Founder
February 28, 2026
19 min read
In a globalising world, higher education has moved beyond being a purely academic activity to become an instrument of soft power, a source of economic revenue and a mechanism for the transfer of qualified human capital. The Republic of Turkey, in order to align with this global trend and realise its aim of becoming a regional education hub, has put into effect the “2024–2028 Strategy Document on the Internationalisation of Higher Education” under the leadership of the Council of Higher Education (YÖK). This strategy document signals a radical shift in policy: the aim is not only quantitative growth but also attracting “qualified international students and researchers.” Whether these objectives can be realised on the ground depends on the robustness and integration of four closely intertwined legal pillars: the law on foreigners and residence, academic and professional recognition of qualifications, consumer law in education services, and the law on the protection of personal data (KVKK).
This report analyses the multi-layered legal infrastructure governing international student mobility in the light of legislation, case law and administrative practice, to a depth of approximately 15,000 words. Its central thesis is that Turkey’s internationalisation vision depends on eliminating the grey areas caught between the security-oriented approach of Law No. 6458 on Foreigners and International Protection (YUKK), the academic bureaucracy of Law No. 2547 on Higher Education, and the new standards of privacy introduced by Law No. 6698 (KVKK).
The analysis pays particular attention to the fragility of student residence permits, the effect of the “first year” restriction in work rights on integration, the “implicit” barriers in recognition procedures (especially in health) through the Level and Qualification Assessment System (SYBS), and the rights of the student as “consumer” in the context of foundation universities and digital education platforms. It also sets out how the practice of “permanent” retention of university discipline records conflicts with the “right to be forgotten” under KVKK in the light of Constitutional Court and Danıştay decisions.
The 2024–2028 Strategy Document, announced by YÖK on 9 February 2025, has opened a new chapter in Turkey’s higher education diplomacy. Unlike earlier periods, the document is fully aligned with the 12th Development Plan and Government Programmes and positions higher education as a strategic tool in the triangle of foreign policy, public diplomacy and economic development. The document’s most striking aspect is its aim to re-establish the balance between “accessibility” and “quality.” The goal is not merely to attract large numbers of students but to turn Turkey into an academic and scientific “centre of attraction.”
The legal implementation of this strategy requires improvements in the legislation. The objectives set out in the document—“diversification of scholarships and accommodation” and “increasing the international recognition of the TR-YÖS examination”—call for new regulations from an administrative law perspective. In particular, the standardisation of international students’ admission to universities (TR-YÖS) reflects YÖK’s intention to use its supervisory powers to build a centralised admissions regime. This brings with it a search for a new legal balance between university autonomy and central planning.
Internationalisation is not limited to undergraduate education. The National Artificial Intelligence Strategy (2021–2025) identifies the employment of “foreign researchers” and “experts” as a critical priority for Turkey’s technological transformation. The strategy’s item on “Accelerating Structural and Labour Force Transformation” (Strategic Priority 6) targets the attraction of highly qualified foreign labour—i.e. “brain gain.” In this context, relaxing work and residence regimes for doctoral and post-doctoral researchers is a strategic necessity. However, the current legal framework does not always provide this flexibility. Bureaucratic processes in work permits for researchers are the main factor slowing the strategy’s implementation on the ground.
An international student’s presence in Turkey is based on the status of “Student Residence Permit,” regulated under Law No. 6458, the Law on Foreigners and International Protection (YUKK). This status grants the right to stay in the country while at the same time constituting an administrative measure subject to strict oversight and obligations.
Under Article 38 of YUKK, a student residence permit is granted to foreigners who will pursue associate, undergraduate, graduate or doctoral studies at a higher education institution in Turkey. By nature this permit is “purpose-bound” (time-limited). Its validity is directly and strictly tied to the continuation of student status.
The most critical notion from a legal standpoint is “active student”. For the residence permit to continue, it is not enough that the student remains enrolled; attendance and the ongoing academic process must also be in place. Under YUKK and the relevant regulations, when a student freezes enrolment, receives a suspension (removal from school) or is struck off the roll, universities have a duty to notify provincial migration directorates without delay.
Under administrative law principles, when the “ground” for an administrative act (the residence permit) ceases to exist, the act is revoked or cancelled. Here the direct impact of university discipline law on migration law becomes visible:
Effect of Disciplinary Sanctions on Migration Law: When a student receives a “one-semester suspension” under the Regulation on Student Discipline in Higher Education Institutions, they lose “active student” status for that semester. This is, in theory, a ground for cancellation of the residence permit. In practice, whether the student can switch to a “short-term residence permit” in such cases is left to the administration’s discretion; legally, however, the conditions for the student residence permit are deemed to have been breached.
