27/11/2025 | Writer: Kaos GL
The 11th Judicial Package was submitted to the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye today. The anti-LGBTI+ provisions, which had drawn public backlash since they first appeared, were removed from the package.
Photo: Dilara Açıkgöz / csgorselarsiv.org
The 11th Judicial Package, which came onto the agenda in Türkiye in October, was submitted to the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye today. The anti-LGBTI+ provisions were removed from the package.
The regulations aimed at trying children pushed into crime as adults were also removed from the judicial package. According to the draft, it was planned to increase the upper limits of prison sentences set out for age minority for children pushed into crime.
The regulations included in the package had been protested in many cities; human rights organizations had called for the removal of the provisions in the package, and objections had been raised.
What was included in the submitted package?
AKP Group Chair Abdullah Güler stated today in a press briefing at the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye that the 11th Judicial Package constitutes a continuation of the previous reform process. Noting that the package was prepared based on the 4th Judicial Reform Strategy Document, Güler said the regulations focus on public safety and combating crime. According to Güler, if the package is passed into law, prison sentences of up to 30 years are stipulated for organization leaders who involve children in crime, and up to 7 years and 6 months for those who fire guns into the air in public spaces.
Among the announced articles, a regulation stipulating a prison sentence of up to 3 years for the acts of blocking roads or preventing the movement of vehicles in traffic is also included. Assessments that this article could also be used in investigations regarding collective actions such as assemblies and demonstrations had sparked public debate, and objections had been raised by civil society and human rights defenders.
What did the anti-LGBTI+ regulations in the draft say?
According to information reflected in public opinion, the draft of the 11th Judicial Package proposed amendments to the 225th article of the Turkish Penal Code, titled “Obscene Acts.” It was planned to add a paragraph to the article that would pave the way for LGBTI+ individuals to receive prison sentences.
According to the draft, individuals who “engage in, or openly encourage, praise, or promote attitudes and behaviors contrary to innate biological sex and public morality” were to be given prison sentences ranging from 1 to 3 years.
If these regulations had entered into force, it was anticipated that digital content platforms publishing LGBTI+-themed content would also be subject to sanctions.
Furthermore, the same draft also included the provision: “If individuals of the same sex hold engagement or marriage ceremonies, these individuals shall be sentenced to 1 year and 6 months to 4 years of imprisonment.” It also proposed raising the existing sentence of “openly engaging in sexual intercourse or committing exhibitionism,” which currently ranges from 6 months to 1 year, to 1 to 3 years.
Regulations that made the gender transition process more difficult were also included
The stated grounds emphasized goals such as “raising healthy individuals and generations” and “protecting the institution of family.”The draft also included new regulations that made accessing “gender reassignment surgery” more difficult. Accordingly, the age threshold for “gender transition” was raised from 18 to 25; and the requirement of four separate medical board assessments was introduced in order to undergo surgery.
With these regulations, it was stated that the aim was to “ensure the gender transition process is carried out in a healthier manner and in a way that avoids irreversible risks.”
The general grounds included terms such as “protecting the institution of family and the social structure,” “combating movements of homogenization,” and “fulfilling the state’s obligation to protect youth and families,” along with references to “fighting genderless movements.” It was argued that the state must “fulfill its duty to protect youth and families against homogenizing influences.”
Tags: human rights, trans, lgbti, lezbiyen, gey, biseksüel, interseks
