How to Get Turkish Citizenship: Descent, Marriage, Residence

Note on sources. The official legal texts of Türkiye are in Turkish. Each provision below is quoted verbatim in Turkish (the authoritative text) and followed by an unofficial English translation for convenience only. Where exact wording matters, the Turkish text governs.

Short Answer

Turkish citizenship is acquired by birth or subsequently (Article 5) — descent is the principal birth rule and does not depend on the place of birth (Article 7), while place of birth operates only against statelessness (Article 8). Subsequent acquisition takes place by decision of the competent authority, by adoption or by exercise of the right of option (Article 9). On the competent-authority branch there are three main routes: the general route (Article 11 of Law No. 5901 — five years’ uninterrupted residence and other conditions), the exceptional route (Article 12 — by Presidential decree in cases of investment or extraordinary service) and the marriage route (Article 16 — being married to a Turkish citizen for at least three years). An important point: under the law, meeting the conditions does not grant an absolute right to citizenship (Article 10). Holding a second citizenship alongside it is not prohibited; Article 44 provides for the position to be annotated in the civil register, and whether your existing citizenship survives is a question for the other state’s law.

The five-year general route is counted on lawful residence, so the permit you hold matters — see residence permit types in Türkiye. Where the stay is supported by employment the counting runs on the work permit instead, because a work permit replaces a residence permit as a rule; see work permits for foreign employees. For the exceptional route based on property, see Turkish citizenship by investment, and for how foreigners acquire title in the first place, property acquisition by foreigners in Türkiye.

Citizen by Birth, or Applicant? The First Fork

Before comparing routes, settle a prior question: are you an applicant at all? Law No. 5901 separates citizenship acquired by birth from citizenship acquired subsequently, and these are not two strategies for the same goal. They are different legal positions, and the difference decides what you file, where you file it, and what you have to prove.

Citizenship by birth is not granted; it exists. Where it applies, the person has been a Turkish citizen since the moment of birth, and the file they eventually open is a registration file, not an application to be naturalised. Citizenship acquired subsequently is the opposite: the person is a foreigner until the competent authority decides otherwise, and the decision is discretionary even when every condition is met.

Reading the two as one is the single most expensive mistake on this subject. Someone born abroad to a Turkish parent who files as a naturalisation applicant is asking to be given something they already hold, and will be assessed against conditions — five years’ residence, language, income — that do not apply to them at all. Someone with only a Turkish grandparent who assumes the reverse waits for a registration that no provision permits.

So the order of questions is:

1. Was either of your parents a Turkish citizen when you were born? If so, you are on the descent branch, and the issue is proof and registration rather than qualification.
2. If not, is there a former Turkish citizen in the family whose own loss of citizenship is the relevant fact? That is the re-acquisition and Blue Card territory, and it turns on how citizenship was lost.
3. If neither, you are an applicant, and the question becomes which of the three subsequent routes fits: residence, marriage, or the exceptional route.

How Is Turkish Citizenship Acquired?

The Law opens with a two-way split that most guides skip over entirely:

5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.5 — Ways of acquiring Turkish citizenship

“(1) Türk vatandaşlığı, doğumla veya sonradan kazanılır.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.5)

Unofficial translation: “Turkish citizenship is acquired by birth or subsequently.”

Everything discussed below — residence, marriage, investment — sits on the subsequent side. The birth side is a separate regime, covered in the next section, and it is worth checking first: a person who assumes they must apply may already be a Turkish citizen by descent.

On the subsequent side, the Law names three mechanisms, not one:

5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.9 — Subsequent acquisition

“(1) Sonradan kazanılan Türk vatandaşlığı, yetkili makam kararı veya evlat edinilme ya da seçme hakkının kullanılması ile gerçekleşir.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.9)

Unofficial translation: “Subsequently acquired Turkish citizenship takes place by decision of the competent authority, by adoption, or by exercise of the right of option.”

The routes described in this article are the competent-authority branch. Adoption and the right of option run on their own conditions.

Here the Law places an important caveat at the outset:

5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.10 — No absolute right

“Ancak, aranan şartları taşımak vatandaşlığın kazanılmasında kişiye mutlak bir hak sağlamaz.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.10)

Unofficial translation: “However, meeting the required conditions does not grant the person an absolute right in the acquisition of citizenship.”

This sentence corrects, in law, the expectation that “I met the conditions, therefore I will become a citizen”: the conditions are necessary but not sufficient; the outcome depends on the competent authority’s assessment. Promises of “guaranteed citizenship” should be treated with caution in light of this provision.

Turkish Citizenship by Descent

Citizenship by birth is not applied for; it exists from birth. The Law says so in terms, and the wording repays attention because it settles both how the citizenship arises and when it takes effect:

5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.6 — Citizenship acquired by birth

“(1) Doğumla kazanılan Türk vatandaşlığı, soy bağı veya doğum yeri esasına göre kendiliğinden kazanılır. Doğumla kazanılan vatandaşlık doğum anından itibaren hüküm ifade eder.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.6)

Unofficial translation: “Turkish citizenship acquired by birth is acquired automatically on the basis of descent or place of birth. Citizenship acquired by birth takes effect from the moment of birth.”

Two words carry the weight. “Kendiliğinden” — automatically, of its own accord — means no decision creates this citizenship; it arises by operation of law. “Doğum anından itibaren” — from the moment of birth — means that when registration finally happens, years or decades later, it records a status that already existed rather than conferring a new one. That is why the later sections on the register speak of establishing and recording, never of granting.

The principal birth rule is descent, and it does not depend on where the birth took place:

5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.7 — Descent

“(1) Türkiye içinde veya dışında Türk vatandaşı ana veya babadan evlilik birliği içinde doğan çocuk Türk vatandaşıdır. (2) Türk vatandaşı ana ve yabancı babadan evlilik birliği dışında doğan çocuk Türk vatandaşıdır. (3) Türk vatandaşı baba ve yabancı anadan evlilik birliği dışında doğan çocuk ise soy bağı kurulmasını sağlayan usul ve esasların yerine getirilmesi halinde Türk vatandaşlığını kazanır.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.7)

Unofficial translation: “A child born within the union of marriage to a Turkish mother or father, inside or outside Türkiye, is a Turkish citizen. A child born outside the union of marriage to a Turkish mother and a foreign father is a Turkish citizen. A child born outside the union of marriage to a Turkish father and a foreign mother acquires Turkish citizenship upon fulfilment of the procedures and principles establishing descent.”