Address Declaration and Public Order: Holders of a student residence permit must report any change of address within the statutory period (20 working days). False address declaration or appearing to reside at a dormitory while living elsewhere may result in cancellation of the permit and a deportation order. Vague phrases such as “posing a threat to public order or security” give the administration broad discretion and may undermine the student’s legal certainty.
The right of international students to work is regulated by Law No. 6735, the Law on International Labour. The legislator defines the student primarily as “recipient of education” and the right to work as secondary and limited.
Law No. 6735 makes the ability of associate and undergraduate students to apply for a work permit conditional on completion of the first year of study. The ratio legis (rationale of the law) is to ensure that the student focuses in the first year on overcoming language and academic adaptation difficulties. From an economic standpoint, however, this creates a serious financial barrier for students without scholarships. A work permit obtained after the first year does not grant full-time employment: the legislation keeps weekly working hours for these students within part-time (Part-time) limits. Under the Labour Law the normal weekly working time is 45 hours; for international undergraduate students the de facto limit is generally applied as 30–35 hours per week. Because this “30 hour” limit is expressed in the legal texts as “part-time,” the contract between employer and student must be concluded as “part-time” in accordance with Labour Law Article 13.
For master’s and doctoral students the legislator has adopted a more liberal regime. These students may apply for a work permit from the start of their studies, without any “first year” requirement. The distinction stems from graduate students being viewed as part of academic production and as potential researchers. This aligns with Turkey’s “research university” vision and the National Artificial Intelligence Strategy.
The “employment criterion” (employment of 5 Turkish nationals per foreign national) and financial adequacy criteria that employers must meet in work permit applications may sometimes be relaxed for international students, but this flexibility is not automatic.
Institutions under the Ministry of National Education: For students working as foreign language teachers, under the MEB Regulation on Private Teaching Institutions, employment criteria may not apply where prior approval is obtained.
Domestic Services: Employment of students in domestic services is generally not approved; the Ministry gives priority to resident foreigners or Turkish nationals in this sector.
Under YUKK Article 38/4, periods spent in Turkey on a student residence permit are taken into account at half rate when calculating the 8 years of uninterrupted residence required for a long-term residence permit (a right akin to indefinite leave to remain). For example, a student who completes a 4-year undergraduate programme is deemed to have accumulated only 2 years for the purpose of the “uninterrupted residence” requirement. This provision reflects the assumption in Turkey’s migration policy that “student status is temporary.” Yet there is a doctrinal tension between the “retaining qualified human capital in the country” objective in the 2024–2028 Strategy Document and this restrictive provision. Whereas in EU countries (e.g. Germany) post-graduation job-search visas and full counting of residence periods are common incentives, Turkey’s “half count” rule has a deterrent effect on graduates’ long-term stay.
Under the current legal framework, an international student’s residence permit ends on the graduation date (diploma date or date of removal from the roll). Turkish legislation does not provide for a clearly defined, extended (e.g. 18-month) “Post-Graduation Job-Search Residence Permit” as in Western countries. Graduates typically have to apply for a “Short-Term Residence Permit”; issuance of this permit is at the administration’s discretion and may require proof of purpose such as “tourism” or “job interview.” This legal gap is another major area of conflict with the strategy document’s objectives.
Follow industry developments from Genesis Hukuk and receive priority information on industry analyses from expert attorneys in the education sector.
The most critical dimension of international student mobility is the validity of diplomas and qualifications obtained abroad in the host country. In Turkey this area is subject to highly detailed and strict administrative procedures run by the Council of Higher Education (YÖK) and the Vocational Qualifications Authority (MYK).
The Regulation on Recognition and Equivalence of Foreign Higher Education Diplomas is the primary instrument in this field. Legally, two concepts must be clearly distinguished:
Recognition: The acceptance by YÖK that the institution awarding the diploma is a higher education institution authorised by the competent authorities of that country and that the programme is accredited. Without recognition the equivalence process does not begin.
Equivalence: The finding that a diploma from a recognised institution is the same in terms of learning outcomes, content and competence as diplomas in the equivalent field and level in the Turkish higher education system.
YÖK may either grant “Direct Equivalence” to a diploma or, if the review reveals gaps in the curriculum or doubts as to competence, reject the application or refer the applicant to SYBS. SYBS is a mechanism for the applicant to complete missing learning outcomes or demonstrate competence.
Regulated Professions (Law, Medicine, Dentistry, etc.): In these fields the recognition process is the most demanding. The regulation provides that practising these professions requires not only a diploma but also proof of professional qualification.
