This content has been translated from the original text.
This article addresses the annulment, by the Constitutional Court's decision dated 4 June 2026, File No. 2026/14, Decision No. 2026/88, of the phrase “for an indefinite period” (“süresiz olarak”) in Article 175 of the Turkish Civil Code, and the legal consequences of that decision for poverty alimony. Because the annulment will enter into force after 9 months, it assesses the status of existing maintenance obligations during this period, the fate of finalised maintenance judgments, the effect on pending divorce cases, the continuation of child maintenance (iştirak nafakası) irrespective of the decision, and the time-limited and graduated maintenance model that may come onto the agenda with the new regulation expected from the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye (TBMM). It also explains the legal balance the decision sets out within the scope of the principle of proportionality and the right to property, and that the erroneous claims that “maintenance has been completely abolished” have no legal basis.
By its judgment dated 4 June 2026, File No. 2026/14, Decision No. 2026/88, the Constitutional Court found unconstitutional and annulled the phrase “for an indefinite period” (“süresiz olarak”) in Article 175 of the Turkish Civil Code No. 4721 (TCC), one of the most debated issues in public opinion and the legal world for years. This decision is not a remote legal debate; it brings a series of legal changes that directly touch daily life, from couples at the divorce stage to maintenance debtors, from maintenance creditors to family budgets. So what has changed for ordinary citizens and practitioners? Let us explain.
One of the most talked-about and curiosity-provoking points is the effective date of the decision and the status of current maintenance payments. Pursuant to Article 153, paragraph 5, of the Constitution, the Constitutional Court decided that the annulment shall enter into force 9 months after its publication in the Official Gazette. Because the entry into force of the annulment decision has been postponed to a later date, no legal vacuum has arisen and the existing statutory provision retains its validity. Therefore, there is absolutely no question of any maintenance payment that automatically ceases with the announcement of the decision, whose maturity falls away, or that is reset without a court decision. The main purpose of this 9-month transition period is to give the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye (TBMM) time to enact a new legal regulation in conformity with the Constitution.
The second major heading is the legal reasoning of the annulment decision and “the balance between proportionality and the right to property”. Under Article 175 of the TCC, poverty alimony (yoksulluk nafakası) is a form of periodic payment made to the party who will fall into poverty because of the divorce, provided that he or she is not at greater fault, by the other party in proportion to the latter's financial capacity. The Constitutional Court held that, even though the marriage contract has factually and legally come to an end, imposing a lifelong, indefinite and unlimited financial debt on one of the parties violates the principle of proportionality in Article 13 of the Constitution and the right to property in Article 35. However, this decision does not mean that poverty alimony has been abolished altogether. The essence of the regulation is to prevent maintenance from continuing ‘for life’ and to establish a fair balance between the debtor and the creditor.
The distinction of child maintenance (iştirak nafakası) is extremely critical in terms of the limits and scope of the right. The Constitutional Court's annulment decision relates exclusively to ‘Poverty Alimony’ awarded in favour of the spouse. ‘Child Maintenance (İştirak Nafakası)’, which is awarded against the spouse who has not been granted custody in order to contribute to the care, education, health and subsistence expenses of the joint children, is entirely independent of this decision. The rights and obligations relating to child maintenance, which is paid until the joint child reaches the age of majority (or, for as long as the child's education continues, until it converts into support maintenance), continue in force in full.
In the process before the Assembly and in the new law, the change that concerns citizens lies in the graduated and time-limited maintenance model. In the new regulation expected to come before the TBMM, with the duration of the marriage accepted as the basic parameter, it is aimed to set maintenance periods limited to a maximum of 2 to 5 years in short-term marriages of 0-3 years, and to introduce upper limits proportionate to the duration of the marriage in long-term marriages. For spouses who are unable to work, elderly, disabled or in need of care, it is envisaged that exceptional protective rules granting the judge discretionary power will be introduced.
For those currently paying maintenance or whose cases are pending, the status of past maintenance judgments is being debated on the procedural front. Pursuant to the last paragraph of Article 153 of the Constitution, ‘the decisions of the Constitutional Court do not have retroactive effect’. For this reason, poverty alimony judgments that were finalised in the past and awarded for an indefinite period do not automatically fall away together with the annulment decision. However, it is expected that, through temporary articles (transitional provisions) to be added to the new law package to be enacted by the TBMM, debtors who are currently paying indefinite maintenance will be granted the right to bring an action for adaptation in line with the new time-limited tiers or for the termination of maintenance.
In the new process arising with the annulment decision, judges will have to decide in divorce cases that have been filed in family courts and have not yet become final by taking into account the Constitutional Court's 9-month postponement period and the new legal framework to be enacted by the TBMM. This transition period makes it necessary to reshape legal strategies for both the maintenance creditor and the maintenance debtor.
Finally, an important fact to know: with this decision, the maintenance obligation has not disappeared entirely. The claims circulating on social media that ‘maintenance has been completely abolished and no one will pay maintenance any more’ have no official or legal basis. The regulation, by removing the indefinite nature, introduces a time-limited and criteria-based structure. The Constitutional Court decision will enter into force 9 months after its publication in the Official Gazette, and during this period the existing statutory provisions will continue to apply.
In short, while the era of indefinite poverty alimony is closing, a time-limited maintenance model based on the duration of the marriage and the circumstances of the parties is entering our lives. If you have a pending divorce case, an enforcement file or an inheritance/maintenance dispute, we recommend that you have the effect of these changes on your file assessed by a lawyer.