Read the three paragraphs against each other: where the mother is Turkish, the child is a citizen regardless of marriage; where only the father is Turkish and the child is born outside marriage, citizenship follows only once descent is established. That asymmetry is where most real questions arise.

Does Citizenship by Descent Reach a Grandchild?

Searches for “citizenship by descent” usually carry over a model from elsewhere: an ancestral claim that a grandchild, or even a great-grandchild, can revive. Turkish law is not built that way. Article 7, quoted above, attaches citizenship at the moment of birth, to the child of a Turkish mother or father. No separate provision turns a grandparent’s citizenship into a claim of its own, so the chain has to be unbroken at each birth: if the parent was not a Turkish citizen when the child was born, the grandparent’s status does not supply the missing link.

The Law does address one group of families in this position, but it gives them rights rather than citizenship. Where a person was a Turkish citizen by birth and lost that status by obtaining permission to renounce, Article 28 keeps their line connected:

5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.28 — Rights granted to those who lost citizenship by renunciation permit

“(1) Doğumla Türk vatandaşı olup da çıkma izni almak suretiyle Türk vatandaşlığını kaybedenler ve üçüncü dereceye kadar olan altsoyları, bu maddede belirtilen istisnalar dışında Türk vatandaşlarına tanınan haklardan aynen yararlanmaya devam ederler. Millî güvenliğe ve kamu düzenine ilişkin hükümler saklıdır. … (5) Bu madde hükümlerinden yararlanacak olan altsoyun, üstsoyu ile soy bağını belgelendirmesi şarttır.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.28)

Unofficial translation: “Those who were Turkish citizens by birth and lost Turkish citizenship by obtaining permission to renounce, and their descendants up to the third degree, continue to enjoy in the same way the rights granted to Turkish citizens, save for the exceptions set out in this article. Provisions relating to national security and public order are reserved. … Descendants who are to benefit from the provisions of this article must document the descent link with their ascendant.”

Three things follow, and they are easy to overstate in the wrong direction. First, this is a rights provision: the descendant is not thereby made a Turkish citizen. Second, the same article withholds part of the package, among them the right to vote and stand for election and the obligation to perform military service; the document evidencing the rights it does grant is the Mavi Kart (Blue Card). Third, paragraph (5) puts the evidential burden on the applicant, who must document the descent link to the ascendant.

The Council of State has said the same thing, and in the fact pattern that produces most of these questions. The claimants were Syrian nationals whose grandfather was registered as a Turkish citizen; they argued that citizenship had therefore passed automatically to their father and from him to them. The administration refused, because the father had no entry in the Turkish civil register. The first-instance court annulled the refusal; the Tenth Chamber quashed that judgment:

“Öte yandan, Türk vatandaşlığı bağının davacıların dedelerinden babalarına, babalarından da kendilerine hiçbir kayda ve şarta bağlı olmaksızın geçeceği ve devam edeceği yönündeki iddiasının da yasal dayanağı bulunmamaktadır.”

(Danıştay 10. Daire, E. 2015/1955, K. 2020/3652, T. 12.10.2020 — bozma)

Unofficial translation: “Moreover, the claim that the bond of Turkish citizenship would pass from the claimants’ grandfather to their father, and from their father to themselves, free of any record or condition, and would so continue, likewise has no legal basis.”

Note what the Chamber rejected: not the family history, but the mechanism. The argument that the bond travels down a line “free of any record or condition” is the ancestral model, and the Court found no statutory footing for it. Each generation stands on its own Article 7 question — was that particular parent a Turkish citizen when that particular child was born?

For the ancestor rather than the descendant the position is different, and better: someone who lost Turkish citizenship by obtaining permission to renounce falls under Article 13 and may re-acquire it without any residence period at all. That regime is set out under re-acquisition below.

Born Outside Marriage: Why the Father’s Case Is Different

Paragraph (3) of Article 7, quoted above, is short and easy to read past, but it is the provision behind a large share of real disputes. Where the mother is a Turkish citizen, the child is a Turkish citizen whether or not the parents were married. Where the father is the Turkish citizen and the parents were not married, citizenship does not follow from the fact of parenthood; it follows once “soy bağı kurulmasını sağlayan usul ve esaslar” — the procedures and principles that establish descent — have been carried out.

Establishing descent is a matter of family law rather than citizenship law. Under the Civil Code the link to the father arises by marriage to the mother, by acknowledgement, or by a court judgment of paternity. Until one of those has happened, the citizenship question has no foundation to rest on, and an application filed in the meantime is premature rather than wrong.

The practical consequence is an ordering rule. Where the descent link to a Turkish father is contested or simply unrecorded, the family-law step comes first and the citizenship file second. Filing them in the opposite order produces a refusal that is unappealable on its merits, because at the moment of the decision the statutory condition genuinely was not met.

Place of Birth: Only as a Safety Net Against Statelessness

Place of birth operates as a narrow safety net against statelessness:

5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.8 — Place of birth

“(1) Türkiye’de doğan ve yabancı ana ve babasından dolayı doğumla herhangi bir ülkenin vatandaşlığını kazanamayan çocuk, doğumdan itibaren Türk vatandaşıdır. (2) Türkiye’de bulunmuş çocuk aksi sabit olmadıkça Türkiye’de doğmuş sayılır.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.8)

Unofficial translation: “A child born in Türkiye who cannot acquire the citizenship of any country by birth by reason of their foreign mother and father is a Turkish citizen from birth. A child found in Türkiye is deemed to have been born in Türkiye unless proved otherwise.”

Note how limited this is: being born in Türkiye does not by itself confer citizenship. The rule applies only where the child would otherwise be stateless. The second paragraph adds a presumption for foundlings.

Already a Citizen, but Not on the Register

This is the position the search terms rarely name and the guides rarely separate: a person who is a Turkish citizen under Article 7, but whose birth was never notified and who therefore appears nowhere in the Turkish civil register. They hold no Turkish identity card and no Turkish passport. The question is not how to become a citizen; it is how to prove and record a citizenship that already exists.

