Darren

Roly, the media in Turkey, whether it be national newspapers, TV, or other etc are not reliable sources of information generally, not reliable sources of fact, and certainly not authoritative sources of interpretation of the law.

I suspect there is not one country in the world where the government is not entitled to abrogate a property owners title rights under specific circumstances - the same is the case in the UK, every EU country, and every OECD country. Turkey as a signatory to various multi-lateral investment and trade accords is obligated to exercise reciprocity - which means Turkey is allowed to do what other treaty members are allowed to do.

I do not know what specific aspects of property ownership or foreign property ownership are referred to, but for example, the requirement to obtain military poermission in Turkey is not dis-similiar to existing regulations in other treaty member states. For example no one would be expected to be authorised to purchase property in designated military zones in other countries.

The confusion often arises from the procedures and processes involved regarding zoning, authorisations, and certain parties perceptions that they need to be able to justify or understand a particular authority's rationale for such zoning, etc- which is not the case.

Often people have not complied with the law in their purchases and find themselves in prejudiced positions and thus look to find fault with the regulations- when in fact they should examine their own conduct, and that of their advisors.

In actual fact property rights in Turkey are more deeply enshrined than in many emerging nations states of the 20th century (Like the former Soviet Block for example). This is particulalry the case because the Turkish "ruling classes" have long held property assets as more than a store of value that prior to 10 years ago was effectively immune from government meddling in the form of taxation, but also as the essence of their feudal power bases.