CHAPTER 1: HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF MONEY AND THE EMERGENCE OF VIRTUAL MONEY
1.1. Definition and Legal Functions of Money
Money has been subject to different definitions from economic and legal perspectives. In general terms, money is the primary medium of exchange used in the purchase of goods and services, the discharge of debts, and the payment of indemnities. At the same time, it plays a role in determining and transferring the surplus value generated as a result of production. From a legal standpoint, money is a payment instrument that fulfills the obligation and discharges the debt.
1.2. Historical Evolution and Types of Money
Throughout history, money has transformed according to the needs of societies. In early times, scarce precious metals such as gold, silver, and bronze were used as “commodity money.” With the expansion of commercial volume, these metals were replaced by common symbols and paper money. In legal doctrine, money is generally classified into five main types:
- Commodity Money: Precious metals that possess intrinsic use value in and of themselves.
- Representative Money: Paper banknotes backed by a specific reserve of gold or silver.
- Book-Entry (Scriptural) Money: Money consisting of numerical records in bank accounts.
- Electronic Money: Digital representations of official fiat currency in circulation, issued by authorized institutions.
- Virtual Money: Digital assets that are not issued by a sovereign state or central bank, but are accepted by virtual communities.
1.3. The Bretton Woods Era and the Severance of the Causality Between Money and Gold
Until 1974, the Bretton Woods Agreement prevailed in the global financial system. Under this system, national currencies were pegged to a specific gold reserve held in central banks. However, in the 1970s, through decisions of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the causal link between money and gold was entirely severed. Thus, money ceased to be an index of gold and became an independent medium of circulation on its own. With their structure independent of gold, today’s official fiat currencies have, in a sense, laid the groundwork for the independent logic of crypto assets.
1.4. Authority to Issue Currency in Turkey
Pursuant to Article 87 of the Constitution, the authority to issue currency belongs to the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM). The TBMM has historically transferred this authority to the Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey (CBRT) through various laws. Under Law No. 3985, the authority to issue banknotes was granted to the CBRT indefinitely. Pursuant to Law No. 5083, the official currency of the Republic of Turkey is the Turkish Lira.
CHAPTER 2: TECHNICAL STRUCTURE AND OPERATING PRINCIPLES OF CRYPTO ASSETS
2.1. What is Cryptocurrency?
Crypto assets are sets of encrypted data created with hundreds of lines of code that possess monetary value. These assets enable peer-to-peer transfers without the need for a trusted central authority. By means of cryptographic methods, the uniqueness and non-replicability of the data are guaranteed.
2.2. Blockchain Technology
The use and control of cryptocurrencies are conducted over a distributed ledger database known as the blockchain. The first example of cryptocurrency is Bitcoin; today, there are over a thousand different crypto assets such as Ethereum, Litecoin, Ripple, and IOTA. The blockchain ensures that transactions are recorded transparently and immutably retroactively.
2.3. Virtual Wallets and the Key System
Crypto assets have no physical existence. Purchasing, selling, and custody operations take place through virtual wallets. Virtual wallets contain two fundamental key mechanisms:
- Public Key: A transfer address visible to everyone, analogous to an IBAN in banking systems.
- Private Key: Analogous to a bank card PIN. It serves to authorize transactions. It must be known solely by the wallet owner. If lost, the assets can never be accessed again.
2.4. Wallet Types and Custody Methods
Wallets where crypto assets are stored are classified according to their technical characteristics:
- Hot Wallet: Wallets operating connected to the internet. They are practical and easy to use; however, they are vulnerable to cyberattack risks.
- Cold Wallet: Hardware devices without an internet connection. They provide high security against internet hacking.
- User-Controlled (Non-Custodial) Wallets: Private key information is entirely the user’s responsibility. If an intermediary company collapses, the assets remain unaffected; however, if the user forgets the key, access becomes impossible.
- Intermediary Platform (Custodial) Wallets: Assets are stored on the servers of exchange platforms. Security is provided by the intermediary firm. If the company experiences systemic issues or goes bankrupt, user assets are put at risk.
CHAPTER 3: LEGAL NATURE OF CRYPTO ASSETS AND LEGISLATION
3.1. Legislative Status in Turkey, Law No. 7518, and the Regulation on the Disuse of Crypto Assets in Payments
Although there is not yet a direct regulation regarding attachment specific to the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law in Turkish law, with Law No. 7518 entering into force in 2024, the definition of crypto assets was introduced into the Capital Markets Law No. 6362, establishing a legal/administrative infrastructure. Furthermore, pursuant to the “Regulation on the Disuse of Crypto Assets in Payments” (ÖKVKDY) published by the CBRT on April 16, 2021, their use as a payment instrument has been restricted.
