Evacuation and Demolition Decision for a Risky Building: Process, Rights, and Legal Remedies Under Law No. 6306

This comprehensive legal guide covers evacuation and demolition decisions for risky buildings under Law No. 6306, including finalization, notification, the 90-day period, demolition permits, electricity, water, and natural gas cut-offs, eviction by law enforcement, and legal avenues.

---

What is an Evacuation and Demolition Order for a Risky Building?

The decision for evacuation and demolition of a risky building, under Law No. 6306 on the Transformation of Areas Under Disaster Risk, refers to the administrative process carried out for the purpose of evacuating and demolishing a building that has been determined and finalized as risky. Although it is referred to as a "demolition decision" in practice, this process is not limited to a single document. It consists of the following stages: finalization of the risky building determination, preparation of a report regarding evacuation and demolition, notification to the owners, announcement by the local headman, granting a timeframe for demolition, obtaining a demolition permit, evacuation of the building, cancellation of utility subscriptions, and, if necessary, the demolition carried out by administrative authorities.

The decision to evacuate and demolish a building deemed at risk is not a classic tenant eviction or private law dispute. This process is a chain of administrative actions of a public order nature, concerning life and property safety. Therefore, the owner, tenant, or holder of limited real rights cannot continue to reside in the risky building solely based on a lease agreement or private arrangements. If the building has been definitively determined to be at risk, the administration has the authority to carry out the evacuation and demolition process.

In urban transformation law, this stage is extremely important. Because when the risky building assessment is finalized and the evacuation-demolition phase begins, the building's actual existence may cease. Winning a lawsuit after the building is demolished does not always guarantee restoration to the previous state. Therefore, when an evacuation and demolition decision is learned for a risky building, the deadlines, notification, right to sue, suspension of execution, rental assistance, and demolition permit procedures should be evaluated together.

When does the evacuation and demolition process begin in a building at risk?

The evacuation and demolition process for a risky building begins after the risk assessment is finalized. Owners or their legal representatives have the right to appeal when a risk assessment is made. If no appeal is filed within the specified time, or if the appeal is rejected by the technical committee, the risk assessment becomes final. Following this finalization, the directorate requests the administration to issue the necessary notifications and demolish the risky building.

The first point to note here is this: Not every mention of "urban transformation" means an eviction and demolition order. A contractor making a bid for the building, apartment owners holding discussions about the transformation, or an owner stating "the building will be demolished" alone does not initiate the eviction and demolition process under Law No. 6306. For the official process to begin, a risk assessment of the building must be carried out, this assessment must be properly reported, and it must be finalized after the appeals process.

If no objection is raised against the determination that a building is at risk, or if the objection is rejected, the building is then considered risky by the authorities. After this stage, there is no need for the owners to make a separate unanimous decision regarding demolition. Ministry statements also indicate that the demolition of buildings definitively deemed risky is a mandatory consequence of the law, and that there is no need for separate decisions or agreements from the owners for demolition.

How to Submit an Evacuation and Demolition Notice?

Notifications regarding the evacuation and demolition of structures covered by Law No. 6306 are subject to a special procedure. According to the current implementing regulation, a report is prepared regarding the evacuation and demolition of risky structures, posted on the building, notified to the owners via the e-Government Portal, and announced at the relevant mukhtar's office for fifteen days. The evacuation and demolition process is deemed to have been notified to the owners of real and personal rights on the last day of the announcement at the mukhtar's office. Structures requested for evacuation are also announced on the Presidency's website for fifteen days.

Due to this regulation, it is incorrect for property owners to expect only physical notification via post. The minutes posted on the building, e-Government notifications, neighborhood announcements, and presidential announcements are important for initiating the statute of limitations and administrative process. Property owners living abroad, heirs, shareholders, and those who do not actively use the property should closely follow these notification methods.

Errors in the notification process can be a significant ground for challenge in the legal review of eviction and demolition orders. For example, posting a notice on the wrong building, incorrect plot information, notifying a deceased owner, excluding heirs from the process, improperly making a public announcement, or notifying individuals unrelated to the risky building can all be subject to legal action. However, the claim of irregular notification should not be considered a reliable reason to completely disregard the process. Property owners aware of the risky building process should immediately obtain the necessary documents and establish a legal course of action without missing deadlines.

What is the time limit given for evacuation and demolition?

According to current regulations, the administration grants a period of no more than ninety days for the demolition of a risky building. If the building is not evacuated and demolished within this period, the building owners are requested to evacuate and demolish the building, stating that the building will be evacuated and demolished by the administrative authorities.

This timeframe is not only for vacating the building but also for completing the demolition process. Within this period, owners must vacate the building, inform tenants, cancel utility subscriptions, apply for a demolition permit, contract with a demolition company, and ensure the building is demolished safely.

