Since Article 128/A of the Criminal Procedure Code (CMK) entered into force on 25 December 2025, banks and payment institutions have been able to suspend accounts for up to 48 hours on their own decision where there is suspicion of certain offences. Since then, freezes on accounts suspected of involvement in fraud and cybercrime have become more common. For anyone who finds an unexpected restriction on their account, the first question is usually the same: why was this measure imposed, and how can it be lifted?
Why Would a Prosecutor Freeze a Bank Account?
The seizure measure regulated under Articles 128 to 134 of the CMK can be applied to assets, rights and receivables that are considered useful as evidence or that may be subject to confiscation. Its purpose is to prevent possible proceeds of crime from being dispersed or hidden until the investigation is concluded. The existence of the measure does not, in itself, mean that the account holder has been found guilty.
The new Article 128/A adds a further step to this system. Where there is suspicion of aggravated theft, certain types of fraud committed through information systems or by using banks and credit institutions as instruments, or misuse of bank or credit cards, the bank may first suspend the account for 48 hours on its own decision. Continuing the suspension beyond that period requires an order from the public prosecutor’s office or a criminal judgeship of peace (sulh ceza hâkimliği). Consider, for example, a small trading business whose current account is suddenly frozen because of a fraud complaint it has no connection with, leaving the owner unable to pay a supplier. This is a situation that arises frequently in practice.
What to Do First When You Notice a Freeze
Most people first encounter a freeze when they cannot log in to their account or when an EFT or transfer is rejected. When you call the bank, you will usually be told that there is a “judicial authority instruction”, but the bank will often not share any details of the case file. The first step at this point is to ask the bank to confirm in writing the basis of the measure: which prosecutor’s office or court issued the instruction, and under which investigation or file number.
Once this is clear, the second step is to apply to the investigation bureau of the relevant Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office. A verbal complaint to the bank or a generic objection petition will not achieve anything on its own, because the power to lift a freeze lies not with the bank but with the judicial authority that issued the order.
How Does the Objection Process Work?
Article 131 of the CMK gives you the right to request that the measure be lifted, and that a notice be sent to the bank, once the ground for the seizure has ceased to exist. During the investigation stage, this request is made directly to the prosecutor’s office handling the file. If the prosecutor rejects the request, or if the measure was originally imposed by a criminal judgeship of peace, the objection is directed to the judgeship that issued the decision. If the wrong authority is identified, the process can be delayed by weeks, so establishing the stage of the file at the outset is decisive.
A general account of hardship is not enough in the petition. It should attach concrete documents showing the source of the money that entered the account, such as contracts, invoices, bank receipts, or vehicle or real estate sale records. In our earlier article on legal remedies available to victims of internet fraud, the process follows a similar logic for victims on the other side of a frozen account. On both sides, concrete documents and timing are decisive.
How Long Can the Measure Last, and Is It Proportionate?
The main point of debate in practice is how long a seizure measure can remain in place. One view holds that a wide margin of discretion is needed so that the investigation can proceed properly and evidence can be preserved. On the other hand, it is also true that when an account holder, and in some cases even third parties who have had no involvement in the offence, cannot access their own money for months, the result goes beyond the purpose of the measure.
In our view, the balance between these two approaches should be sought in the principle of proportionality. An amount whose legitimate source can be supported with concrete documents should be released within a reasonable time, in a way that does not affect the general course of the investigation. The CMK’s seizure system is designed to serve the purposes of evidence and confiscation. Keeping an amount with a clearly demonstrable source frozen indefinitely goes beyond that purpose.
Why Is Proving a Legitimate Source So Important?
In requests to lift a freeze, the most prominent factor is whether the origin of the incoming amount can be clearly shown. Items such as proceeds from the sale of a vehicle, repayment of a cash loan, rental income, or payment for an invoiced service make the prosecutor’s or judgeship’s assessment considerably easier when supported by the relevant contract or receipt. For example, if a freelancer’s fee for services received from abroad is caught in a freeze, the invoices and contract copies in their hands can bring the matter to a conclusion within days.
By contrast, amounts whose source cannot be explained, or which pass quickly between several people, are seen by investigating authorities as a factor that heightens suspicion. For this reason, it is critical not to rush during a freeze, to compile all available documents completely, and to make the application together with those documents in order to speed up the process.
Conclusion: A Roadmap for When Your Account Is Frozen
As of 2026, measures of this kind are being applied to a growing number of accounts. They aim both to protect the rights of fraud victims and to prevent third parties’ accounts from being used as instruments. For the account holder, however, the process demands quick and correct steps. In summary, the sequence to follow is:
- Ask the bank to confirm the basis of the measure in writing (file or investigation number, and the authority that issued the order).
- Apply to the investigation bureau of the relevant Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office to establish the stage of the file.
- Compile complete documents showing the source of the amount that entered the account, such as contracts, invoices or receipts.
- Prepare a petition under CMK Article 131 requesting that the seizure be lifted, based on concrete documents.
- If the request is rejected, consider filing an objection with the criminal judgeship of peace that issued the decision.
Because every file has its own circumstances, correctly identifying the reason for the freeze and the stage of the investigation directly affects the order of the steps to be taken.
Legal Disclaimer