Start with what proof means here, because the Law is unusually open about it:

5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.36 — Proof of Turkish citizenship

“(1) Türk vatandaşlığının ispatı herhangi bir şekle tabi değildir. (2) Aşağıdaki resmi kayıt ve belgeler, aksi sabit oluncaya kadar ilgilinin Türk vatandaşı olduğuna karine teşkil eder. a) Nüfus kayıtları. b) Nüfus cüzdanları. c) Pasaport veya pasaport yerine geçen belgeler. (3) Bir kişinin Türk vatandaşı olup olmadığı konusunda herhangi bir tereddüde düşüldüğü takdirde bu husus Bakanlıktan sorulur.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.36)

Unofficial translation: “Proof of Turkish citizenship is not subject to any particular form. The following official records and documents constitute a presumption, until the contrary is established, that the person concerned is a Turkish citizen: a) civil registry records; b) identity cards; c) passports or documents replacing a passport. Where any doubt arises as to whether a person is a Turkish citizen, the matter is put to the Ministry.”

Three points follow, and they cut in different directions. First, proof is not subject to any particular form — so the absence of a registry entry is not, by itself, an answer. Second, the listed documents are a presumption (karine), not the citizenship itself; they are evidence that can be displaced. Third, where there is doubt, the question goes to the Ministry, which is why these files end in a ministerial determination rather than a counter clerk’s decision.

Registering After Eighteen, from Abroad

The implementing Regulation deals with exactly this case — someone living abroad, now an adult, whose birth was never notified:

Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanununun Uygulanmasına İlişkin Yönetmelik m.8 — Notifications from abroad after the age of eighteen

“(1) Yurt dışında yaşayan ve onsekiz yaşını tamamladığı halde doğumuna ilişkin bildirimde bulunulmayan kişilerin aile kütüğüne tescili, Türk vatandaşı ana veya babadan dolayı Türk vatandaşlığını kazandıklarının Bakanlıkça yapılacak inceleme sonucunda tespiti halinde mümkündür.”

(Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanununun Uygulanmasına İlişkin Yönetmelik m.8)

Unofficial translation: “Registration in the family register of persons living abroad who have completed the age of eighteen and in respect of whose birth no notification has been made is possible where it is established, following an examination to be carried out by the Ministry, that they acquired Turkish citizenship by reason of a Turkish mother or father.”

The file itself is specified, item by item, and it is worth reading before assembling anything, because item (e) surprises people:

Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanununun Uygulanmasına İlişkin Yönetmelik m.9 — The application file

“(1) Türk vatandaşı ana veya babaya bağlı olarak Türk vatandaşlığını kazandığını iddia ederek başvuruda bulunan kişi adına müracaat makamlarınca aşağıda belirtilen belgelerden oluşan dosya düzenlenir ve karar alınmak üzere Bakanlığa gönderilir: a) İsteği belirten form dilekçe. b) Müracaat makamlarınca sistemden alınan, Türk vatandaşı ana veya babaya ait nüfus kayıt örneği. … e) Kişinin ana ve babasından, bunlardan birisinin ya da her ikisinin ölmüş olması halinde ise varsa kardeşlerinden, kardeşleri yoksa üçüncü derece yakınlarından, müracaat makamlarınca alınacak ve yakınlık derecelerini belirten ifade tutanağı. f) Doğum belgesi.”

(Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanununun Uygulanmasına İlişkin Yönetmelik m.9)

Unofficial translation: “A file consisting of the documents specified below is compiled by the application authorities in the name of the person who applies claiming to have acquired Turkish citizenship through a Turkish mother or father, and is sent to the Ministry for a decision: a) a form petition stating the request; b) a copy of the civil registry record of the Turkish mother or father, obtained from the system by the application authorities; … e) a statement record to be taken by the application authorities from the person’s mother and father, or, where one or both of them have died, from their siblings if any and, failing siblings, from third-degree relatives, specifying the degrees of kinship; f) a birth certificate.”

Item (e) is the part that decides many of these files. Where the Turkish parent has died, the Regulation reaches to siblings and then to third-degree relatives for a recorded statement of kinship. Families who assume that a death in the previous generation closes the file are reading the provision backwards; it is written precisely for that case. What it does require is that somebody able to speak to the relationship can still be produced.

Where the Ministry is satisfied, the effect is retrospective, and the Regulation says so:

Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanununun Uygulanmasına İlişkin Yönetmelik m.10 — The decision

“(1) Bakanlıkça yapılacak inceleme ve araştırma sonucunda Türk vatandaşı anadan doğduğu veya babadan olduğu tespit edilen kişinin, doğumundan itibaren Türk vatandaşı olduğu aile kütüğüne tescil edilir. (2) Türk vatandaşı anadan doğduğu veya babadan olduğunu ispata yarayacak yeterli bilgi ve belge bulunmaması halinde, ilgili kişinin bu yöndeki talebi Bakanlıkça reddedilir.”

(Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanununun Uygulanmasına İlişkin Yönetmelik m.10)

Unofficial translation: “A person who, following the examination and investigation to be carried out by the Ministry, is established to have been born of a Turkish mother or to a Turkish father is registered in the family register as having been a Turkish citizen from birth. Where there is insufficient information and documentation to establish birth of a Turkish mother or to a Turkish father, that person’s request is refused by the Ministry.”

Paragraph (1) confirms the point made under Article 6: the entry records citizenship from birth, not from the date of the decision. Paragraph (2) names the failure mode, and it is evidential — insufficient information and documentation, not ineligibility.

What the Applicant Has to Prove

Because paragraph (2) turns on evidence, the burden matters, and the Council of State has placed it squarely on the applicant. In a case where the claimant sought recognition through a Turkish father, the Turkish and Syrian registry entries for that father disagreed on his parents’ names and his place of birth. The Tenth Chamber set out what the claimant was expected to do:

“Uyuşmazlıkta; soybağı esasına göre Türk vatandaşlığını kazanma istemiyle başvuruda bulunan davacının, babası olduğunu ileri sürdüğü kişinin Türkiye ve Suriye nüfus kayıtlarında farklılıklar olduğu açık olup gerekirse babalık tespit davası açarak her türlü belge ve bilgi (Türk Vatandaşı akrabaları ile kan testi yapılması, şahit dinletilmesi vb. her türlü delil ile) ile Türk vatandaşı babadan doğduğu hususunu ispatlaması gerekmektedir.”

