A party, a lawyer or an authority abroad usually has the Turkish translation prepared at home: a translator sworn in that country makes it and certifies it there. Whether such a certification counts before a Turkish court or authority has no single answer. Some instruments expressly accept a certification given in the State of origin, one looks for a translator sworn in Türkiye, and others say nothing about who certifies. The route decides, and it is identified before the translation is commissioned.
Letters of request: certification in either State
For evidence sought in Türkiye the instrument is the 1970 Hague Evidence Convention, in force for Türkiye since 12 October 2004. Türkiye excluded Article 4(2) by a reservation under Article 33 and stated that letters of request to be executed under Chapter I are in Turkish or accompanied by a Turkish translation, in compliance with Article 4(1) and 4(5). The reference to Article 4(5) is what matters here: a translation is certified as correct by a diplomatic officer or consular agent, by a sworn translator, or by any other person so authorised in either State. The certifier need not be authorised in Türkiye, so a translator sworn where the request originates is within the list.
The 1954 Convention: a translator sworn in Türkiye
Where the 1954 Hague Convention on civil procedure applies, the wording narrows. Unless otherwise agreed, the translation of a document for service (Article 3) or of a letter of request (Article 10) is certified by a diplomatic or consular agent of the requesting State or by a sworn translator of the requested State. For a document travelling to Türkiye that means a translator sworn in Türkiye, or the requesting State’s own consular officer; a translator sworn in the State of origin is not one of the two options. The distinction has practical weight with a State that is party to the 1954 Convention but not to the 1970 one, since there the older articles remain the multilateral basis for evidence.
Bilateral agreements: four formulas
Türkiye’s bilateral agreements answer the same question in four different ways. The 1933 convention with Switzerland has the translation of a letter of request certified by a diplomatic or consular officer of the requesting State or by a sworn translator of the requesting or of the requested State, so both countries’ translators appear. The 1982 convention with Tunisia goes the other way: the accuracy of the translation of a document for service is certified by the diplomatic agent or consul of the requesting Party, and no sworn translator is named, which makes certification outside Türkiye the rule itself. The 1989 convention with Morocco accepts certification by a sworn translator or approval under the law of the requesting State. The 1989 convention with Algeria asks for translations certified as conforming to the original without saying who certifies them, and for documents filed for enforcement refers to the rules of the requested State’s legislation (Article 26(e)).
Exequatur and awards: the certifier is not named
Turkish legislation is silent where one would most expect an answer. For the enforcement of a foreign judgment, MÖHUK Article 53(1) asks for an approved translation of the judgment and of the document showing finality; for a foreign arbitral award, Article 61(1)(c) asks for translated and duly certified copies of the arbitration agreement and of the award. Neither provision names the authority that approves. In a civil case the court may ask for an official translation of a foreign-language document (Code of Civil Procedure, Article 223(2)), a term the Code does not define. Under Article IV(2) of the New York Convention that certification comes from an official or sworn translator or from a diplomatic or consular agent, and the Article names no country for the translator.
What sworn means on the Turkish side
Turkish legislation creates no separate profession and no central register of sworn translators. A translator takes an oath before a notary, the record of that oath stays at that notary’s office (Notaries Law Regulation, Article 96), and the notary certifies the translation as a notarial act (Notaries Law, Articles 60(6) and 103). That notarial act is the general procedure legislation provides for certifying a translation officially in Türkiye, and it is the point of comparison when an instrument speaks of a sworn translator of the requested State.
One regulation that names both sides
One Turkish text does answer the question expressly. In the regulation on registering foreign decisions in the civil registry, the Turkish translation of the decision and of the document showing finality is accepted where it has been approved by a notary or by a Turkish foreign mission, or approved by the competent authority of the country concerned with an apostille (Article 7(1)(b) and 7(1)(c)), while for the translation of the foreign party’s identity document or passport it mentions notarial certification only (Article 7(1)(ç)). The application itself is not the subject of this page; the provision shows that where the legislator means to accept an approval given abroad, it says so.
Before the translation is commissioned
Because the answer changes from one instrument to the next, we suggest fixing the route first and reading its certification clause second: which convention or agreement applies, and whom its text names. Acte Tercüme translates documents arriving from abroad from English and French into Turkish, and Turkish files into English or French.