Some service providers still offer to mail a claim form straight to a defendant in Türkiye, or to have it handed over informally. Under the 1965 Hague Service Convention those channels are closed for Türkiye. This page explains the declaration behind that, the one place where the post office does appear in Turkish service, and why the choice of route can come back later if a judgment has to be enforced in Türkiye.
What Article 10 allows, and what Türkiye said
Article 10 keeps alternative channels open unless the State of destination objects: sending judicial documents by postal channels directly to persons abroad under 10(a), and service directly through judicial officers, officials or other competent persons under 10(b) and 10(c). In its declaration of 28 February 1972, Türkiye declared its opposition to the methods of service set out in Article 10. The HCCH Practical Information page for Türkiye records that opposition against all three sub-paragraphs.
Consular service is limited as well
Article 8 allows service through the diplomatic or consular agents of the State of origin. Türkiye declared that such agents may effect service only on their own nationals. A consulate in İstanbul can serve a citizen of its own State living there, but not a Turkish company or a national of a third State. For every other addressee the route is the Central Authority: the Directorate General for Foreign Relations and EU Affairs of the Ministry of Justice (DİABGM), Ankara.
Where the post office does come in
The post is not absent from Turkish service; it is used by the Turkish authorities, not by the sender abroad. Türkiye’s Practical Information page explains that when documents are in Turkish or carry a Turkish translation, the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office serves them through the post offices under domestic law. That is service executed inside Türkiye after the request has passed through the Central Authority, which is a different act from a foreign court or law firm mailing papers to a Turkish address.
The same line in older and criminal instruments
Türkiye took the same position under the 1954 Hague Convention on civil procedure, objecting to the direct methods of its Article 6 and limiting consular service to the sending State’s own nationals. In criminal matters, Türkiye made a reservation to Article 16 of the Second Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (ETS 182): it does not accept judicial decisions and other documents being sent by foreign authorities directly by post to persons in its territory.
Why the route can matter at enforcement
A foreign civil judgment is executed in Türkiye only after a Turkish court grants exequatur (MÖHUK Article 50). The conditions listed in Article 54 include the right of defence: whether the defendant was duly summoned and represented. An analysis published by the Turkish law firm Paksoy reports that the Court of Cassation has consistently refused to enforce German and US judgments where the defendant in Türkiye had been served by post, and that service through diplomatic channels after the judgment became final did not cure the defect. That is the firm’s reading, cited with its source; whether it affects a given case is for the lawyer to judge.
The other direction works differently
The objection protects addressees in Türkiye. It does not stop Turkish courts from using the post abroad: Circular 63/3 para. 18 allows the Turkish documents, with a translation into the addressee’s language, to be sent by registered post directly to addressees in States that accept Article 10(a). An addressee in France or the United States may receive Turkish court papers in the mail; an addressee in Türkiye is not served with foreign court papers that way.
What we translate for the Convention route
Acte Tercüme prepares Turkish translations of claim forms, summonses and annexes for requests that go through DİABGM, so that they can be served under Article 5(1). We do not arrange postal or informal delivery into Türkiye.