Abstract

The cancellation and withdrawal of Turkish citizenship acquired through investment have become significant issues in Türkiye’s legal and international investment landscape. Criminal investigations and administrative reviews conducted in 2025 and 2026 have raised questions concerning the legality of property transactions, the reliability of valuation reports, the authenticity of financial transfers, and the legal validity of citizenship decisions issued in previous years.

According to public statements attributed to the Turkish Ministry of Interior, citizenship acquisition decisions concerning 6,134 individuals, including 1,413 principal investors and their family members, have been cancelled or withdrawn following reviews of investment eligibility and security assessments.

A separate investigation announced on September 21, 2026, concerned 1,070 people, comprising 263 principal investors and 807 family members, whose citizenship acquisitions were linked to property transactions examined by the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office.

These figures do not represent identical legal proceedings. In particular, it would be incorrect to conclude that every person within the group of 1,070 had already been subjected to a final individual citizenship cancellation decision.

This study examines official announcements, the chronology of investigations, their criminal and administrative dimensions, and their presentation in Arabic, English, Russian and Chinese-language media up to October 22, 2026.

It also considers the position of genuine investors, constitutional protection of nationality, legal certainty, legitimate expectations, individual responsibility and effective judicial review.

Research limitation: Allegations made during criminal investigations are distinguished from established facts and final judicial findings. Media commentary, commercial publications and individual social-media posts are not treated as independent official evidence or representative scientific surveys of investor opinion.

1. Why Have Turkish Citizenship Revocations Become an International Issue?

Acquisition of Turkish citizenship through investment is one of the exceptional naturalisation mechanisms established under Turkish law to facilitate foreign investment. Its principal statutory basis is Article 12 of Turkish Citizenship Law No. 5901, together with Article 20 of the Regulation on the Implementation of the Turkish Citizenship Law.

The Turkish citizenship-by-investment system operates at the intersection of private law and public law. An investor may enter into a private contractual relationship by purchasing immovable property, making a bank deposit or undertaking another qualifying investment. The decision granting Turkish citizenship, however, is an exercise of public authority.

A construction company may sell a property. A bank may execute transfers. An appraisal company may determine a property’s market value. A consultant may assist with administrative documentation. None of these private parties has the legal authority to grant Turkish nationality.

Citizenship is acquired through a decision issued by the competent state authority under the applicable legal framework.

Consequently, when a citizenship decision granted several years earlier is subsequently challenged because of an allegedly false document, an irregular valuation or a disputed investment transaction, the legal implications extend beyond the contractual relationship between investor and seller.

The matter also concerns the stability of administrative decisions, the protection of nationality as a legal status, the rule of law and the confidence that individuals may reasonably place in governmental acts.

Two Competing Legal Considerations

One approach emphasises the state’s legitimate responsibility to investigate fraud, sham transactions and applications that did not meet the statutory conditions for naturalisation.

The other stresses the need to distinguish genuinely compliant investors from third parties who may have committed irregularities during a transaction. An individual who actually transferred the required funds, purchased property and obtained the official certificate of conformity may face circumstances materially different from those of a person who knowingly participated in a fictitious investment.

These objectives are not necessarily incompatible. A legal system may pursue fraud prevention while simultaneously requiring individual examination, adequate evidence, proportional legal consequences and effective judicial protection.

2. Chronology of Turkish Citizenship Investigations in 2025–2026

2.1. September 24, 2025: Investigation Into Allegedly Sham Property Transactions

The investigations became particularly visible with the operation announced on September 24, 2025.

According to Anadolu Agency, authorities investigated allegedly fictitious or sham real estate transactions used to facilitate Turkish citizenship acquisitions. The operation took place across 19 provinces and concerned transactions linked to 451 foreign investors and a reported total of 1,198 citizenship acquisitions including family members.

The publicly reported allegations included the absence of genuine foreign-currency inflows, inflated property appraisals, and subsequent transfers of properties to previous owners or associated parties.

The investigation demonstrated why the registration of a property transfer in the land registry does not necessarily prove that every requirement of the citizenship-by-investment legislation was satisfied in economic substance.

Source:
Anadolu Agency, September 24, 2025.

2.2. August 4, 2026: Proceedings Concerning 687 People

On August 4, 2026, the Turkish Ministry of Justice announced another operation coordinated by the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office.

