Stopped in transit on a foreign warrant, and the twenty-four hours that follow.

Passenger data reaches Turkish authorities before the aircraft lands. If another state has circulated an Interpol notice or a diffusion against you, the alert appears when your passport is read at transfer control, or when the onward carrier checks you in. You are detained by police inside the airport, and from that moment the governing text is Law no. 6706 on International Judicial Co-operation in Criminal Matters. Never having cleared Turkish passport control changes nothing about that.

An Interpol notice is not an extradition request. It asks the state where you are found to locate you and hold you while the requesting state prepares its file. Turkish law treats that as a separate and temporary measure. Under Article 14/1, provisional detention may be ordered before the extradition request has even reached the Central Authority — where there is strong suspicion that an extraditable offence was committed, where the requesting state asks for it under a treaty or the principle of reciprocity, and where the Central Authority — the Ministry of Justice — finds that request appropriate. Article 14/2 adds a narrow category, defined by reference to Article 12/3(a) of the Turkish Penal Code, in which provisional detention does not require the foreign state to ask at all.

So you can be held in Türkiye on the strength of a request that no court has yet examined. What that notice says, and whether it survives scrutiny at source, is a separate fight — set out in our note on Interpol red notices.

Article 14/3 sets the clock. A person arrested for extradition purposes is sent to the public prosecutor and brought before a sulh ceza judge within twenty-four hours at the latest for a decision on provisional detention. Before that decision, the judge is required to explain extradition by consent and its legal consequences. What you say in reply goes into the record.

Consent is not a formality and it is not a release mechanism. Under Article 17, a person who consents may be extradited without the ordinary procedure being applied. The court still rules on admissibility, but the route it takes is a different one.

Provisional detention is time-limited. Under Article 14/4, the period is set by the applicable treaty; where the case proceeds on reciprocity alone, a person may be held provisionally for no more than forty days. Under Article 14/6, if the requesting state does not send the extradition papers within that period, the provisional detention or judicial control order is lifted. That does not bar fresh measures once a request does arrive, but the burden shifts back to the state that missed its own deadline.

Once the papers do arrive, Article 13 requires the Central Authority to examine the request, ask for anything missing, and reject requests that do not meet the required conditions before they ever reach a court. Requests that pass go to the public prosecutor attached to the competent court.

Which court that is depends on where you are. Under Article 15/1, the ağır ceza court of the place where the person is found decides the extradition request; if the person's location is unknown, the Ankara ağır ceza court is competent. For someone arrested airside in Istanbul, that means an Istanbul court and an Istanbul prosecutor, not Ankara.

From there, Article 16 governs the detention itself: the court may order protective measures at any stage, detention pending surrender is reviewed at intervals of no more than thirty days, all measures are lifted if no extradition decision under Article 19 is taken within one year of the acceptance decision becoming final, and total detention may never exceed the sentence the person faces or is serving for the offence in question.

Article 14/5 is the provision worth arguing at the first hearing. Instead of provisional detention, the judge may order judicial control under Article 109 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in a form that prevents flight. The obstacle for a transit passenger is obvious: no residence, no employment, no family in the country, and a ticket to somewhere else.

The obligations available under CMK 109/3 are the material you have to work with, and they have to be proposed concretely rather than requested in the abstract:

• (a) a prohibition on leaving the country;
• (b) reporting at a named police station at intervals the judge fixes;
• (f) a security deposit, its amount and payment schedule set by the judge on the prosecutor's request, taking the person's financial position into account;
• (j) and (k) not leaving a stated residence, or a defined settlement area.

In practice that means a verifiable Istanbul address, someone able to pay a deposit from abroad, and travel documents in the file. Those are things a family collects, not something a detainee can arrange from a holding room — which is why the first calls out matter so much. What relatives can usefully do in the opening days is set out in our note for the family of a detainee.

A release order in the extradition file does not put you back on your connecting flight. You are still a foreign national who has not been admitted, and the immigration route runs in parallel: administrative detention in a removal centre, then removal. That process has its own decisions, its own time limits and its own appeal, described in our note on removal centres and administrative detention.

Two provisions keep the two tracks from being used against each other. Under Article 12/1, a foreign national cannot be deported during the extradition process without the opinion of the Central Authority. Under Article 12/2, a foreign national cannot be deported to the state whose extradition request was refused without the opinion of the Central Authority either. If either of those things is being arranged, it is the point at which to intervene, because removal achieves by administrative means what the court declined to order.

Everything after the twenty-four hours — the thresholds in Article 10, the grounds in Article 11 on which a request cannot be granted, and what the ağır ceza court actually examines — is set out in the main note on extradition from Türkiye.