An official response to a parliamentary inquiry has reignited debate over Turkey’s controversial citizenship policies, revealing that foreign nationals with serious criminal allegations and international alerts have nonetheless been granted Turkish nationality in recent years.

The written reply, signed by Interior Minister Ali Yerlikaya and dated December 12, 2025, outlines the formal vetting procedures applied to foreign applicants under the administration of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. According to the letter, applicants are subject to security screenings and archival checks, including reviews of records from INTERPOL and Europol, as well as assessments conducted by Turkey’s intelligence service, the National Intelligence Organization (MIT).

On paper, the process appears stringent. The ministry states that individuals flagged through international police channels or who receive negative intelligence assessments are to be denied citizenship. Yet the same letter acknowledges that tens of thousands of foreigners have been granted nationality through exceptional procedures in recent years – raising serious questions about how thoroughly these safeguards are applied in practice.

Investment pathways and exceptional citizenship

Between 2018 and 2024, a total of 46,431 foreign nationals acquired Turkish citizenship through “exceptional” investment-based schemes, according to the ministerial response. These programs, promoted aggressively to attract foreign capital, allow applicants to obtain nationality by purchasing property, depositing funds in Turkish banks or making other qualifying investments.

Critics have long argued that oversight of these schemes is weak and that due diligence often fails to scrutinize the origins of funds. While Turkish authorities emphasize compliance with domestic regulations, foreign law enforcement agencies have repeatedly expressed concern that the program may enable money laundering or provide safe haven to individuals under criminal investigation elsewhere.

The parliamentary letter underscores a structural gap: In the absence of formal INTERPOL Red Notices or Europol alerts, other forms of foreign arrest warrants, sealed indictments or intelligence-based monitoring do not necessarily block an applicant’s path to citizenship. This has reportedly allowed high-risk individuals – some widely known to foreign authorities – to complete the naturalization process without obstruction.

High-profile cases raise alarms

Several cases have drawn international scrutiny. Among them is Rawa Majid, a Sweden-based organized crime figure often referred to as the “Kurdish Fox.” Wanted in Sweden for major narcotics offenses and suspected involvement in contract killings, Majid reportedly secured Turkish citizenship through investment channels. Although briefly detained in Turkey, he was later released, and Swedish extradition requests remain unresolved.

Similarly, Ismatullah Khalozai, identified by US authorities as a facilitator for ISIS-K, is alleged to have operated in Turkey under multiple identities despite international designations. Another Iraqi national, Wisam Hikmat Ahmed Faiq al-Barazanchi, accused of financing extremist networks, reportedly acquired Turkish citizenship and later operated a business in Istanbul alleged to have logistical links to transnational networks.

Other controversial cases include Marwan M. Salih Salih Al-Rawi, designated by US authorities as a sponsor of extremist organizations, who was granted Turkish citizenship and reportedly adopted a Turkish name. Iranian national Ahmad Nazari Shirehjini, accused in Europe of involvement in transnational fraud and money laundering networks, also obtained Turkish nationality despite serious allegations abroad.

European law enforcement has voiced concern about figures such as Dutch drug trafficking suspect Leijdekkers, who reportedly resided in Turkey for years and initiated citizenship procedures despite ongoing investigations in the Netherlands. Attempts by Dutch authorities to pursue migration enforcement reportedly encountered bureaucratic resistance.

In addition, individuals linked to Hamas financing networks — including Jordanian and Syrian nationals — have been reported to have acquired Turkish nationality, further complicating Ankara’s diplomatic relations with Western partners.

Legal framework vs. implementation

Under Article 72 of Turkey’s citizenship regulation, authorities are required to conduct security and archive checks before approving naturalization. The Interior Ministry maintains that this process ensures that criminals are not granted nationality. However, the emergence of numerous controversial cases suggests that screening may depend heavily on whether formal international notices are active at the time of application.

INTERPOL alerts, particularly Red Notices, can take time to process and may be influenced by political and legal considerations. Many countries rely instead on bilateral arrest warrants or intelligence-based monitoring systems that do not automatically appear in INTERPOL databases. In such cases, applicants may avoid triggering automatic disqualification during Turkish vetting procedures.

Legal analysts say this distinction is crucial. If naturalization decisions hinge narrowly on formal INTERPOL alerts rather than broader intelligence or credible foreign warrants, the system may leave significant loopholes.

Government response and enforcement actions

Facing mounting criticism, Turkish authorities have occasionally launched law enforcement operations targeting abuses within the citizenship-by-investment framework. On September 24, 2025, police reportedly detained 106 suspects accused of forming criminal organizations, document forgery and aggravated fraud — offenses often associated with manipulation of residency and naturalization procedures.

Yet skeptics question whether such operations represent systemic reform or limited responses aimed at easing diplomatic pressure. Past cases suggest that only a small number of suspects face substantial penalties, while broader policy structures remain intact.

The Interior Ministry has not publicly clarified how individuals with controversial international profiles were able to pass vetting in earlier years. Nor has it provided detailed explanations of whether citizenship can be revoked in cases where new evidence emerges after naturalization.

International implications

The controversy carries implications beyond Turkey’s borders. Citizenship confers not only residency rights but also access to visa-free travel arrangements and international financial systems. If individuals under criminal investigation obtain passports through investment schemes, partner countries may face heightened security and compliance risks.

Western governments have previously raised concerns about “golden passport” programs in multiple jurisdictions, arguing that insufficient transparency can undermine collective efforts to combat organized crime, terrorism financing and money laundering.

For Turkey, which remains a NATO member and a key regional actor, the allegations complicate its efforts to portray itself as a reliable partner in international security cooperation. Publicly, Ankara insists that it applies strict screening and maintains zero tolerance for crime in naturalization processes. The parliamentary letter, however, has fueled criticism that economic and political considerations may at times outweigh security concerns.

A policy under scrutiny

The central question emerging from the Interior Ministry’s response is whether the granting of citizenship to controversial figures reflects administrative oversight or deliberate policy design. Legal experts note that exceptional naturalization is ultimately a discretionary executive decision. If safeguards are bypassed or narrowly interpreted, responsibility lies at senior levels of governance.

As international scrutiny intensifies, Turkey faces growing pressure to demonstrate that its citizenship system aligns with global standards of due diligence and law enforcement cooperation. Whether Ankara undertakes meaningful reform or continues its current approach will shape not only its domestic legal landscape but also its standing among international partners.

For now, the official acknowledgment of how the system functions — combined with the record number of naturalizations under exceptional procedures — has ensured that Turkey’s citizenship policy remains under a powerful and uncomfortable spotlight.

Please follow Blitz on Google News Channel

© Blitz