The Ministry stated that comparatively low-value properties had allegedly been represented as higher-value investments through false appraisal reports and sham sales transactions.

According to the announcement, the legal process had been initiated to cancel the citizenship of 687 individuals considered to have obtained Turkish citizenship through those arrangements.

The authorities also reported detention decisions involving 90 suspects, the apprehension of 72 suspects, and protective measures affecting corporate and other assets.

The Ministry referred to approximately TRY 2.5 billion in foreign-currency funds that allegedly should have entered Türkiye but had not actually done so.

An essential distinction must be maintained: the initiation of criminal proceedings and legal steps intended to cancel citizenship does not establish that every affected individual lost citizenship on August 4, 2026.

Source:
Turkish Ministry of Justice, Official Statement, August 4, 2026.

2.3. September 21, 2026: Investigation Involving 1,070 People

A further operation coordinated by the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office was announced on September 21, 2026.

According to the official statements reported by Anadolu Agency, investigators examined property transactions involving Gül İnşaat AŞ, Beyaz İnşaat and LİV İnşaat.

The authorities reported examining sales to 734 foreign purchasers, of which 274 were alleged to involve sham transactions.

The investigation concerned citizenship acquisitions involving 1,070 people, including investors and their family members.

The reported transaction volume exceeded TRY 3.5 billion. Various properties and corporate assets were reportedly subjected to protective measures, including seizure and the appointment of trustees.

Nevertheless, the presumption of innocence continues to apply to the companies and individuals under investigation. Whether the allegations are established must be determined through the applicable criminal proceedings.

The fact that a development project is mentioned in a criminal investigation does not establish that every purchaser within that project participated in unlawful conduct.

Source:
Anadolu Agency, September 21, 2026.

2.4. September 21, 2026: Ministry of Interior Figures Concerning 6,134 People

The Ministry of Interior’s public statement reported on September 21, 2026, revealed that the administrative dimension of the citizenship reviews extended considerably beyond the latest criminal investigation.

The Ministry reported that citizenship acquisition decisions involving 6,134 individuals had been cancelled or withdrawn in connection with investment eligibility reviews and public-order or national-security assessments.

This total must not be confused with the 1,070 people referred to in the second-wave investigation.

International investment-migration publications had also reported the broader figure in August 2026. Accordingly, the publication date of a news article must be distinguished from the period covered by the underlying administrative statistics.

Sources:
TRT Haber, September 21, 2026;
IMI Daily, August 6, 2026.

2.5. September 24–25, 2026: Detention and Judicial Supervision Measures

Following the second-wave operation, further information became available concerning the criminal procedural measures imposed on suspects.

An Anadolu Agency report dated September 25, 2026, stated that 33 suspects had been remanded in custody, 20 were subjected to house-arrest measures, and 21 were placed under other forms of judicial supervision.

Some earlier reports had cited different detention figures. Reports issued at different times may reflect successive stages of the same investigation rather than contradictory final outcomes.

Pretrial detention and judicial supervision are preventive procedural measures. Neither constitutes a final criminal conviction.

2.6. October 2026: Outstanding Uncertainty Regarding Individual Files

As of October 22, 2026, the publicly verifiable information examined in this study demonstrated the existence of extensive criminal investigations and administrative reviews.

However, public sources did not establish that all individual citizenship files within the announced groups had been concluded or that final criminal judgments had been delivered in every related investigation.

The absence of new press announcements does not mean that no administrative or investigative actions are taking place. Criminal investigation confidentiality and personal-data protection rules may prevent individual developments from becoming publicly known.

3. What Do the Figures 6,134, 1,070 and 687 Actually Mean?

A major source of misunderstanding is the combination of figures originating from separate administrative reviews, criminal investigations and official announcements.

3.1. The Reported Administrative Total of 6,134

The Ministry of Interior’s publicly reported breakdown was as follows:

The Ministry also reported that, since February 11, 2026, certificates of conformity involving 458 principal investors had been cancelled, affecting 1,393 individuals including family members. It separately referred to seven individuals whose citizenship had been withdrawn on public-order or national-security grounds.

These sub-period figures should not automatically be added to the general total as if they were entirely separate populations.

For each affected individual, the relevant legal facts remain the date of the administrative decision, the date and manner of notification, its statutory grounds and any available judicial remedy.