In practice, some previous Ministry frequently asked questions explain the 60-day and an additional 30-day system. However, the current regulation stipulates that a period of no more than ninety days should be given for the evacuation and demolition of risky buildings. Therefore, the period to be applied in the specific case should be checked against the current legislation and administrative documents in effect at the time of the transaction.

How to Obtain a Demolition Permit?

After the risk assessment of a building is finalized and the evacuation and demolition process begins, a demolition permit must be obtained. According to the regulations, a demolition permit can be issued upon the application of one or more of the building owners or their representatives. For this, documents proving that the building has been evacuated and that electricity, water, and natural gas services have been shut off must be submitted, or this must be determined by the administration and documented in a report. For buildings exceeding 21.50 meters in height, the designation of a structural engineer as the person responsible for demolition is also required. If these conditions are met, a demolition permit is issued within six working days without requiring the consent of all owners.

This provision is very important in practice. In apartment buildings with many owners, it is not always possible for all owners to sign simultaneously. The refusal of some owners to sign does not guarantee that the risky building will remain standing indefinitely. If the building is confirmed to be risky and the conditions for evacuation and demolition have been met, the demolition permit process can proceed with the application of one or more of the owners.

Before a demolition permit is obtained, the building must be completely vacated, utility subscriptions must be cancelled, environmental safety measures must be taken, the competence of the demolition company must be assessed, and the safety of neighboring buildings must be ensured. Especially in buildings with close proximity, older structures, and densely populated city centers, careless demolition can cause damage to neighboring buildings, vehicles, or third parties. Therefore, demolition is not only an administrative process but also an activity that gives rise to technical and legal responsibilities.

What happens if a risky building is not evacuated?

If a building deemed at risk is not evacuated and demolished within the given timeframe, the authorities may impose more severe penalties. According to regulations, if a building is not demolished by its owners within the specified period, the relevant institutions and organizations are requested to cease or discontinue the provision of electricity, water, and natural gas services. These institutions and organizations are obligated to suspend these services upon the administration's request.

Cutting off electricity, water, and natural gas services is aimed at preventing the continued use of the risky building. Continuing to live in or operate a business in a building that has been definitively deemed risky can endanger not only the occupants but also third parties in the surrounding area.

If evacuation and demolition do not take place despite the given time, the risky building is reported to the local administrative authority. In this case, evacuation and demolition procedures are carried out or commissioned by the local administrative authority with the support of law enforcement. The regulation stipulates that risky buildings not demolished within the given time can be demolished by the administration, and if the implementation requires it, the Presidency can also carry out the demolition work itself.

Is Forced Eviction and Law Enforcement Support Possible?

Forced eviction is possible in buildings deemed at risk; however, this process is subject to specific procedures. Ministry statements indicate that if a building is not evacuated within the given timeframe, procedures for evacuation and demolition, including opening or forcing open locked doors, may be carried out with the assistance of law enforcement if necessary. Furthermore, it is stated that those who obstruct the identification, evacuation, and demolition of risky buildings may be reported to the Public Prosecutor's Office in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Turkish Penal Code.

Therefore, it is not advisable for a property owner or tenant who wishes to oppose the risky building demolition process to resort to physical resistance. Locking doors, preventing officials from entering, obstructing the demolition team, or using threats or coercion will not strengthen their legal position; on the contrary, it may lead to administrative and criminal consequences.

If a building is deemed unsafe, an evacuation notice, or a demolition order is unlawful, the correct course of action is not to obstruct the construction but to file an administrative appeal, an annulment lawsuit, and a request for a stay of execution within the prescribed time limits. Especially if demolition is imminent, simply filing a lawsuit without requesting a stay of execution from the court does not provide sufficient protection.

Does Filing a Lawsuit Automatically Stop Eviction and Demolition?

Filing a lawsuit against a risk assessment, evacuation, or demolition order does not, by itself, halt the implementation of administrative actions. The Ministry's frequently asked questions section clearly states that if a lawsuit is filed seeking a stay of execution or annulment of a risk assessment or demolition order, the mere filing of the lawsuit will not prevent the administrative actions from being carried out unless a stay of execution or annulment decision is granted.

Therefore, when filing a lawsuit against an evacuation and demolition order for a risky building, a request for a stay of execution must be considered separately. The request for a stay of execution must be supported by arguments that the action is clearly unlawful and that its implementation would cause irreparable harm.

In cases involving risky buildings, the element of irreparable harm is often linked to the demolition of the building. Even if the court issues a cancellation order after the building has been demolished, it may not be possible to restore the building to its original state. Therefore, the lawsuit should not only state that "the action is unlawful"; it should also explain with concrete evidence that the demolition will have irreversible consequences, severely affect property rights, that the technical report is flawed, or that the notification process was improperly conducted.

