Restraining Order

What is a Restraining Order?

A restraining order is a preventive and protective measure stipulated in Law No. 6284 on the Protection of the Family and the Prevention of Violence Against Women.

The primary aim of a restraining order is to prohibit the perpetrator from approaching, communicating with, or living in the same residence as the victim for a specified period of time. It also seeks to prevent behaviors such as damaging property, using alcohol or drugs, and other harmful acts — ultimately ensuring the safety of the victim.

A victim may request a restraining order against a perpetrator due to experiences of violence, threats of violence, insults, humiliation, or persistent stalking. Accordingly, individuals who are eligible to request a restraining order can generally be listed as follows:

1. Individuals and children who are victims of violence
2. Individuals and children who are at risk of being subjected to violence
3. Individuals who are victims of one-sided persistent stalking

How to Obtain a Restraining Order?

A person who wishes to obtain a restraining order can do so by submitting a petition to the Family Court. However, in cases where this is not possible, the victim may request a restraining order after giving a statement at a police station or to the gendarmerie.

According to the relevant law, the authority must issue a restraining order as soon as possible, based solely on the victim’s statement, without requiring any documents or evidence (Article 8 of the Law on the Protection of the Family and the Prevention of Violence Against Women).

Protective Measures That May Be Issued Upon a Restraining Order Request

Protective measures are defined in Article 8 of Law No. 6284 on the Protection of the Family and the Prevention of Violence Against Women as follows:

(1) A protective measure may be issued upon the request of the concerned individual, or upon application by the Ministry, law enforcement officers, or the public prosecutor. Requests for protective measures can be submitted to the nearest and most accessible judge, local authority, or law enforcement unit.
(2) A protective measure can initially be granted for a maximum duration of six months. However, if it is determined that the violence or the threat of violence is likely to continue, the duration or type of the measures may be extended, modified, terminated, or continued as is—either ex officio or upon the request of the protected person, the Ministry, or law enforcement officers.
(3) In order to issue a protective measure, no evidence or documentation is required to prove that violence has occurred. A preventive measure must be issued without delay. Issuance of such a decision must not be postponed in a manner that could jeopardize the objective of this Law.
(4) The protective order must be communicated or notified to both the protected person and the perpetrator. However, a decision rejecting the request for a protective order is notified only to the protected person. In urgent cases, the protective order issued by the relevant law enforcement unit must be immediately delivered to the perpetrator through an official report.
(5) During the service or announcement of the order, the perpetrator must be warned that any violation of the protective order may result in coercive imprisonment.
(6) If deemed necessary, upon request or ex officio, the personal information, identity details, address, and other critical information of the protected person and other family members, which may compromise the effectiveness of the protection, shall be kept confidential in all official records. A separate address is determined for notifications. Those who unlawfully disclose, share, or reveal such information will be subject to the relevant provisions of the Turkish Penal Code No. 5237 dated 26/9/2004.
(7) Upon request, the personal belongings and documents of the concerned parties shall be delivered to them through the assistance of law enforcement.

In this context, the legislator has classified the types of protective measures that can be issued upon a restraining order request into two categories: “protective” and “preventive” measures. As stated in Articles 3 to 5 of Law No. 6284:

Protective Measures:

a) Providing appropriate shelter for the individual and, if necessary, for any accompanying children, either at their current location or in another suitable place.
b) Granting temporary financial assistance, without prejudice to aid provided under other laws.
c) Providing psychological, vocational, legal, and social guidance and counseling services.
ç) In cases where there is a life-threatening danger, placing the individual under temporary protection, either upon request or ex officio.
d) If necessary, providing access to daycare services to support the protected person’s participation in the workforce—limited to four months if the individual is not employed, and two months if employed—provided that the costs do not exceed half of the net monthly minimum wage determined annually for individuals over the age of sixteen, and that the expenses are documented. These services are funded from the relevant allocation of the Ministry’s budget.

Preventive Measures:

a) Refraining from any words or behaviors directed at the violence victim that involve threats of violence, insults, humiliation, or degradation.
b) Immediate removal from the shared residence or current location, and allocation of the shared residence to the protected person.
c) Not approaching the protected persons, their residence, school, or workplace.
ç) If there is a previously issued personal contact order regarding the children, ensuring that personal contact takes place in the presence of a companion, limiting the contact, or completely terminating it.
d) If deemed necessary, refraining from approaching the protected person’s relatives, witnesses, and children, even if they have not experienced violence themselves, without prejudice to cases involving personal contact orders.
e) Not damaging the protected person’s personal belongings or household items.
f) Not disturbing the protected person via communication tools or any other means.
g) Surrendering legally owned or carried firearms to law enforcement authorities.
ğ) Even if performing a public duty that requires carrying a firearm, surrendering the firearm assigned to them due to this duty to their institution.
h) Not using alcohol, drugs, or stimulants at the locations where the protected persons are present, not approaching the protected persons or their locations while under the influence of these substances, and if addicted, ensuring examination and treatment including hospitalization.
ı) Applying to a healthcare institution for examination or treatment and ensuring that the treatment is provided.