(Danıştay 10. Daire, E. 2015/485, K. 2020/5160, T. 19.11.2020 — bozma)

Unofficial translation: “In the dispute, it being clear that there are discrepancies between the Turkish and Syrian civil registry records of the person whom the claimant, applying to acquire Turkish citizenship on the basis of descent, asserts to be his father, the claimant must, by bringing an action for determination of paternity if necessary, prove by every kind of document and information (by every kind of evidence, such as blood testing with Turkish-citizen relatives, the hearing of witnesses and the like) that he was born of a Turkish-citizen father.”

The Chamber then drew the consequence for the burden:

“Bu durumda, davacının vatandaşlığa alınma başvurusunda ileri sürdüğü iddiasını ispatlayamadığı ve bu duruma yönelik ispat yükünün davalı idareye yüklenemeyeceği anlaşıldığından, davacının başvurusunun reddine ilişkin dava konusu işlemde hukuka aykırılık bulunmadığı sonucuna varılmıştır.”

(Danıştay 10. Daire, E. 2015/485, K. 2020/5160, T. 19.11.2020 — bozma)

Unofficial translation: “In this situation, since it is understood that the claimant was unable to prove the assertion advanced in his application for admission to citizenship, and that the burden of proof in that respect cannot be placed on the defendant administration, it has been concluded that there is no unlawfulness in the contested act refusing the claimant’s application.”

Read the two passages together and the picture is demanding but not closed. The burden sits on the applicant, and the administration is not obliged to investigate the family history for them. In exchange, the Chamber’s own list of acceptable evidence is wide: a paternity action, blood testing with Turkish-citizen relatives, witness evidence, “every kind of evidence”. Where the paper record is thin or inconsistent — the ordinary situation in families separated by a border or a war — the answer is not that the claim fails, but that it has to be built.

Decided by majority; one member would have upheld the first-instance annulment on the ground that the administration should have given the claimant a further opportunity to prove the link by other means, rather than refusing outright on the mismatch in the parents’ identity details.

Ottoman Ancestry and Older Losses of Citizenship

A recurring search, and one where the honest answer differs sharply from the impression left by the market: whether descent from an Ottoman-era family founds a claim to Turkish citizenship today. Under the law as it stands it does not. Article 7 attaches citizenship at birth through a parent who was a Turkish citizen at that time, and the Council of State decision quoted above rejects the ancestral mechanism in terms. There is no provision under which Ottoman lineage, however well documented, is converted into a citizenship claim.

What does exist is narrower and more useful, and it is worth knowing because it catches real families. Where an ancestor held Turkish citizenship under the Republic and lost it, the Law provides a way back — and it reaches a long way back, to the citizenship statutes of 1928 and 1964:

5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.43 — Those who lost or were stripped of citizenship under the repealed laws

“(1) Mülga 403 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanununun 25 inci maddesinin (a), (ç), (d) ve (e) bentleri uyarınca Türk vatandaşlığını kaybetmiş olan kişiler, başvurmaları halinde, millî güvenlik bakımından engel teşkil edecek bir hali bulunmamak kaydıyla, Türkiye’de ikamet etme şartı aranmaksızın Bakanlık kararı ile yeniden Türk vatandaşlığına alınabilirler. (2) Mülga 28/5/1928 tarihli ve 1312 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanununa göre vatandaşlıktan ıskat edilmiş kişiler, başvurmaları hâlinde, millî güvenlik bakımından engel teşkil edecek bir hâli bulunmamak kaydıyla, Türkiye’de ikamet etme şartı aranmaksızın Bakanlık kararı ile yeniden Türk vatandaşlığına alınabilirler. (3) Millî güvenlik bakımından engel teşkil edecek hali bulunanların talepleri Bakanlıkça reddedilir.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.43)

Unofficial translation: “Persons who lost Turkish citizenship pursuant to subparagraphs (a), (ç), (d) and (e) of Article 25 of the repealed Turkish Citizenship Law No. 403 may, upon application, be re-admitted to Turkish citizenship by decision of the Ministry without the condition of residing in Türkiye being sought, provided they have no circumstance constituting an obstacle in terms of national security. Persons who were stripped of citizenship under the repealed Turkish Citizenship Law No. 1312 of 28/5/1928 may, upon application, be re-admitted to Turkish citizenship by decision of the Ministry without the condition of residing in Türkiye being sought, provided they have no circumstance constituting an obstacle in terms of national security. The requests of persons having a circumstance constituting an obstacle in terms of national security are refused by the Ministry.”

The reach of this article is the point. It is addressed to people who lost a citizenship they held, under statutes repealed decades ago, and it lets them return without any residence requirement. It is not addressed to their descendants, and it does not create a line of inheritance; the person who lost the citizenship is the person who may apply.

So the diaspora question resolves into a factual one, and it is worth answering before anything else is filed. Was the ancestor a citizen of the Republic who lost that status — in which case Article 43 (or, for renunciation with permission, Articles 13 and 28) may be in play for them, and Blue Card rights may reach their descendants to the third degree? Or is the connection to the Ottoman period only — in which case the law offers no route, and applications built on genealogy alone will not succeed regardless of how the case is presented.