3.2. The 1,070 Individuals Were Not All Principal Investors

Calling all 1,070 people foreign investors would be legally inaccurate.

The citizenship status of spouses and children may be connected to the principal investor’s acquisition, but the legal consequences must be examined with reference to the grounds and date of each person’s acquisition.

The fact that 55 children reportedly acquired citizenship after the original citizenship decision does not establish that all of those children necessarily face identical consequences.

3.3. Can the Figures 687 and 1,070 Be Added Together?

The August 4 and September 21 announcements concerned different investigative stages. Adding their figures may produce a rough count of the individuals mentioned in those announcements, but it does not establish a new official total of final citizenship cancellations.

Nor can it safely be assumed, without examining the underlying datasets, that the figures are entirely independent of the reported total of 6,134.

Official statistics must be interpreted according to their precise scope, reporting period and legal classification.

4. The Positions of the Ministry of Interior, Ministry of Justice, Police and Prosecutors

4.1. Ministry of Interior: Administrative Supervision

The Ministry of Interior has emphasised the supervision of certificates of conformity and the review of previously issued citizenship decisions.

According to its publicly reported explanation, investment applications undergo checks concerning compliance with the statutory requirements, security screening and archival investigations.

The Ministry has also stated that the irregularities under investigation concerned documents prepared before the citizenship application stage and that no institutional failure or negligence had been identified within the Directorate General of Population and Citizenship Affairs.

This represents the Ministry’s stated position. Whether particular administrative officials relied on specific documents lawfully remains a matter requiring examination of the individual case file and, where necessary, judicial scrutiny.

4.2. Ministry of Justice: Alleged Fraud and Organised Misconduct

The Ministry of Justice has presented the criminal investigations as measures against the misuse of citizenship legislation through fraudulent property transactions and documents.

Depending on the investigation, publicly reported allegations have included establishing organisations for criminal purposes, migrant smuggling, document forgery and false declarations during the preparation of official documents.

Nevertheless, the appearance of a particular offence in an investigation does not establish that every person connected to the investigation committed that offence.

Criminal liability depends on the alleged conduct, individual participation, the relevant mental element and the admissibility and sufficiency of the evidence.

4.3. Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office: Financial and Documentary Evidence

The investigations have reportedly involved land registry records, valuation reports, banking transactions, expert assessments and analyses conducted by the Financial Crimes Investigation Board, known as MASAK.

The central issue therefore extends beyond whether title to a property was formally transferred.

The authorities may also examine the genuine economic nature of the transaction, the origin and destination of funds, the authenticity of payment and whether the required investment was actually completed.

4.4. Police Authorities: Criminal Investigation Functions

The Istanbul Police Department’s Anti-Migrant Smuggling and Border Gates Branch has participated in the publicly announced operations under prosecutorial coordination.

Judicial police authorities collect evidence and carry out investigative measures under the applicable criminal procedure framework.

They do not, merely by interviewing a person or recording a statement, exercise the authority to issue a final administrative decision terminating Turkish citizenship.

A summons for questioning and a citizenship cancellation decision must therefore be treated as legally distinct events.

4.5. Land Registry and Tax Audit Authorities

The General Directorate of Land Registry and Cadastre and the Tax Inspection Board have also been identified as participants in technical and financial review processes.

Relevant issues include the reliability of valuation reports, the nature of real estate transfers, declared purchase prices, tax-related financial information and the consistency of supporting documents.

Technical findings may provide grounds for subsequent administrative action, but the legality of such action remains subject to applicable judicial review.

5. What Transactions Are Being Investigated?

5.1. False or Inflated Property Valuation Reports

An allegation that a property’s value was artificially increased raises the question of whether the investment genuinely met the statutory minimum required at the relevant time.

However, it is not always legally appropriate to determine the historical validity of an investment solely by reference to its present market value.

The governing legislation, market conditions, valuation methodology and transactional circumstances at the time of investment are essential considerations.

5.2. Sham Property Sales

A sham transaction generally involves a discrepancy between the parties’ apparent legal act and their genuine intention or economic arrangement.

The appearance of a development or construction company’s name in an investigation is insufficient, by itself, to establish that every individual sale carried out by that company was fictitious.

Each transaction requires its own examination.