These measures are explained as follows.

Duration of the Restraining Order

The duration of a restraining order is subject to the period determined by the judge or police based on the specific circumstances of the case, with an upper limit of 6 months. As a rule, this period begins to run from the date the restraining order is notified or communicated to the concerned party. Additionally, before the expiration of the period, the individual has the right to apply to the authorized authority for the continuation or extension of the restraining order.

Violation of the Restraining Order

If a person subject to a restraining order engages in actions or behaviors that violate the order, they may be sentenced to coercive imprisonment for a period ranging from 3 to 10 days. For each repeated violation, the coercive imprisonment period may be increased to between 15 and 30 days. However, by law, the total duration of coercive imprisonment cannot exceed 6 months.

Authority Authorized to Issue a Restraining Order

Although the authority legally authorized to issue a restraining order is the Family Court judge, in urgent situations requiring immediate decisions, this authority may also be exercised by the police or gendarmerie. Additionally, if there is an ongoing case such as divorce or separation between the parties, the court handling that case is also authorized to issue a restraining order. In this regard, the parties may need a lawyer, such as an attorney in Antalya, to make the relevant request.

Frequently Asked Questions

1.How Long Does It Take to Obtain a Restraining Order?

Obtaining a restraining order takes approximately 1 day if the procedural steps related to the request are carried out correctly and promptly. Therefore, if at least one of the mentioned conditions is met, the victim will be able to receive the restraining order within the specified time.

2.How Is the Restraining Order Notified to the Other Party?

If the restraining order request is approved, the decision is explained and notified to both the victim and the perpetrator. However, if the request is denied, the rejection decision is notified only to the person seeking protection.

3.Can a Restraining Order Be Appealed?

An appeal against a restraining order can be made by the person subject to the order by submitting a petition to the Family Court. In this regard, the individual must file the appeal within 2 weeks from the date the restraining order is explained and notified to them, which is the statutory deadline specified in Article 9 of the Law on the Protection of the Family and the Prevention of Violence Against Women.

4.Can a Restraining Order Be Cancelled?

Since the person who requested the restraining order has personally made this request, there is generally no need to cancel the order. However, in cases such as reconciliation or settlement, the victim may choose to cancel the restraining order voluntarily. The cancellation request is made by the victim applying to the Family Court.

5.I Have Obtained a Restraining Order; Can I Call by Phone?

Since any form of harassment of the protected person by the perpetrator constitutes a violation of the restraining order, calling by phone is also considered a breach of the order. As a result, the violator may be sentenced to coercive imprisonment.

6.Is the Restraining Order Recorded in the Criminal Record (GBT)?

Since a restraining order is a type of protective measure, it is not recorded in the criminal record of the person subject to the order, and therefore, inquiries regarding this decision are not possible.