The General Route: Five Years’ Uninterrupted Residence

The most widely known route rests on long residence:

“(1) Türk vatandaşlığını kazanmak isteyen yabancılarda; a) Kendi millî kanununa, vatansız ise Türk kanunlarına göre ergin ve ayırt etme gücüne sahip olmak, b) Başvuru tarihinden geriye doğru Türkiye’de kesintisiz beş yıl ikamet etmek, c) Türkiye’de yerleşmeye karar verdiğini davranışları ile teyit etmek, ç) Genel sağlık bakımından tehlike teşkil eden bir hastalığı bulunmamak, d) İyi ahlak sahibi olmak, e) Yeteri kadar Türkçe konuşabilmek, f) Türkiye’de kendisinin ve bakmakla yükümlü olduğu kimselerin geçimini sağlayacak gelire veya mesleğe sahip olmak, g) Millî güvenlik ve kamu düzeni bakımından engel teşkil edecek bir hali bulunmamak, şartları aranır.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.11)

Unofficial translation: “(1) Foreigners wishing to acquire Turkish citizenship shall be required to satisfy the conditions of: a) being of age and having capacity to distinguish under their own national law, or under Turkish law if stateless; b) having resided in Türkiye without interruption for five years counted back from the application date; c) confirming by their conduct their decision to settle in Türkiye; ç) not having an illness constituting a danger in terms of public health; d) being of good moral character; e) speaking sufficient Turkish; f) having an income or occupation sufficient to provide for themselves and their dependants in Türkiye; g) not having any circumstance constituting an obstacle in terms of national security and public order.”

The phrase “uninterrupted five years” is critical: long periods spent abroad may break the residence. Note that the general route is the one carrying the language condition in paragraph (e) — a point that matters when comparing it with the marriage route below.

The Exceptional Route: Investment and Extraordinary Service

There is an exceptional route, not tied to the residence requirement, that operates by Presidential decree:

“(1) Millî güvenlik ve kamu düzeni bakımından engel teşkil edecek bir hali bulunmamak şartıyla Cumhurbaşkanı kararı ile aşağıda belirtilen yabancılar Türk vatandaşlığını kazanabilirler.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.12)

Unofficial translation: “(1) Provided that there is no obstacle in terms of national security and public order, the foreigners specified below may acquire Turkish citizenship by decision of the President.”

This article covers persons who render extraordinary service in scientific, economic, social, sporting, cultural or artistic fields, and the investment-based cases listed in the law. On the investment route, the amounts and conditions are set not in the law but in secondary legislation and change over time; the current threshold must therefore be verified at the time of application, and the thresholds themselves are set out in Turkish citizenship by investment. Where the investment is made through a Turkish company, the company itself is formed under the ordinary rules that apply to any foreign investor; see company formation in Turkey for foreigners.

Turkish Citizenship by Marriage

A common misconception is that marrying a Turkish citizen automatically confers citizenship. The law expressly rejects this:

“(1) Bir Türk vatandaşı ile evlenme doğrudan Türk vatandaşlığını kazandırmaz. Ancak bir Türk vatandaşı ile en az üç yıldan beri evli olan ve evliliği devam eden yabancılar Türk vatandaşlığını kazanmak üzere başvuruda bulunabilir. Başvuru sahiplerinde; a) Aile birliği içinde yaşama, b) Evlilik birliği ile bağdaşmayacak bir faaliyette bulunmama, c) Millî güvenlik ve kamu düzeni bakımından engel teşkil edecek bir hali bulunmama, şartları aranır.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.16)

Unofficial translation: “(1) Marriage to a Turkish citizen does not directly confer Turkish citizenship. However, foreigners who have been married to a Turkish citizen for at least three years and whose marriage is continuing may apply to acquire Turkish citizenship. Applicants are required to satisfy the conditions of: a) living in family unity, b) not engaging in an activity incompatible with the marriage union, c) not having any circumstance constituting an obstacle in terms of national security and public order.”

So marriage alone is not enough; a marriage of at least three years that is continuing is required. The article also requires conditions such as living in family unity — a check against sham (marriages of convenience).

Is There a Turkish Language Test for Citizenship by Marriage?

No — and this is one of the most frequently confused points. The requirement of “yeteri kadar Türkçe konuşabilmek” (speaking sufficient Turkish) appears in paragraph (e) of Article 11, quoted above, that is, among the conditions of the general route. The condition list in Article 16 consists of three items only: (a) living in family unity, (b) not engaging in an activity incompatible with the marriage union, and (c) not having any circumstance constituting an obstacle in terms of national security and public order. The language condition does not appear in that list.

The difference can be verified directly by comparing the two provisions quoted verbatim above: a language condition is sought from an applicant proceeding on the general route, whereas an applicant proceeding through marriage is bound by Article 16’s own three-item list. The warning in Article 10 — that satisfying the conditions confers no absolute right — applies to both routes alike.

Re-acquisition After Loss: Two Regimes

Someone who once held Turkish citizenship does not re-enter through the general route. The Law separates them by how citizenship was lost. Where the loss was voluntary or derivative, no residence period is required:

5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.13 — Re-acquisition without a residence requirement

“(1) Millî güvenlik bakımından engel teşkil edecek bir hali bulunmamak şartıyla aşağıda belirtilen kişiler Türkiye’de ikamet etme süresine bakılmaksızın, Türk vatandaşlığını Bakanlık kararıyla yeniden kazanabilirler. a) Çıkma izni almak suretiyle Türk vatandaşlığını kaybedenler. b) Ana veya babalarına bağlı olarak Türk vatandaşlığını kaybedenlerden 21 inci maddede öngörülen süre içerisinde seçme hakkını kullanmayanlar.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.13)

Unofficial translation: “Provided that they have no circumstance constituting an obstacle in terms of national security, the persons specified below may re-acquire Turkish citizenship by decision of the Ministry, irrespective of any period of residence in Türkiye: a) those who lost Turkish citizenship by obtaining permission to renounce; b) those who lost Turkish citizenship as dependants of their mother or father and did not exercise the right of option within the period provided in Article 21.”

Where citizenship was withdrawn or lost under Articles 29 and 34, the position is stricter — a three-year residence requirement applies, and for one group the decision level rises to the President:

5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.14 — Re-acquisition subject to a residence requirement

“(1) 29 uncu madde uyarınca Türk vatandaşlığı kaybettirilenler Cumhurbaşkanı kararıyla, 34 üncü madde uyarınca Türk vatandaşlığını kaybedenler Bakanlık kararıyla, millî güvenlik bakımından engel teşkil edecek bir halinin bulunmaması ve Türkiye’de üç yıl ikamet etmek şartıyla Türk vatandaşlığını yeniden kazanabilirler.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.14)

Unofficial translation: “Those whose Turkish citizenship was withdrawn under Article 29 may re-acquire Turkish citizenship by decision of the President, and those who lost Turkish citizenship under Article 34 by decision of the Ministry, provided that they have no circumstance constituting an obstacle in terms of national security and that they reside in Türkiye for three years.”