5.3. Artificial Financial Transactions and Missing Currency Inflows

One recurring allegation is that funds ostensibly transferred for a qualifying investment did not genuinely originate from the investor or were circulated through intermediary accounts to simulate compliance.

Relevant evidence may include foreign-bank statements, SWIFT records, currency purchase documents, seller account statements, payment instructions, tax records and any subsequent repayment or circular movement of funds.

The economic reality of the payment should be established through a coherent documentary chain rather than an isolated banking entry.

5.4. Distinguishing the Investor’s Conduct from Third-Party Misconduct

The preparation of an inaccurate valuation report by an appraisal company, the submission of a false document by a seller and a knowingly false declaration by an investor are not legally identical acts.

At the same time, the investor’s good faith does not automatically resolve every administrative problem if a mandatory objective condition for the acquisition of citizenship was not actually fulfilled.

Both questions therefore require examination: whether the statutory requirements were satisfied and whether any alleged misconduct is attributable to the investor.

For further analysis, see our earlier publication:
Cancellation and Withdrawal of Turkish Citizenship Acquired Through Investment: False Valuation Reports, Sham Transactions and the Protection of Genuine Investors.

6. Cancellation and Withdrawal of Turkish Citizenship Are Not the Same Legal Mechanism

Precise legal terminology is essential when discussing the termination of Turkish citizenship.

In ordinary language, the expression “citizenship revocation” may be used broadly. Turkish Citizenship Law No. 5901, however, provides distinct mechanisms with different legal grounds and consequences.

6.1. Cancellation Under Article 31

Article 31 concerns the cancellation of a decision granting Turkish citizenship where citizenship was acquired as a result of the individual’s false declaration or concealment of material facts forming the basis of acquisition.

Therefore, the circumstances surrounding the alleged false statement or concealment and its connection with the acquisition decision are legally significant.

6.2. Legal Consequences Under Article 32

Article 32 provides that a cancellation decision takes effect from the date of the cancellation decision and may also apply to spouses and children who acquired Turkish citizenship dependently through the individual concerned.

The scope of the effect on family members must be assessed according to the statutory provisions and the circumstances of their acquisition of nationality.

6.3. Withdrawal Under Article 40

Article 40 concerns the withdrawal of citizenship decisions where the statutory conditions required for the decision were not fulfilled or where a duplicate decision was issued.

The legal consequences of withdrawal must be distinguished from those of cancellation, particularly regarding the temporal effects of the withdrawal and the status of persons whose citizenship depended on the original decision.

6.4. Constitutional Protection and Judicial Review

Article 66 of the Constitution of the Republic of Türkiye provides that Turkish citizenship is acquired under the conditions prescribed by law and may be lost only in circumstances established by law.

The same constitutional provision protects access to judicial review against decisions and acts relating to deprivation of citizenship.

Therefore, citizenship termination is not outside the principles of legality, the rule of law and effective judicial protection.

A media statement asserting that an individual’s citizenship was “revoked” does not establish whether the legally relevant measure was cancellation under Article 31, withdrawal under Article 40 or another administrative measure.

The actual individual administrative decision and its statutory basis must be examined.

Legal sources:
Turkish Citizenship Law No. 5901;
Constitution of Türkiye, Article 66.

The linked parliamentary text reflects the legislation as adopted. Any amendments applicable to a particular transaction or decision must also be considered.

7. How Has the Arabic-Language Media Covered Turkish Citizenship Revocations?

Turkish citizenship through investment has long attracted attention in Arabic-speaking countries because of its relationship with real estate investment, family relocation, business opportunities and international mobility.

The investigations reported in 2026 introduced an additional dimension to this discussion: the possibility that nationality granted in previous years may subsequently become the subject of administrative and judicial review.

7.1. Anadolu Agency’s Arabic Coverage

On September 21, 2026, Anadolu Agency published an Arabic-language report concerning the proceedings involving 1,070 individuals and the alleged property irregularities under investigation.

The publication is useful for understanding how Turkish official statements were communicated to Arabic-speaking audiences.

Nevertheless, translating an official announcement into another language does not transform ongoing proceedings into final judicial findings.

Anadolu Agency, Arabic Edition, September 21, 2026.

7.2. Regional Arabic Publications

Ammon News, based in Jordan, also reported the developments concerning the 1,070 individuals and the alleged irregularities in property transactions.