Some Supreme Court Decisions Regarding Restraining Orders

1. “Following the decision of the Mersin 2nd Family Court dated 15.11.2012 and numbered 2012/584-584, which subjected E.. Ş.., who committed an act in violation of Law No. 6284 on the Protection of the Family and Prevention of Violence Against Women, to 5 days of coercive imprisonment pursuant to Article 13/1 of the said Law, and the rejection by the Mersin 3rd Family Court of the objection by the Düzce Public Prosecutor’s Office regarding the non-finalization of this coercive imprisonment decision, dated 20.12.2012 and numbered 2012/641-641, the file was examined… It was determined that the coercive imprisonment decision given by the Mersin 2nd Family Court is subject to objection, that the finalization process should be carried out after this stage, and therefore, the rejection of the objection on this basis in the written decision was deemed incorrect.” (Supreme Court 2nd Civil Chamber, dated 05.03.2015, Case No. 2014/17763, Decision No. 2015/3728)
2. “According to the provisions of Law No. 6284 on the Protection of the Family and Prevention of Violence Against Women, preventive measures specified in Article 5, paragraph 1, subparagraphs (a), (b), and (c) of this Law were ordered for a period of two months. Upon objection by the person subject to the measure, the … 2nd Civil Court of First Instance definitively rejected the objection on 06.05.2012 (Law No. 6284, Article 9/1). Decisions made upon objections to protective measures issued under Law No. 6284 are final (Law No. 6284, Article 9/3) and cannot be appealed. Therefore, the appeal request against the decision, which was definitively made upon objection and for which no appeal is allowed by law, should be rejected.” (Supreme Court 2nd Civil Chamber, dated 13.05.2013, Case No. 2012/16521, Decision No. 2013/13336)
3. “Upon the request of the attorney of … for the allocation of the jointly occupied residence at Poligon Neighborhood, Seba Vista Site A-1 Block D:3, İstinye/Istanbul to the client, for the opposing party and their relatives to refrain from approaching the said residence and other places where the joint child is present, for the removal of the personal relationship between the opposing party and the joint child, for the opposing party to refrain from harassing the client and their relatives through communication tools, for the prevention of violence, threats, and insults by the opposing party against the client and the joint child, and for measures to prevent the opposing party from damaging the client’s personal belongings and shared household items, the Istanbul 14th Family Court issued an interim decision dated 30/04/2020 and numbered 2020/222, ordering pursuant to Articles 5/1-a, 5/1-c, and 5/1-f of Law No. 6284 that … shall not engage in words or behaviors involving threats of violence, insults, humiliation, or degradation toward the violence victim …, shall not approach the victim or the victim’s residence, school, and workplace, and shall not harass the victim by communication tools or other means…” (Supreme Court 7th Criminal Chamber, dated 08.12.2021, Case No. 2021/20286, Decision No. 2021/16925)
4. In the specific case; the plaintiff requests provisional alimony for herself and the joint children based on the claim of justified separate living. In the socio-economic investigation, it was determined that the plaintiff is a housewife with no income, living separately from the defendant together with the joint child; the defendant works as a laborer, earns a monthly salary of 900 TL, lives separately from his spouse, and there is a restraining order against him. Considering the existence of a restraining order against the defendant in the divorce case filed against the plaintiff, it is undeniable that the plaintiff spouse is justified in living separately. Within the framework of the above legal regulations, since the parties are still living separately and the plaintiff spouse is justified in doing so, alimony should be awarded for the plaintiff and the children in an appropriate amount proportional to the defendant’s income and according to the principle of equity emphasized in Article 4 of the Turkish Civil Code. The written dismissal of the case due to a mistaken evaluation is deemed incorrect and necessitates reversal. (Supreme Court 3rd Civil Chamber, dated 03.03.2016, Case No. 2015/18088, Decision No. 2016/3160)
5. In the reviewed file, despite the restraining order against the defendant …, he went to the residence with … to collect his belongings. The mother …, authorized to give consent for those living in the residence, admitted … into the house, and after admitting him, explicitly did not want … to leave the house. Meanwhile, …, who was not present at the scene but heard the voices and called the police, led to officers arriving and apprehending the defendants. It is established in the file that …, who entered the residence, was admitted by … who was authorized to give consent, and there was no clear declaration of intent to leave the house. Upon hearing the argument between mother and daughter, the father called the police, who arrived at the scene and took the parties to the police station. It is also confirmed that …, who is friends with the daughter of …, was called and asked to bring the daughter home. RESULT: Since the elements of the offense of violation of domicile attributed to defendant … are not constituted “due to the existence of consent,” we believe that the judgment convicting him instead of acquitting him is against procedure and law, and the verdict should be overturned for the stated reason. (Supreme Court 18th Criminal Chamber, dated 05.03.2018, Case No. 2016/5588, Decision No. 2018/2976)
6. In the concrete case, the plaintiff stated that they married the defendant in 1989, divorced by mutual agreement in 2008 to protect from enforcement proceedings, but continued living together. The plaintiff transferred the real estate properties acquired solely before 2008 to the spouse with the divorce decision. Later, while living together, the defendant obtained a restraining order against the plaintiff based on false statements. Following the restraining order, the defendant used all the plaintiff’s furniture and real estate. After the divorce decision, in 2013, the plaintiff purchased a car and real estate in their name. The defendant began hiding assets. The plaintiff requested the return of the real estate transferred to the spouse during the divorce, which was a mutual consent divorce, and sought the registration of the entire real estate in …, and one-third share of the real estate in … Neighborhood in their name. The plaintiff also requested that half of the sale price of the vehicle with license plate … and half of the furniture in the … Neighborhood house be awarded to them as property. (Supreme Court 20th Civil Chamber, dated 07.11.2016, Case No. 2016/5893, Decision No. 2016/10229)

Views: 0