So the first question for a former citizen is not “which route do I qualify for” but “under which provision did I lose it” — that single fact decides between no residence requirement and three years. And the question reaches further back than Articles 13 and 14: for losses under the repealed Laws No. 403 and No. 1312, Article 43, set out above under ancestry, supplies a third regime, also without a residence requirement.

Citizens of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus

One group is dealt with in a single sentence, and on terms available to nobody else:

5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.42 — Citizens of the TRNC

“(1) Türk vatandaşlığını kazanmak üzere başvuruda bulunan Kuzey Kıbrıs Türk Cumhuriyeti vatandaşları, Türk vatandaşı olmak istediklerini yazılı olarak beyan ettikleri takdirde Türk vatandaşlığını kazanırlar. (2) Kuzey Kıbrıs Türk Cumhuriyeti vatandaşlığını sonradan kazanmış olanlar hakkında 11 inci maddede belirtilen hükümler uygulanır.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.42)

Unofficial translation: “Citizens of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus who apply in order to acquire Turkish citizenship acquire Turkish citizenship if they declare in writing that they wish to become Turkish citizens. The provisions set out in Article 11 apply to those who acquired citizenship of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus subsequently.”

Paragraph (1) is unlike anything else in the Law. There is no residence period, no language condition, no discretionary assessment, and critically no reservation of the Article 10 caveat that meeting the conditions confers no absolute right. The written declaration is itself the operative act: those who make it acquire citizenship.

Paragraph (2) then closes the obvious gap. The concession belongs to TRNC citizens by origin, not to anyone who has since become one; a person who acquired TRNC citizenship subsequently is routed back to Article 11 and its five-year conditions. The dividing question is therefore not whether you hold a TRNC passport today but how you came to hold it.

Dual Citizenship: Does Türkiye Allow It?

Turkish law does not prohibit holding more than one citizenship. It does not treat the second citizenship as invisible either: what the Law sets up is a registration step, not a permission step.

5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.44 — Multiple citizenship

“(1) Herhangi bir nedenle yabancı bir devlet vatandaşlığını kazanan kişilerin, bu durumlarına ilişkin belgeleri ibraz etmeleri ve yapılacak inceleme sonucunda kayden aynı kişiler olduklarının tespiti halinde, nüfus aile kütüklerindeki kayıtlarına çok vatandaşlığa sahip olduklarına dair açıklama yapılır.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.44)

Unofficial translation: “Where persons who acquire the citizenship of a foreign state for any reason produce the documents relating to that situation, and it is established as a result of the examination carried out that the entries refer to the same persons, an annotation that they hold multiple citizenship is made in their records in the civil family registers.”

Read the provision for what it does not say. It does not ask anyone for permission, and it does not make a foreign citizenship a ground of loss. What it requires is that the person produce documents and that the register be annotated once the entries are confirmed to refer to the same person. That is an identity-matching exercise, not an approval.

The real limit sits on the other side of the border, and it is the part most often missed. Whether you may keep the citizenship you already hold is decided by the law of that state, not by Turkish law. Some states withdraw their citizenship automatically when a national naturalises elsewhere; others permit dual nationality without difficulty. Because Turkish law cannot change that outcome, the question has to be put to the other legal system separately, and before the Turkish application rather than after it.

Article 28, discussed above under descent, is the mirror image of this section. It exists precisely because some people do give up Turkish citizenship, often to satisfy a foreign state that does not tolerate dual nationality; the Blue Card is what the Law leaves to them and to their descendants afterwards.

Where the Application Is Filed, and What It Costs

Two practical provisions that are easy to find and often skipped. First, the filing venue is fixed by statute, and it differs depending on where you are:

5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.37 — Application authority and procedure

“(1) Türk vatandaşlığının kazanılması ve kaybına ilişkin başvurular yurt içinde ikamet edilen yer valiliğine, yurt dışında ise dış temsilciliklere bizzat veya bu hakkın kullanılmasına ilişkin vekâletname ile yapılır.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.37)

Unofficial translation: “Applications relating to the acquisition and loss of Turkish citizenship are made to the governorship of the place of residence within the country, and abroad to the foreign missions, in person or by a power of attorney relating to the exercise of this right.”

Three things are settled by that sentence. Inside Türkiye the file goes to the governorship of the province where you reside — not to a ministry in Ankara, and not to a municipality. Abroad it goes to the consulate or embassy, which is what makes the registration route in the preceding section workable for families who have never lived in Türkiye. And the words “bizzat veya … vekâletname ile” confirm that the filing may be made either in person or through a representative holding a power of attorney for the purpose.

Second, there is a service charge on subsequent acquisition, and its amount is not in the Law:

5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.45 — Service charge for citizenship proceedings

“(1) Türk vatandaşlığının sonradan kazanılmasına ilişkin verilen hizmet bedeli karşılığı, Bakanlık ve Maliye Bakanlığınca birlikte belirlenir. Tahsil edilen hizmet bedeli tutarları bütçeye gelir kaydedilir. (2) 193 sayılı Gelir Vergisi Kanununa göre geliri olmayanlar ve kendileri ile birlikte işlem gören ergin olmayan çocukları için birinci fıkra uyarınca belirlenen hizmet bedeli alınmaz.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.45)

Unofficial translation: “The consideration for the service charge given in relation to the subsequent acquisition of Turkish citizenship is determined jointly by the Ministry and the Ministry of Finance. The amounts of service charge collected are recorded as revenue in the budget. The service charge determined under the first paragraph is not taken from those who have no income under Income Tax Law No. 193, or from their non-adult children processed together with them.”

Because the figure is set by administrative determination rather than by the Law, any amount quoted in an article — including this one — would be out of date on its own terms; the current charge has to be confirmed at the time of filing. Paragraph (2) carries the more useful and less publicised rule: those without income under the Income Tax Law, and their minor children processed with them, are exempt. Note also that the charge attaches to subsequent acquisition. It has no application to a registration file under Articles 6 and 7, because nothing is being acquired there.

