on TCK art. 191.
If the period ends without problems
If the five years are completed in compliance with the obligations, a decision of non-prosecution (kovuşturmaya yer olmadığı kararı) is given (TCK art. 191(7)). The postponement decision does not appear on the criminal record certificate. It is only recorded in a special system accessible to prosecutors and courts.
Recent Court of Cassation decisions
- Court of Cassation Assembly of Criminal Chambers, 17.09.2025, E. 2020/471, K. 2025/335: For persistence, a third breach must be established despite two justified warnings. The file cannot be closed before the second warning is given. Possessing drugs again during the postponement period is not a separate offence but a ground for breach. Text of the decision
- Court of Cassation 10th Criminal Chamber, 20.01.2026, E. 2024/7894, K. 2026/602: The file of a person who does not respond to the summons letter within ten days cannot be closed immediately; a second summons with a warning must be served. If the person still does not apply at all, the persistence condition is met. The “three breaches within one year” rule applies only to persons who have applied to the directorate and started supervision. A stay decision given although persistence had occurred was quashed in the interest of the law. Text of the decision
- Court of Cassation 10th Criminal Chamber, 18.09.2025, E. 2024/7784, K. 2025/8431: Where a person attended meetings after the first warning, later missing one meeting cannot be treated as “persistence” without a new time limit and warning; the conviction was quashed. Text of the decision
- Court of Cassation 10th Criminal Chamber, 20.05.2025, E. 2023/22147, K. 2025/5766: A postponement decision that does not clearly state that the time limit for objection starts from service does not become final in the proper way; supervision cannot be started on the basis of it, the five-year period does not run and there can be no breach of obligations. In addition, the file of a person who did not respond to the first summons cannot be closed without serving a second notice with a warning; the conviction was quashed in the interest of the law. Text of the decision
This article is for general information only and is not legal advice. For your specific situation, please seek advice from a lawyer.