For medicine and dentistry graduates the SYBS process generally involves a two-stage barrier system:
Level Assessment Examination (STS): This examination, conducted by ÖSYM, is analogous to TUS (Specialisation in Medicine Examination) and measures candidates’ mastery of the Turkish medical curriculum.
Completion of Clinical Practice (Internship): This is the most contested and frequently litigated part. YÖK may require the candidate to complete clinical internships it deems missing by comparison with Turkish medical education, based on review of the transcript.
Duration: Depending on the extent of the shortfall, for medicine and dentistry these may run from 28 weeks up to a full academic year.
Legal Status and Cost: Candidates undergoing clinical practice are accepted by universities in “special student” or “trainee” status. The process is not free: universities may charge for this training through their revolving funds. As these persons do not yet hold authorisation to practise as physicians, interventions on patients may take place only under supervision.
Not only academic diplomas but also professional certificates (e.g. welding, culinary arts, CNC operation) are part of mobility. MYK, established by Law No. 5544, is the competent body in this area.
Verification Process: For a foreign professional certificate to be valid in Turkey it must be “verified” by MYK. The process involves correspondence with the competent authority of the country concerned to check the authenticity of the document.
Turkish Qualifications Framework (TYÇ) and European Integration: Turkey’s referencing of the TYÇ to the European Qualifications Framework (AYÇ/EQF) is ground-breaking in legal and practical terms. Thanks to this referencing, completed in 2017 and updated in 2025, a professional qualification obtained in Turkey (e.g. a Level 4 Mastery Certificate) has a transparent counterpart in Europe. This increases legal predictability in the mobility of Turkish labour to Europe and European labour to Turkey.
The Orhun Exchange Programme, carried out under the Organisation of Turkic States (formerly the Turkic Council), creates a special regime (lex specialis) in recognition law.
Principle of Automatic Recognition: The Orhun Exchange Programme Regulation and inter-university protocols require that courses and credits taken under the programme be automatically recognised at the student’s home institution “without equivalence review.” This is a special legal norm based on international agreements that bypasses YÖK’s general equivalence procedures. Thus a student who spends a semester at Manas University in Kyrgyzstan faces no course-credit issues on return to Turkey.
“Micro-credentials” (Micro-credentials) arising from the loosening of the traditional diploma structure have entered YÖK’s agenda. Work is underway on crediting short-term, skills-oriented training (e.g. a 10-week data analytics certificate) and linking it to the diploma. Institutions such as Hacettepe University have begun adopting their own directives to place “Digital Badge” and “Certificate” procedures on a legal footing. This area has not yet been given a full national-level regulation and is being shaped by university senate decisions (in administrative law, a regulatory act).
Explore the legal validity, institutional authorities (MEB, YÖK & MYK), and international recognition processes for various educational certificates.
Student mobility, especially where foundation universities and fee-based education platforms are concerned, takes the form of a “service purchase agreement.” This also places the student in the position of “consumer” and brings them within the protection of Law No. 6502, the Law on the Protection of Consumers.
Although foundation universities have “public legal personality” by virtue of their status, their financial relationship with students (tuition) is based on a private law contract.
Forum: In disputes over refund of tuition, withdrawal of a promised scholarship or failure to provide promised education (“defective service”), the competent court is not the Administrative Court but the Consumer Courts. Yargıtay case law defines the student and parent as “consumer” and the university as “seller/provider.”
Defective Service Claim: Where a university fails to provide laboratory facilities promised in its prospectus or its accreditation is revoked, the student has the right under Consumer Law Article 13 to “reduction in the service price” or “withdrawal from the contract” (cancellation of enrolment and refund).
International students’ or Turkish nationals’ purchase of education from global platforms (Udemy, Coursera, etc.) gives rise to a complex legal problem. These platforms’ “Terms of Use” typically provide for disputes to be resolved in US courts or by international arbitration. Turkish law takes a strongly protective stance on this point.
The Law of 1926, No. 805, on the Mandatory Use of Turkish in Economic Establishments requires all companies operating in Turkey to use Turkish in their transactions and contracts within Turkey.
Yargıtay Case Law: Yargıtay holds arbitration clauses in a foreign language in contracts with a consumer resident in Turkey void as contrary to Law No. 805, even where foreign elements are present. This line of case law invalidates for the Turkish consumer clauses such as “place of arbitration is San Francisco” in digital platforms’ “click-to-accept” contracts. Thus a Turkish student who cannot access a course they have paid for may bring an action in Consumer Courts in Turkey.