This illustrates how the Turkish citizenship investigations became part of the wider Arabic-language regional news cycle.

However, republication of information initially reported by Anadolu Agency does not necessarily constitute independent verification of the underlying allegations.

Ammon News, September 21, 2026.

7.3. Terminological Problems in Arabic Reporting

Arabic expressions commonly translated as cancellation, withdrawal or revocation may not accurately reproduce the distinctions contained in Articles 31 and 40 of Turkish Citizenship Law.

A definitive headline declaring that 1,070 people had lost citizenship may therefore overstate what the underlying announcement actually established.

For investors and their families, the relevant questions concern the existence of an individual administrative decision, its legal grounds, notification, passport status and possible legal remedies.

The implications for spouses and children deserve particularly careful consideration.

8. European and English-Language International Media Coverage

International coverage has approached the Turkish citizenship issue not only as a criminal investigation but also as a question concerning the governance, credibility and long-term stability of citizenship-by-investment programmes.

8.1. Deutsche Welle: The Broader Public-Policy Debate

A Deutsche Welle report published on August 8, 2026, considered the investigations in the context of the wider Turkish investment-naturalisation framework.

Such reporting raises institutional questions extending beyond individual criminal liability: How should qualifying investments be verified? Which public institutions should review valuation and banking evidence? What safeguards are required to prevent abuse without undermining lawful investment?

Deutsche Welle, August 8, 2026.

8.2. IMI Daily and Comparative Investment Migration

IMI Daily, a publication specialising in investment migration, reported on the Turkish citizenship developments during August and September 2026.

Its September 21 coverage addressed the investigation concerning 1,070 individuals. A separate analysis published on October 8 discussed citizenship revocation risks across different international investment programmes.

These publications show that the Turkish controversy forms part of a broader discussion about the legal durability of citizenship acquired through investment.

However, specialist commercial publications should not be treated as equivalent to official administrative documents or binding court decisions.

Sources:
IMI Daily, September 21, 2026;
IMI Daily, October 8, 2026.

8.3. The Ambiguity of the Word “Revocation”

English-language reporting often uses “revocation”, “cancellation”, “withdrawal” and “annulment” interchangeably.

These terms may not accurately identify the precise administrative mechanism applied under Turkish law.

Accurate reporting therefore requires more than identifying the number of affected persons. It should distinguish decisions already issued from procedures merely initiated, identify the relevant legal grounds and clarify whether individual decisions have been notified or judicially challenged.

9. Russian-Language Reporting and Investment Security

Russian-speaking investors have shown sustained interest in Turkish real estate and citizenship acquisition. Consequently, reports concerning retrospective reviews of citizenship decisions have also appeared in Russian-language publications.

9.1. Kazinform and the 2025 Investigations

Kazinform, a Kazakhstan-based news agency, published a Russian-language report on October 4, 2025, concerning the investigation into allegedly fictitious Turkish property transactions and citizenship acquisitions.

The report illustrates that concerns about fraudulent investment-based citizenship applications were already circulating in Russian-language media before the larger developments of 2026.

Kazinform, October 4, 2025.

9.2. Property Investment Platforms

Russian-language commercial publications addressing the Turkish property market have also discussed appraisal requirements, documentary safeguards and the possibility of reviewing past citizenship acquisitions.

These publications may assist in identifying practical investor concerns, such as the preservation of historical banking documents and verification of property valuations.

However, real estate marketing materials should not be treated as independent legal scholarship or authoritative regulatory statements.

Property Turkey, Russian-language publication, September 30, 2026.

10. Chinese-Language Publications and the Position of Chinese Investors

Developments concerning Turkish citizenship revocations have also been discussed in Simplified Chinese-language investment and migration publications.

The principal subjects include historical property valuations, documentation of genuine payments and the possibility of administrative review after a citizenship decision has already been granted.

10.1. Chinese Migration and Investment Commentary

A Chinese-language publication dated September 28, 2026, addressed the Turkish investigation involving 1,070 individuals and discussed the risk that citizenship previously acquired through investment might later be reviewed because of alleged irregularities in the underlying property transactions.

This demonstrates that the issue has attracted attention outside Turkish and English-language reporting.

Skymigration, September 28, 2026.

10.2. Reporting on the Figure of 6,134

Chinese-language commercial investment publications have also referred to the reported cancellation or withdrawal of citizenship decisions involving 6,134 individuals.