Definition of Crypto Asset Pursuant to Article 3/1 of ÖKVKDY:
“Crypto asset refers to intangible assets that are created virtually using distributed ledger technology or a similar technology and distributed over digital networks, but are not characterized as fiat money, scriptural money, electronic money, payment instruments, securities, or other capital market instruments.”
Pursuant to paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 3 of the said Regulation, the direct or indirect use of crypto assets in payments and the provision of services related thereto are strictly prohibited. This regulation has restricted the qualification of cryptocurrencies as an official payment or exchange instrument.
3.2. Debates on Legal Characterization in Doctrine
In legal doctrine, three main views are put forward regarding the legal nature of crypto assets:
- Theory of Corporeal Property (Goods): Although ownership authority is recognized pursuant to Article 683 of the Turkish Civil Code, the generally accepted concept of property requires a corporeal (tangible) existence. Since crypto assets do not possess a physical/corporeal existence, it is argued that they cannot be considered property in the strict sense, but property provisions can be applied by analogy.
- Theory of Securities: Based on the premise that they should be evaluated as negotiable instruments providing partnership or creditor rights within the scope of the Capital Markets Law. However, because they do not represent a fixed sum and do not generate periodic income, they are not accepted as securities in doctrine.
- Theory of Virtual Money: Handled as a store of value and medium of exchange accepted by virtual communities, even though it is not official national fiat currency. Today, the dominant view in doctrine is that crypto assets constitute an intangible asset value measurable in money and qualify as virtual money.
CHAPTER 4: CRYPTOCURRENCIES IN TERMS OF ENFORCEMENT LAW AND ATTACHABILITY
4.1. Being Subject to Enforcement Proceedings
Subjecting crypto assets to enforcement proceedings varies depending on the chosen proceeding path:
- Enforcement Proceedings via General Attachment (Enforcement without Judgment): Since the Turkish Lira equivalent of cryptocurrencies can be determined, enforcement proceedings without a judgment can be initiated by stating the debt amount in TL.
- Proceedings Specific to Negotiable Instruments: In negotiable instruments, the amount must be in official national currency or foreign currency (Turkish Commercial Code Art. 776). Writing cryptocurrency as the value on the instrument vitiates its negotiable instrument character. Therefore, proceedings cannot be initiated via this route.
- Enforcement Proceedings with Judgment: If specific performance and delivery of the cryptocurrency in specie is demanded, a lawsuit must first be filed before a court to obtain a judgment (ilam). After obtaining the judgment, enforcement proceedings with judgment can be initiated.
4.2. Attachability of Cryptocurrencies and Legal Basis
Attachment is the seizure of the debtor’s assets, rights, and receivables in an amount sufficient to cover the debt. Articles 82 and 83 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law enumerate unattachable assets and rights exhaustively. Crypto assets are not among these articles.
The fundamental principle in enforcement law is that all types of asset values that can be measured in monetary terms and are not explicitly prohibited from attachment by law can be attached. Since cryptocurrencies possess an economic value, their attachment is possible. Indeed, enforcement court decisions have also ruled that crypto assets constitute digital foreign currency and virtual money, and therefore can be subject to attachment.
CHAPTER 5: IDENTIFICATION, CUSTODY, AND PRACTICAL ISSUES IN ATTACHMENT PRACTICE
5.1. Debtor’s Obligation of Declaration of Assets and Sanctions
Since crypto assets lack a central registry administration, the most important tool during the identification phase is the debtor’s declaration of assets (Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law [EBL] Art. 74). The debtor is obligated to declare all assets, rights, and claims in their possession or held by third parties to the enforcement office.
The debtor is obligated to disclose the crypto assets in their wallet in the declaration of assets. Disciplinary imprisonment is applied pursuant to EBL Art. 76 against a debtor who fails to make a declaration of assets. Against a debtor who conceals crypto assets or makes a false declaration, criminal proceedings are initiated for the offense of making a false declaration pursuant to EBL Art. 338.
5.2. Attachment Procedures in Wallets and the Authority of the Enforcement Officer
The methods to be applied by the enforcement office vary according to the debtor’s wallet type:
- Hot Wallet Attachment: The debtor has an obligation to open locked places (EBL Art. 80/3). The enforcement officer may demand that the debtor enter their private key to open the hot wallet and transfer the asset.