If the Application Is Refused

Citizenship proceedings are administrative acts. If the application is refused despite the conditions being considered met, the basis and grounds of the refusal may be assessed and recourse to the administrative courts is possible. But, as Article 10 reminds us, since meeting the conditions does not grant an absolute right, judicial review turns on the lawfulness of the act — no assessment can guarantee the outcome in advance.

Before the merits, the clock. Administrative litigation time limits run from notification, and the Law says who must be notified:

5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.41 — Notification

“(1) Türk vatandaşlığının kazanılmasına ve kaybına ilişkin kararlar ilgiliye ve başvuru makamlarına tebliğ olunur. 29 uncu madde uyarınca verilen kaybettirme kararları Resmi Gazete’de yayımlanır ve yayımlandığı tarihte tebliğ edilmiş sayılır.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.41)

Unofficial translation: “Decisions relating to the acquisition and loss of Turkish citizenship are notified to the person concerned and to the application authorities. Decisions of deprivation given pursuant to Article 29 are published in the Official Gazette and are deemed notified on the date of publication.”

The second sentence is the trap. For deprivation decisions under Article 29, publication in the Official Gazette is itself the notification, and the period runs from the date of publication whether or not the person ever saw it. Someone living abroad can therefore lose the opportunity to challenge without having received anything at all. For ordinary refusals the first sentence applies and time runs from actual notification — which is why the notification document, and its date, should be kept rather than discarded.

What that review looks like in practice is shown most clearly by two decisions of the Council of State pointing in opposite directions.

A conviction is not automatically an obstacle

The refusal ground most often invoked is the national-security and public-order condition. It is not a formula the administration can apply to any conviction. In a case where the applicant had been given a suspended ten-month sentence for causing zoning pollution, the Council of State held:

“Bu durumda, davacı hakkında yapılan yargılama sonucu işlediği sabit görülen imar kirliliğine neden olmak suçunun niteliği ve yukarıda bahsedilen hususlar birlikte değerlendirildiğinde, anılan suç davacının Türk vatandaşı olmasına engel teşkil edecek mahiyette olmayıp, bu nedenle davacının milli güvenlik ve kamu düzeni bakımından engel teşkil edecek hali bulunduğundan bahisle Türk vatandaşlığına alınma talebiyle yaptığı başvurunun reddedilmesinde hukuka uyarlık bulunmamaktadır.”

(Danıştay 10. Daire, E. 2021/3093, K. 2022/289, T. 20.01.2022 — bozma)

Unofficial translation: “In this situation, when the nature of the offence of causing zoning pollution, established as committed following the proceedings against the claimant, is assessed together with the matters set out above, that offence is not of a nature constituting an obstacle to the claimant becoming a Turkish citizen; the refusal of the application made with a view to acquiring Turkish citizenship, on the ground that the claimant had a circumstance constituting an obstacle in terms of national security and public order, is therefore not in accordance with the law.”

The reasoning is about the nature of the offence, assessed with the surrounding circumstances — not about the bare existence of a criminal record. The Chamber noted that its conclusion was in line with a decision of the Council of State’s Administrative Case Chambers Board.

A residence address certificate is not a residence permit

The opposite outcome, and a document-level trap worth knowing before filing. The applicant, married to a Turkish citizen since 1990, filed under Article 16 without a residence permit, then re-filed with a residence address certificate instead. The Council of State distinguished the two documents:

“Sonuç olarak, iki belgenin hukuki niteliği birbirinden farklı olup, dava konusu düzenlemeyle ikamet izni istenilmesindeki amaç, yabancının Türkiye’de ikamet ettiği yerleşim yerini tespit etmek değil, Türkiye’de yasal olarak bulunup bulunmadığını ve kurallara uyma niyetini sorgulayıp teyit etmektir.”

(Danıştay 10. Daire, E. 2019/10218, K. 2024/2102, T. 22.05.2024 — davanın reddine)

Unofficial translation: “Consequently, the legal nature of the two documents differs from each other, and the purpose of requiring a residence permit under the contested regulation is not to determine the place of residence where the foreigner resides in Türkiye, but to question and confirm whether they are lawfully present in Türkiye and their intention to comply with the rules.”

On that basis the claim was dismissed:

“Bu durumda, davacı tarafından sunulan yerleşim yeri belgesinin Yönetmelik’te istenilen ikamet tezkeresinin (ikamet izni) yerine geçemeyeceği ve ikamet izni veya bu izinden muaf olduğuna yönelik bir belge sunulamadığı dikkate alındığında, dava konusu Yönetmelik uyarınca tesis edilen Hatay Valiliği işleminde de hukuka ve mevzuata aykırılık bulunmadığı sonucuna varılmaktadır.”

(Danıştay 10. Daire, E. 2019/10218, K. 2024/2102, T. 22.05.2024 — davanın reddine)

Unofficial translation: “In this situation, taking into account that the residence address certificate submitted by the claimant cannot take the place of the residence permit required under the Regulation, and that no residence permit or document showing exemption from that permit could be submitted, it is concluded that there is no unlawfulness or non-compliance with the legislation in the act of the Hatay Governorship established pursuant to the contested Regulation.”

Read together, the two decisions mark out the shape of the review: the administration must be able to justify a substantive refusal ground on the nature of the facts, while the applicant must satisfy the documentary conditions exactly — thirty-four years of marriage did not cure a missing residence permit.

When a Citizenship Decision Is Withdrawn or Corrected

A decision in your favour is not always the end of the matter, and the distinction between the two provisions that say so is worth holding on to, because one is serious and the other is routine.

The serious one:

5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.40 — Withdrawal of citizenship decisions

“(1) Türk vatandaşlığının kazanılması veya kaybına ilişkin kararlar, hukuki şartlar oluşmadan veya mükerrer olarak verildiği sonradan anlaşıldığı takdirde geri alınır.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.40)

Unofficial translation: “Decisions relating to the acquisition or loss of Turkish citizenship are withdrawn where it is subsequently understood that they were given without the legal conditions having arisen, or that they were duplicated.”

Two grounds, and both are narrow. A decision is withdrawn where the legal conditions had not arisen when it was given, or where it duplicated an existing decision. This is not a general power to revisit a grant that has become inconvenient; it addresses a decision that was defective at the moment it was made. It is, however, the provision behind the fear that citizenship once granted can be undone, and the fear is not baseless where the original file contained something untrue. Note the drafting: the article says such decisions are withdrawn, not that they may be.