Some have presented the developments as evidence of stronger compliance requirements while emphasising that lawful new applications remain possible.

Such commentary should be assessed in light of the publisher’s commercial interests. A company marketing Turkish property may minimise perceived legal risks, whereas a company promoting competing investment destinations may emphasise those risks.

The legal assessment must be based on Turkish law, official decisions and the documents of the individual transaction.

Property Turkey, Chinese-language publication, September 30, 2026.

10.3. Can the Investigations Be Attributed to a Particular Nationality?

The official figures examined for this article do not provide a comprehensive, independently verified public breakdown of all affected individuals by nationality.

Accordingly, it would be inappropriate to suggest, without reliable evidence, that Chinese, Arab, Russian or other national groups account for particular proportions of the cases.

For legal purposes, the determining considerations are the conditions under which citizenship was acquired, the authenticity of the supporting transactions and the precise legal grounds of any subsequent administrative decision.

11. Social Media, Internet Forums and Misleading Claims

The investigations have generated discussion on Reddit and other online platforms concerning intermediaries, real estate developers, valuation companies and the reliability of citizenship-by-investment programmes.

11.1. Criticism of Intermediaries

A Reddit discussion published on September 23, 2026, questioned reliance on intermediaries and argued in favour of independent verification of the underlying investment documents.

Such commentary may identify practical concerns, but it remains an individual opinion rather than representative evidence of investor sentiment.

Reddit, r/CitizenshipInvestment, September 23, 2026.

11.2. Claim: “Everyone Who Obtained Citizenship Through Investment Is at Risk”

This is an unjustified legal generalisation.

Acquisition of Turkish citizenship through a lawful investment does not itself constitute misconduct.

The existence and degree of risk depend on the investment’s nature, the applicable legislation at the time, the supporting documents and the specific administrative findings concerning the individual.

11.3. Claim: “All 1,070 Turkish Passports Have Been Cancelled”

The September 21 announcements referred to the initiation of relevant administrative procedures. They did not establish that every person in the group had already received a final individual citizenship cancellation decision and that every passport had been cancelled on the same date.

A citizenship decision, passport validity and the physical surrender of a passport may involve distinct legal and practical procedures.

11.4. Claim: “All Foreign Investors Will Be Detained at Turkish Borders”

No publicly verified general official measure establishing such treatment for all foreign investors was identified in the research underlying this article.

The position of a particular traveller depends on the person’s current nationality status, travel documents, any criminal investigation and applicable individual judicial or administrative measures.

Neither unconditional assurances of safe entry nor general predictions of detention can properly be made without examining the specific legal circumstances.

11.5. Are There Reliable International Opinion Surveys?

This study did not identify a representative international scientific survey, with a disclosed methodology and sample, measuring attitudes towards Turkish citizenship revocations by nationality or investor group.

Social media posts, online comments and search-engine trends should not be presented as scientifically established public opinion findings.

12. How Might Citizenship Revocations Affect International Investor Confidence?

Citizenship through investment is not merely a passport acquisition mechanism. For many individuals and families, nationality forms part of long-term legal, residential, educational and commercial planning.

Re-examining citizenship decisions issued several years earlier may therefore produce different effects on investor confidence.

12.1. Stronger Enforcement May Improve Programme Credibility

A state’s willingness to detect fraudulent valuations, fictitious transactions and fabricated documents may strengthen the legal integrity of its citizenship regime.

Distinguishing genuine investors from those involved in artificial arrangements could enhance public confidence in the programme over time.

12.2. Retrospective Reviews May Raise Questions About Legal Stability

Conversely, an investor who genuinely paid the legally required amount, acquired the property and obtained official approval may reasonably question the consequences of irregularities allegedly committed by third parties.

This does not mean that administrative authorities are categorically prohibited from reviewing earlier decisions.

The essential question is whether the alleged failure to satisfy statutory requirements has been established through sufficiently specific evidence and properly connected to the grounds of the administrative measure.

12.3. Legitimate Expectations and Individual Responsibility

Legal certainty requires individuals to be able to foresee, within reasonable limits, the legal consequences of state action and to organise their affairs accordingly.

Nevertheless, legal certainty does not automatically protect every decision that is subsequently shown to be unlawful.

