Concerns arise over Turkey's seafarer regulations as the Council of State prosecutor's opinion hints at potential annulments affecting the maritime sector.
According to the announcement dated March 14, 2026, by the Turkish Association of Pilot Captains, the opinion submitted by the prosecution in the ongoing case at the Council of State's 10th Chamber, which seeks the annulment of certain provisions of the Regulations on Seafarers and Pilot Captains, contains evaluations in favor of annulment regarding some articles. The announcement states that there are legal concerns regarding the disciplinary sanctions applicable to seafarers, provisions related to the imposition of disciplinary penalties within the scope of port or flag state inspections, as well as regulations concerning the suspension or annulment of pilot captain qualifications and age limits. The association particularly emphasizes that this opinion is not a final decision, and the last word will be spoken by the Council of State's 10th Chamber.
The history of the case is quite dynamic. According to official records, the regulation was published not on September 29, 2024, as stated in some explanations, but in the Official Gazette dated August 29, 2024, number 32647, and it repealed the previous regulation from 2018. The Maritime Journal had reported as early as November 2024 that the case brought by the Turkish Association of Pilot Captains (TKKD) specifically targeted the authority to reduce the age limit in Article 70/6 from 65 to 60, as well as the warnings and suspension sanctions of up to six months in Article 70/7. In short, this issue is not new; there has been a legal struggle at the helm from the very beginning. 7deniz reported that in July 2025, the Council of State's 10th Chamber rejected the request for a stay of execution in the case filed by ITU DEFAMED against the same regulation; however, there were dissenting votes regarding the age regulation and the term 'seafarer.' Denizhaber announced in January 2026 that the Council of State's Administrative Litigation Chambers had suspended the execution of the regulation granting the administration the authority to lower the pilot captain age limit to 60. This situation indicates that the case has transformed from merely an objection by professional organizations into a strict legal test before the high judiciary. The administrative side, however, defended the regulation in a completely different context. In a statement reported by 7deniz in June 2025, Minister of Transport and Infrastructure Abdulkadir Uraloğlu described the text as 'a reform-oriented step' that aligns the sector's dynamics with international norms. Now, the emphasis on illegality in the prosecution's opinion regarding the same text makes the case even more critical. On one side, there is the discourse of reform; on the other side, there is a debate on legal certainty and legality.
When examining the legal consequences for companies, a clearer outcome emerges: if the regulation or individual actions established based on it are annulled and a causal link with concrete damage is proven, a full remedy lawsuit may come into play. Article 12 of the Administrative Procedure Law allows for a direct full remedy lawsuit due to an administrative action causing a rights violation, or it permits the filing of an annulment lawsuit first, followed by a full remedy lawsuit after the decision. However, the addressee of this lawsuit is generally not the individual civil servant or bureaucrat but the administration. The Constitutional Court's stance is clear: compensation lawsuits arising from the faults committed by public officials while exercising their powers can only be filed against the administration; the administration retains the right of recourse against the responsible personnel.
The level of harsh criticism within the sector is also significant. In Denizhaber, Captain Şükrü Özcan wrote as early as September 2024 that if the sanctions imposed by the disciplinary commission are found to be irregular or unlawful in court, it could draw the commission and its members into discussions of individual responsibility. This indicates the level of reaction within the community. However, from the perspective of positive law, the line still leads to the same conclusion: the direct subject of full remedy is generally not the individual but the administration.
Source: SeaNews Türkiye