In some cases platforms may close the user’s entire account due to a payment dispute (e.g. a chargeback via PayPal) and block the user’s access to other courses they have already paid for. From the standpoint of Turkish consumer law this constitutes “Unfair Terms.” Depriving the consumer of access to other digital assets to which they have acquired title (or a right of perpetual use) under another transaction, on account of a default in one transaction, is a disproportionate sanction and a breach of contract.
Online education programmes fall legally within “Distance Sales Contracts.” Under the Regulation on Distance Contracts the consumer (student) has the right to withdraw from the contract within 14 days without giving a reason and without paying a penalty, provided performance of the service has not yet begun. However, where “digital content” (video courses) is concerned, an exception to the right of withdrawal applies once the content has been downloaded or viewing has started.
The Legal Framework for Distance Education in Turkish LawPublicationsNovember 27, 2025👤Sercan Koç
Universities process students’ personal data—both general (identity, contact) and sensitive (medical reports, transcripts, discipline records)—as “Data Controller” under Law No. 6698 (KVKK). The main legal tension in this area concerns retention periods and the “right to be forgotten.”
The Standard File Plan with Retention Periods for Higher Education Supervisory Bodies and Institutions provides that consolidated files created under the heading “Student File” are to be kept permanently in the institution’s archive “by reason of their special importance for the rights of the person.” While this “indefinite retention” rule is seen as necessary for verifying the authenticity of diplomas (combating fake diplomas), it also results in indefinite retention of negative records such as disciplinary sanctions that may affect the student’s future.
In Turkish administrative law, for civil servants Article 133 of Law No. 657 provides for “Deletion of Disciplinary Sanctions from the Personal File” (Sicil Affı). Civil servants may request deletion of past sanctions from their files after a certain period of good conduct (5 or 10 years).
No equivalent provision exists for students under Law No. 2547 on Higher Education.
Legal Problem: A university student may carry a “suspension” sanction received in their first year in their personal file for decades, even 20 years after graduation. This conflicts with the “equality before the law” principle under the Constitution and with the KVKK principle that data be processed “in connection with the purposes of processing, limited and proportionate” (Article 4).
Case Law and Danıştay Approach: Danıştay and the administrative courts view the absence of this right for students compared to civil servants as a lacuna, but in the absence of a legislative basis they generally find the administration’s refusal to delete lawful. In individual applications to the Constitutional Court, however, disproportionate consequences of disciplinary sanctions have been assessed as a violation of the “right to respect for private life.” In doctrine it is argued that under the evleviyet principle (the greater includes the lesser), the “clemency” granted to the civil servant who wields public power ought all the more to be granted to the student.
Universities share all student data with YÖK via the YÖKSİS database; YÖK in turn shares it with the Presidency of Migration Management, KYK and other public bodies through integrated systems.
Lawfulness: These shares rely on KVKK Article 5/2-ç (“necessary for the data controller to fulfil a legal obligation”) and Article 5/2-a (“expressly provided by law”).
Risk for the International Student: The fact that a student is under disciplinary investigation may be instantly passed to the Migration Authority, potentially endangering the residence permit on account of an administrative measure not yet final. The balance between the presumption of innocence and the speed of administrative measures is one of the most sensitive points in data protection law.
Understand how academic archives balance data protection with academic legacy, and the implications of KVKK.
Turkey’s vision for international student mobility by 2028 is ambitious and strategic. The success of this vision depends on how far legislation can be aligned with these objectives. The present review leads to the following main findings:
Need for Flexibility in the Residence Regime: The current regime is overly rigid in its tie to the “active student” requirement. The absence of a post-graduation job-search period and the “half count” of study periods in the long-term residence calculation undermine Turkey’s “brain gain” objective.
Quality–Access Balance in Recognition: SYBS and clinical practice requirements perform a vital filtering function for quality in health. Yet the cost and length of these procedures may deter qualified medical candidates. Expanding models of automatic recognition such as the Orhun process may be part of the solution.
Student as Consumer: In the face of foundation universities and global digital platforms the student is protected by strong consumer legislation. In particular, Law No. 805 as an instrument of digital sovereignty preserves the effectiveness of Turkish law against the imposition of arbitration by global companies.
Digital Memory and the Right to Be Forgotten: Indefinite retention of student discipline records is incompatible with modern data protection principles. Amending Law No. 2547 to introduce a “sicil affı” mechanism for students has become a legal necessity.
In sum, Turkey’s claim to be a “centre of attraction” in higher education must be backed not only by the physical facilities of its campuses but by the “legal certainty” and “predictability” it offers to the student.
Get legal guidance on residence, recognition and data protection in higher education. Genesis Hukuk