Accordingly, the proper analysis must determine both whether the legal requirements for citizenship existed at the date of acquisition and whether the administration has justified the particular measure taken against the individual.

This distinction is especially important where the investor is not personally accused of fraud but the relevant developer, appraisal company or intermediary is under investigation.

12.4. The International Dimension of Legal Protection

For foreign investors, a credible legal system is not one in which administrative review is impossible. Rather, it is one in which review is conducted on foreseeable legal grounds, allegations and evidence can be examined, decisions are reasoned and effective judicial remedies remain available.

The long-term international credibility of Türkiye’s citizenship-by-investment framework may therefore depend not only on how many decisions are cancelled, but also on how those decisions are justified and reviewed by independent courts.

13. Are New Turkish Citizenship-by-Investment Applications Still Possible?

As of October 22, 2026, the official investment and citizenship information reviewed for this study did not establish that the Turkish citizenship-by-investment mechanism had been abolished in its entirety.

The official investment information published by Invest in Türkiye continued to describe exceptional citizenship acquisition through qualifying real estate investment of at least USD 400,000, subject to the applicable legal conditions.

The General Directorate of Land Registry and Cadastre also continued to provide information concerning citizenship acquisition through property investment via its Your Key Türkiye platform.

Official resources:
Invest in Türkiye;
Your Key Türkiye.

Two distinctions are essential.

First, the continued legal availability of the programme does not guarantee that any particular application will be approved.

Second, administrative review of citizenship decisions granted in previous years does not establish that all lawful new applications have automatically been suspended.

For prospective applicants, the type and actual value of the investment, the payment documents, the certificate of conformity, the security screening and the legislation applicable at the relevant date remain material.

The General Directorate of Land Registry and Cadastre also published an announcement on September 29, 2026, concerning the procedures and principles governing valuation reports used in certain property transactions involving foreigners.

Land Registry and Cadastre – September 29, 2026 Announcement.

The presence of application information on official websites does not, however, provide sufficient statistical evidence about actual processing times or approval rates.

14. Outstanding Questions Concerning Turkish Citizenship Revocations

Despite the information contained in official announcements, several important legal and empirical questions require further clarification.

1. What is the complete distribution of the 6,134 reported cases by original citizenship acquisition year and date of the administrative measure?
2. How many individuals within the group of 1,070 had received individual and reasoned citizenship decisions by October 22, 2026?
3. Which specific provisions of Turkish Citizenship Law No. 5901 are applied in each category of cancellation or withdrawal?
4. How are genuinely compliant investors distinguished from individuals knowingly participating in fraudulent transactions?
5. Is there a publicly available, verified list identifying the precise property transactions affected by the investigations?
6. How are the rights of spouses and children assessed where citizenship was acquired at different times or under different legal grounds?
7. What information is publicly available concerning the outcomes of administrative lawsuits and applications for suspension of execution?
8. Have independent researchers conducted representative studies measuring the effects of these developments on international investor confidence?

These questions cannot all be conclusively answered through news coverage. Many require access to individual administrative files, primary institutional records and court decisions.

15. Conclusion: Fraud Prevention and Legal Certainty Must Be Protected Together

The investigations conducted during 2025 and 2026 constitute an important phase in the application and supervision of Turkish citizenship law.

Allegations involving false appraisal reports, fictitious property sales, artificial banking transactions and misleading documentation raise serious questions of both criminal and administrative law.

However, legal analysis cannot be founded exclusively on the scale of the figures announced or on the identity of a construction company associated with an investigation.

The administrative statistics concerning 6,134 individuals, the September investigation involving 1,070 people and the earlier proceedings concerning 687 people must be understood within their respective legal and factual contexts.

Similarly, involvement in a criminal investigation does not automatically establish a final conviction or the termination of citizenship.

Under Article 66 of the Turkish Constitution, nationality is a legal status acquired and lost in accordance with statutory conditions.

Every administrative measure affecting that status must be examined according to its legal grounds, evidentiary basis and consequences for the individual.

The central conclusion of this research is that preventing fraud in citizenship procedures and protecting the legal security of genuine, good-faith investors are not mutually exclusive objectives.

The state’s responsibility to safeguard the integrity of its nationality regime must operate alongside the individual’s entitlement to lawful administrative decision-making and effective judicial protection.