What kinds of lawsuits can be filed against an eviction and demolition order?

A lawsuit against an evacuation and demolition order for a risky building will be filed as an annulment lawsuit in the administrative court, depending on the nature of the action. The subject of the lawsuit may be the identification of the risky building, the evacuation-demolition notice, the demolition decision, the demolition process by the administration, or related administrative actions.

The time limits for filing a lawsuit under Law No. 6306 are relatively short. Therefore, the date of notification, the last day of the announcement by the local administrative office, the e-Government notification, the minutes posted on the building, and all administrative letters must be considered together. An error in calculating the time limit may result in the lawsuit being dismissed due to exceeding the time limit.

The lawsuit may include the following allegations: the risk assessment of the building has not been finalized; the eviction and demolition notice was issued improperly; the wrong building was involved in the process; the demolition period was set contrary to regulations; the owner or heirs were not properly informed; the necessary board opinions were not obtained despite the building being a registered cultural heritage site; the strengthening application was not evaluated; the risk report is technically flawed; and action was attempted despite a stay of execution order being in place.

Will Mortgages, Liens, or Encumbrances Prevent Demolition?

The presence of mortgages, liens, usufruct rights, lease annotations, or other encumbrances on a risky building does not, by itself, prevent its demolition. Ministry statements indicate that the existence of mortgages on a risky building does not constitute an obstacle to demolition; and that any real or personal rights, as well as annotations restricting or prohibiting the right of transfer, recorded in the building's registry will continue to apply to the shares after the building is demolished.

This regulation pertains to the public safety aspect of urban transformation. The existence of a mortgage or lien on a building does not automatically mean that the building, which poses a risk to life safety, must remain standing. However, these rights do not completely disappear; they may continue on the land share or ownership stakes after demolition.

Therefore, the bank, creditors, mortgage holders, usufructuaries, or those with encumbrances must also follow the process. The fact that the property becomes land after demolition may affect the status of these rights holders in terms of future construction contracts in exchange for apartments, land share sales, or the creation of new independent units.

Property Owners' Rights Regarding Eviction and Demolition Orders

Property owners should not remain passive in the face of evacuation and demolition orders for risky buildings. First, they should verify whether the risk assessment of the building has been finalized. Questions such as: Has the appeal period expired? Is there a technical committee decision? Has a local announcement been made? Has an e-Government notification been submitted? When does the deadline for demolition expire? should be answered.

If Malik believes the action is unlawful, he can file a lawsuit for annulment in the administrative court and request a stay of execution. However, it should be remembered that filing a lawsuit alone will not stop the demolition.

The owner also has the right and obligation to manage the eviction and demolition process under their own control. If they vacate the building within the specified time, cancel utility subscriptions, obtain a demolition permit, and organize a safe demolition, they reduce the risk of incurring administrative demolition costs. Conversely, if the owner completely ignores the process, they may be held liable for the demolition costs incurred by the administration in proportion to their share.

Tenants' Rights Regarding Eviction and Demolition Orders

The decision to evacuate and demolish a building at risk has significant consequences for tenants as well. Since the tenant is not the owner of the property, they may not be able to use the same technical appeal process as the owner to challenge the risk assessment. However, it cannot be said that the tenant is completely deprived of their rights.

The tenant should first ascertain whether the eviction request is based on a genuine risky building process. If the owner only states that "the building will undergo transformation," the tenant may request to see the official risky building certificate, eviction/demolition report, or administrative letter. If there is a genuine and finalized risky building process, it is generally not possible for the tenant to continue residing in the building, as public safety is the primary concern in such cases.

In return, the tenant retains rights such as a return of the security deposit, a refund of the rent paid in advance, relocation expenses, application for rental assistance or relocation support, and, if it is a business, the relocation of its commercial activities. During eviction, the tenant must prepare a handover report, determine the final meter readings, request a return of the security deposit in writing, and claim any unused portion of the rent paid in advance.

Can a demolition order be implemented even when reinforcement work is already underway?

The final determination of a building as risky does not always mean that demolition is the only option. In some buildings, strengthening may be technically possible. According to the Ministry's statements, if strengthening is preferred over demolition of a risky building, the owners must have the feasibility of strengthening determined within the given timeframes, a decision for strengthening must be made by a 4/5 majority under Article 19 of the Condominium Law, a strengthening project must be prepared, and a permit must be obtained within the framework of zoning regulations. After the strengthening is completed, an application must be made to the relevant directorate to remove the risky building designation from the title deed.

Therefore, the reinforcement option is a serious, technical, and time-consuming alternative. The owners simply saying "we will reinforce it" will not automatically stop the demolition process. Reinforcement requires a technical report, a sufficient majority of owners, a project, permits, and administrative approval.

