Can't You File a Lawsuit If You Have No Money? the Answer from the AYM!
Official titleDecision of the Constitutional Court Dated 3/3/2026 and Application Number 2023/30342
The Constitutional Court examined the allegation that Azize Cansağ Bağlı's right of access to a court was violated due to the rejection of her request for legal aid, and decided unanimously that the right of access to a court within the scope of the right to a fair trial was violated.
Details of the Regulation
The applicant, Azize Cansağ Bağlı, requested legal aid in the title deed cancellation and registration lawsuit she filed, but this request was rejected by the local court. As the reasoning for the rejection, the applicant's failure to submit sufficient documents regarding her property assets, the existence of bank accounts, and the subject matter of the lawsuit were shown. The applicant objected to this decision and submitted a certificate of poverty along with screenshots via e-Devlet showing that she possessed no property assets, and stated that her lawyer was her son, who was acting as counsel free of charge. However, the objection was also rejected, with the local court arguing that the certificate of poverty alone was not sufficient.
The Constitutional Court criticized the local courts for evaluating the legal aid request with a categorical approach, considering matters such as the specific nature of lawsuits like title deed cancellation and the existence of bank accounts, without taking into account the applicant's actual financial situation. The Court accepted that the obligation to pay judicial fees and expenses constitutes an interference with the right of access to a court, but emphasized that this interference must be suitable, necessary, and proportionate within the scope of the principle of proportionality. It stated that the legal aid mechanism is of vital importance to ensure access to court for persons whose financial situation is inadequate.
The AYM concluded that this rigid and categorical approach of the local courts placed an excessive burden on the applicant, rendering the interference with the right of access to a court neither necessary nor proportionate. For this reason, it was ruled that the right of access to a court within the scope of the right to a fair trial guaranteed under Article 36 of the constitution was violated. The Court decided that a retrial be held to eliminate the consequences of the violation and that 40,000 TL in counsel fees be paid to the applicant.
Questions You Might Have
- Why can the rejection of a legal aid request violate the right of access to a court?
- The rejection of the legal aid request of a person who is unable to pay judicial expenses restricts the right of access to a court guaranteed by the constitution by making it impossible for them to file a lawsuit or maintain their lawsuit.
- What kind of an error did the Constitutional Court determine that the local courts made in their evaluation of legal aid?
- The local court rejected the legal aid request with a rigid and categorical approach without sufficiently investigating the applicant's actual financial situation, taking into account the existence of the applicant's bank accounts and the subject matter of the lawsuit (title deed cancellation).
- Is there an aspect of this decision that is expected to set a precedent?
- Yes, this decision will set a precedent by emphasizing that local courts, when evaluating legal aid requests, must conduct an examination that is more meticulous, based on the individual's actual financial situation, and in accordance with equity.
Key Terms
- Adli Yardım
- The legal mechanism that enables persons whose financial situation is inadequate to have the opportunity to file and pursue a lawsuit by being temporarily or completely exempted from judicial expenses, such as judicial fees and attorney's fees.
- Mahkemeye Erişim Hakkı
- The right of everyone to bring a dispute before a court and demand that it be effectively resolved. It is a fundamental element of the right to a fair trial and is guaranteed by Article 36 of the constitution.
- Ölçülülük İlkesi
- The legal principle expressing that the interferences of public power must be suitable, necessary, and proportionate to achieve an objective. It consists of the sub-principles of suitability, necessity, and proportionality.
- Yeniden Yargılama
- The process in which, following a decision of violation of rights by the Constitutional Court, the local court re-examines the lawsuit from the beginning or from the stage that caused the violation, in order to eliminate the violation.
Where we posted this
Follow Turkish legal developments
REGAS analyzed all 36 items in the Official Gazette of 5 August 2026; we published only 5 of them here.
REGAS summarizes every change in the Turkish Official Gazette in plain language and notifies you.
The REGAS app is currently Turkish-only. If you would like English in the app, the best way to make it happen is to support the developer: get the app and just say so.
REGAS Commentary
This decision is of great importance in terms of securing the rights of citizens with limited economic means to access the judiciary. It demonstrates that local courts must display an approach that is more flexible and based on the individual's actual financial situation when evaluating legal aid requests. In this way, the path to seeking rights will be opened for persons deprived of the opportunity to file a lawsuit due to financial inadequacies, and the principle of a fair trial will be applicable more effectively. Especially in complex and costly legal processes, legal aid holds the character of being the key to access to justice.