The routine one is a different instrument altogether and is often confused with it:

5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.39 — Correction of material errors and completion

“(1) Bu Kanuna göre alınan kararlarda maddi bir hata veya eksikliğin bulunduğunun sonradan anlaşılması halinde, dayanağına uygun şekilde Genel Müdürlükçe düzeltme veya tamamlama kararı alınır.”

(5901 sayılı Türk Vatandaşlığı Kanunu m.39)

Unofficial translation: “Where it is subsequently understood that there is a material error or omission in decisions taken under this Law, a correction or completion decision is taken by the Directorate General in conformity with its basis.”

A misspelled name, a wrong date of birth, a missing family member on the decision — these are material errors, corrected by the Directorate General “in conformity with its basis”, meaning in line with the underlying documents. A correction under Article 39 does not reopen the citizenship; it repairs the record of it. Receiving one is not a step towards Article 40, and the two should not be read as a sequence.

Common Mistakes

• Treating meeting the conditions as a guarantee. The law expressly states that meeting the conditions does not grant an absolute right (Article 10).
• Assuming marriage confers citizenship immediately. A continuing marriage of at least three years and further conditions are required (Article 16).
• Treating “uninterrupted five years” as interrupted. Long periods abroad may break the five-year residence (Article 11).
• Relying on old investment figures. On the investment route amounts are set by secondary legislation and change; the current threshold must be verified (Article 12).
• Overlooking birth. Citizenship is acquired by birth or subsequently (Article 5); a person with a Turkish parent may already be a citizen by descent rather than an applicant (Article 7).
• Sending a residence address certificate instead of a residence permit. The two documents have different legal natures and one does not substitute for the other (10th Chamber, E. 2019/10218, K. 2024/2102).
• Assuming any conviction closes the door. The review looks at the nature of the offence, not the bare record (10th Chamber, E. 2021/3093, K. 2022/289).
• Treating a grandparent as an ancestral claim. Descent attaches at birth (Article 7); a grandparent’s citizenship does not revive a generation later. Where the ancestor renounced, Article 28 gives descendants to the third degree Blue Card rights, not citizenship.
• Assuming Türkiye must approve a second citizenship. Article 44 provides for annotation in the register, not permission; the binding limit is the other state’s law on retaining its own citizenship.
• Re-applying through the general route after losing citizenship. Re-acquisition has its own regime, and which one applies depends on how citizenship was lost (Articles 13 and 14).
• Treating a refusal as final. Citizenship is an administrative act; a refusal can be reviewed in the administrative courts.
• Filing a naturalisation application when the file is really a registration. Citizenship by birth arises automatically and takes effect from the moment of birth (Article 6); where it applies, the file records a status rather than requesting one.
• Reading an absent registry entry as an absent citizenship. Proof of citizenship is subject to no particular form, and the listed records are a presumption rather than the citizenship itself (Article 36).
• Assuming a deceased Turkish parent closes the file. The Regulation expressly reaches siblings, and failing siblings third-degree relatives, for a recorded statement of kinship (Regulation, Article 9(1)(e)).
• Expecting the administration to prove the family link. The burden sits on the applicant, though the admissible evidence is wide — a paternity action, blood testing with Turkish-citizen relatives, witnesses (10th Chamber, E. 2015/485, K. 2020/5160).
• Building a claim on Ottoman lineage. Article 43 addresses persons who themselves lost citizenship under the repealed Laws No. 403 and No. 1312; it is not a route for descendants and not a genealogical claim.
• Applying on the Article 7(3) branch before descent is established. Where the Turkish parent is the father and the parents were not married, the family-law step comes first; a citizenship file opened earlier is premature.
• Missing a deprivation decision published in the Official Gazette. Under Article 41 publication is itself notification, and time runs from the date of publication.
• Confusing a correction with a withdrawal. Article 39 repairs a material error in the record; Article 40 withdraws a decision that was defective when it was made.
• Treating the TRNC concession as general. The written declaration route applies to citizens of the TRNC; those who acquired that citizenship subsequently are routed to Article 11 (Article 42(2)).

Summary

Turkish citizenship is acquired subsequently by three main routes: the general route (Article 11 — five years’ uninterrupted residence and other conditions), the exceptional route (Article 12 — investment/extraordinary service, by Presidential decree) and the marriage route (Article 16 — a continuing marriage of at least three years). The law’s core caveat is in Article 10: meeting the conditions does not grant an absolute right to citizenship. Because amounts on the investment route are set by secondary legislation and change, the current threshold must always be verified at the time of application; in the event of refusal, the act may be reviewed in the administrative courts — where the Council of State has held both that the nature of an offence, not the bare record, decides the public-order ground (E. 2021/3093, K. 2022/289) and that a residence address certificate cannot replace a residence permit (E. 2019/10218, K. 2024/2102). Those who once held Turkish citizenship follow a separate re-acquisition regime that turns on how it was lost (Articles 13 and 14), while their descendants up to the third degree may hold Blue Card rights under Article 28 rather than citizenship itself. Turkish law does not prohibit multiple citizenship and provides for it to be annotated in the civil register (Article 44); whether an existing citizenship can be retained is decided by the other state’s law. Before any of that, however, comes the question of whether an application is needed at all: citizenship by birth is acquired automatically and takes effect from the moment of birth (Article 6), so a person born to a Turkish parent is registered rather than naturalised, with the Ministry establishing the position and the entry recording citizenship from birth (Regulation, Articles 8 to 10). The burden of establishing the family link rests on the applicant, and the Council of State has both rejected the ancestral model, under which the bond would pass down a line free of any record or condition (E. 2015/1955, K. 2020/3652), and confirmed that the administration cannot be required to carry that burden, while accepting a wide range of evidence to discharge it (E. 2015/485, K. 2020/5160). Determining at the outset which of these positions you occupy — citizen already, former citizen, or applicant — is the most important step, and it decides the venue too, since files are lodged with the provincial governorship inside Türkiye and with the foreign missions abroad (Article 37).