- Cold Wallet Attachment: Physical hardware wallets are considered valuable property within the scope of EBL Art. 80/4. The location where it is kept can be forcibly opened, and the device can be physically seized.
- Private Key Impasse: Even if the cold wallet device is seized, if the debtor refuses to provide the private key or claims to have forgotten it, accessing the assets within the wallet and converting them into cash may become impossible.
5.3. Attachment on Exchange Accounts (Attachment Notice under EBL Art. 89)
If the debtor’s assets are held in intermediary exchanges operating in Turkey (BinanceTR, BTCTürk, Paribu, etc.) or payment institutions (Papara, etc.), an attachment notice pursuant to EBL Art. 89 is served on these companies by the enforcement office. The company examines the accounts belonging to the debtor, registers an attachment annotation on the debtor’s account, notifies the enforcement office of the situation, liquidates the assets in line with the instructions of the enforcement office, and transfers the resulting amount to the enforcement office’s bank account.
5.4. Foreign Platforms and Bankruptcy Scenarios
If the debtor’s assets are located on foreign exchange platforms abroad, identification becomes extremely difficult due to the high level of anonymity and insufficient international judicial cooperation.
5.5. Foreign Platforms and Bankruptcy Scenarios
1-) In the decision of the Council of State 10th Chamber dated 28.05.2025, Docket No. 2021/3363, Decision No. 2025/2779, the following evaluation was made regarding the status of crypto assets:
“Although expressed as cryptocurrency in some judicial decisions, digital and/or crypto assets are addressed within the scope of property rights in the legal sphere, and are subjected to judicial practice by even accepting that they pass to the estate as digital assets; however, in the stage of technological development achieved today, given that these assets are far from possessing the characteristics of money or currency, and in the face of the diversity and/or convergence in the types and qualities of crypto assets; a regulation to be made toward using ‘crypto assets’ that do not conform to centralized money or currency (including digital money) issued under the state’s monopoly authority as a payment instrument would be contrary to the requirement—stipulated in Law No. 6493 and the harmonized EU acquis—that a securely and efficiently functioning payment system must have a solid legal basis and a mechanism ensuring the control of financial and operational risks that may hinder the efficient operation of the system.”
2-) Istanbul Regional Court of Justice 3rd Civil Chamber, Docket No. 2026/157, Decision No. 2026/83, Dated 21.01.2026:
“The right underlying an interim injunction must be determined accurately. The disputed object between the parties or the right constituting the subject of the trial also constitutes the right that is the subject of the injunction. The Law emphasized this matter by stating ‘regarding the subject of dispute’ (Art. 389/1). However, the particular point to be noted is that an interim injunction should not be granted in matters falling within the domain of other provisional legal remedies. For this reason, in money claims, the primary provisional legal remedy outside of special and exceptional circumstances is a precautionary attachment (provisional seizure)… In the concrete case, the plaintiff demands the restitution of their coins in kind, and if this is not possible, compensation for their damages arising from the said transaction, under the allegation that their coin accounts were seized by third parties following a SIM card swap. Although the plaintiff requested an injunction on the defendants’ assets to secure their claim, since the defendants’ assets are not the subject of dispute in the instant case, granting an interim injunction pursuant to Article 389 of the Code of Civil Procedure (HMK) is legally not possible.”
3-) Istanbul Regional Court of Justice 19th Civil Chamber, Docket No. 2021/1963, Decision No. 2021/1628, Dated 17.09.2021:
“The request relates to granting an interim injunction on the company accounts due to the blocked money alleged to belong to the plaintiff and located in the defendant company’s account arising from ‘cryptocurrency’ trading transactions conducted via the application belonging to the defendant company… In the concrete case, it being understood that the defendant’s bank accounts made the subject of the interim injunction request were not strictly the subject of dispute, and that pursuant to the mandatory provision of the law, accepting the plaintiff’s interim injunction request was not legally possible, the court’s decision to dismiss the applicant’s injunction request was found in accordance with procedure and the law.”
CONCLUSION AND GENERAL EVALUATION
Although crypto assets have not yet attained a complete statutory status, they are intangible asset components possessing economic value. Pursuant to the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law, there is no legal obstacle to their attachment. In order to prevent debtors from concealing assets and to eliminate the grievances of creditors, official crypto wallets must be established within enforcement offices, exchange integrations must be secured, and the legislative infrastructure must be urgently completed.