Strengthening can be considered especially for structures of historical value, where demolition would have more severe economic consequences, where strengthening is technically feasible, or where the damage level is limited. However, the cost of strengthening should be analyzed together with the cost of new construction, soil conditions, age of the building, and the mutual consent of the owners.

Who is responsible for the demolition costs?

The demolition costs of a risky building are, as a rule, the responsibility of the owners. If the owners organize the demolition themselves within the specified time frame, the demolition company's fees, permit procedures, debris removal, perimeter safety, technical responsibility, and other expenses are shared among the owners.

If the owners do not vacate the building and have it demolished within the specified time, the administration may carry out or have it demolished. In this case, the demolition costs will be collected from the owners in proportion to their shares. Administrative demolition costs may be higher than those of a demolition organized by the owners themselves. Furthermore, these costs may be subject to collection as a public debt.

Therefore, property owners need to plan the demolition organization as soon as the risky building assessment is finalized. Questions such as who will contact the demolition company, how the costs will be divided, on what date the utility subscriptions will be canceled, who will apply for the demolition permit, and how the debris and surrounding area will be handled must be resolved in writing.

Legal Status of Real Estate After Demolition

After a risky building is demolished, the building effectively disappears and the property becomes land. However, the owners' property rights do not completely cease. Owners retain their rights to the property in proportion to their land shares or stakes. The designation of a risky building in the land registry can be removed after demolition; however, procedures regarding the property's status under Law No. 6306 may continue.

The main issue in the post-demolition process is how the land will be utilized. Will the owners build the new building themselves, will they sign a construction contract with a contractor in exchange for a share of the completed building, will there be revenue sharing, how will the independent units be distributed, is the land share fair, and will the shares of owners who do not agree with the decision be sold? These are some of the questions that arise.

Therefore, the eviction and demolition decision is not the end of the urban transformation process, but the beginning of the new construction process. Property owners focusing solely on demolition and neglecting the contractor contract, land share distribution, independent unit allocation, and security deposits may lead to serious disputes in the future.

The Most Common Mistakes Made When Deciding on Evacuation and Demolition of Risky Buildings

The most common mistake in practice is confusing the official evacuation and demolition process with pressure from contractors or rumors circulating in the building. The genuine process for assessing a risky building is based on documentation. No action should be taken without reviewing reports, finalization documents, announcements, minutes, and administrative correspondence.

The second mistake is thinking that filing a lawsuit will automatically stop the demolition. Unless there is a stay of execution or an annulment order, the administration can continue with its actions.

The third mistake is assuming that the consent of all property owners is required for a demolition permit. The regulation allows for the issuance of a demolition permit without requiring the consent of all property owners when certain conditions are met.

The fourth mistake is tenants moving out without securing their deposit and advance rent in writing. A handover document must be prepared at the time of eviction.

The fifth mistake is proposing the reinforcement option at the last minute and without proper documentation. Technical suitability, a 4/5 majority, a project plan, and permits are required for reinforcement.

The sixth mistake is failing to plan the post-demolition reconstruction process. After a building is demolished, land share, contractor contract, security deposit, delivery time, and the allocation of independent units become even more critical.

Conclusion

The decision to evacuate and demolish a building deemed at risk is a serious administrative process carried out under Law No. 6306, aimed at evacuating and demolishing a building that has been definitively determined to be at risk. This process is not simply about leaving the building or calling a demolition company. It encompasses many stages, including the final determination of the building's risk, notification, announcement by the local authorities, e-Government notification, an evacuation and demolition period not exceeding ninety days, a demolition permit, closure of utility subscriptions, law enforcement support, litigation, and a stay of execution.

The most important thing for property owners is not to passively wait for the process to conclude. Once the risky building assessment is finalized, the evacuation and demolition process should be followed, demolition permits and utility subscription cancellation procedures should be prepared, applications for rental assistance and support should be evaluated, and if there are any legal irregularities, legal action and injunctions should be sought immediately.

From the tenants' perspective, the property should not be vacated without seeing the official documents; however, if there is a confirmed risky building status, they should not insist on remaining in the building. Tenants should secure their rights in writing regarding issues such as security deposits, rent in advance, relocation assistance, key handover documents, and the relocation of their business operations.

In conclusion, the decision to evacuate and demolish a risky building is a strategic process in terms of administrative law, real estate law, rental law, and urban transformation practices. Any time-related error, incomplete litigation, insufficient request for a stay of execution, or faulty demolition organization at this stage can lead to irreversible consequences in terms of property rights and economic interests. Therefore, the evacuation and demolition process for risky buildings must be carried out in a documented and planned manner, with technical and legal support.