In the longer term, the international credibility of Turkish citizenship through investment will depend not merely on investment thresholds or the number of approved applications, but also on transparency, legal foreseeability, reasoned decisions and effective judicial oversight.

Accordingly, the appropriate legal starting point is not a general media headline, but the applicable statute, the actual administrative decision, the underlying evidence and the circumstances of the individual citizenship file.

16. Related Publications by Dolğun Akademi

This article complements our previous research on Turkish citizenship cancellation and withdrawal, foreign investment, criminal investigations and the protection of genuine investors.

Our Five-Part Citizenship Law Series

1. Official Figures and International Media Coverage: This article.
2. Has My Turkish Citizenship Been Cancelled? Legal Review in 2026. Examination of official records, notification, legal status, passports and family rights.
3. Turkish Citizenship Cancellation and Criminal Investigations in 2026. Police statements, prosecutorial decisions, non-prosecution, acquittal and administrative litigation.
4. Can a Genuine Investor Lose Turkish Citizenship? Valuation errors, bank records, preservation of evidence and judicial protection.
5. Turkish Citizenship by Investment in 2026: Requirements and Legal Risks. Qualifying investments, regulatory conditions and preventive legal due diligence.

Earlier Legal Research

September 19, 2026:
Cancellation and Withdrawal of Turkish Citizenship Acquired Through Investment. The distinction between Articles 31 and 40, genuine investment, disputed valuations and judicial protection.

September 28, 2026:
Turkish Citizenship Cancellation and Withdrawal: New Valuations, Investment Shortfalls, Families, Children and Related Investigations.

October 8, 2026:
Turkish Citizenship Revocation in 2026: Latest Developments and Legal Remedies.

17. Legislation, Official Statements and International References

A. Legislation and Official Sources

1. Constitution of the Republic of Türkiye, Article 66. Constitutional Court – Constitutional Text.
2. Turkish Citizenship Law No. 5901, particularly Articles 12, 31, 32 and 40. Turkish Grand National Assembly.
3. Turkish Ministry of Justice, August 4, 2026. Official Statement on Proceedings Concerning 687 Individuals.
4. Ministry of Interior, September 21, 2026. Statement Reported by TRT Haber.
5. Invest in Türkiye. Acquiring Property and Citizenship.
6. General Directorate of Land Registry and Cadastre. Your Key Türkiye – Citizenship Acquisition.
7. General Directorate of Land Registry and Cadastre, September 29, 2026. Valuation Report Procedures.

B. Turkish News Sources

1. Anadolu Agency, September 24, 2025. Investigation Into Sham Property Transactions.
2. Anadolu Agency, September 21, 2026. Second-Wave Investigation.
3. Anadolu Agency, September 25, 2026. Reporting on detention and judicial supervision measures.
4. Deutsche Welle Turkish, August 8, 2026. Research on Turkish Citizenship Through Investment.

C. Arabic-Language Publications

1. Anadolu Agency Arabic, September 21, 2026. Coverage of Proceedings Involving 1,070 Individuals.
2. Ammon News, Jordan, September 21, 2026. Arabic-Language Coverage.

D. English-Language International Publications

1. IMI Daily, August 6, 2026. Turkey Revokes 6,134 CBI Citizenships in Program-Wide Sweep.
2. IMI Daily, September 21, 2026. Turkey to Revoke 1,070 More Citizenships.
3. Turkish Minute, September 21, 2026. Citizenship Decisions Involving 6,134 People.
4. IMI Daily, October 8, 2026. Comparative Citizenship Revocation Risks.

E. Russian-Language Publications

1. Kazinform, October 4, 2025. Russian-Language Report on Turkish Citizenship Investigations.
2. Property Turkey, September 30, 2026. Russian-Language Investment Commentary.

F. Chinese-Language Publications

1. Skymigration, September 28, 2026. Chinese-Language Commentary on the 1,070-Person Investigation.
2. Property Turkey, September 30, 2026. Chinese-Language Investment Commentary.

G. Online Discussion

Reddit, r/CitizenshipInvestment, September 23, 2026.
Individual Discussion of Citizenship-by-Investment Intermediaries. This is an individual user opinion, not official evidence.

Source methodology: Reporting based on the same official announcement is not counted as independent verification. Commercial publications, anonymous commentary and official legal records are distinguished throughout this research.