Indefinite maintenance (süresiz nafaka) is post-divorce maintenance (yoksulluk nafakası, maintenance for the spouse who would fall into poverty because of the divorce) based on the phrase "süresiz olarak" "for an indefinite period" (unofficial translation) in the first paragraph of Article 175 of the Turkish Civil Code. By its decision dated 04.06.2026, E. 2025/156, K. 2026/131, the Constitutional Court annulled this phrase; the decision was published in the Official Gazette dated 30.09.2026 and numbered 33386. The annulment provision enters into force nine months after publication, that is, on 30.06.2027. Until that day the phrase remains in force, and indefinite maintenance has not yet been abolished.
The guide explains what indefinite maintenance is, the Constitutional Court's annulment decision, the day on which the annulment will enter into force, the constitutional framework of the regulation expected in Parliament, the position of maintenance currently being paid and how post-divorce maintenance is assessed in pending divorce actions. Statutory provisions have been reproduced as read from the Adalex legislation record, and decisions as read from their official full texts. The date of last review is 09.11.2026.
What Is Indefinite Maintenance?
The answer to the question of what indefinite maintenance means lies in the wording of the law: the spouse who would fall into poverty because of the divorce may, provided that their fault is not greater than that of the other spouse, claim post-divorce maintenance from the other spouse for their subsistence in proportion to the other spouse's financial means, and the law states that this maintenance may be claimed for an indefinite period. What is called "indefinite maintenance" in practice is not a separate type of maintenance, but an award of post-divorce maintenance without limiting it to a period of time.
"Boşanma yüzünden yoksulluğa düşecek taraf, kusuru daha ağır olmamak koşuluyla geçimi için diğer taraftan mali gücü oranında süresiz olarak nafaka isteyebilir. Nafaka yükümlüsünün kusuru aranmaz."
"The party who would fall into poverty as a result of the divorce may, provided that their fault is not greater, claim maintenance for an indefinite period from the other party for their subsistence, in proportion to the other party's financial means. Fault on the part of the person liable for maintenance is not required." (Unofficial translation)
For this reason, the question of whether maintenance is indefinite is answered yes for the time being: as long as the phrase remains in force, courts as a rule award post-divorce maintenance without setting an end date, in the form of monthly periodic payments (irat). In its decision, the Constitutional Court also found that established judicial practice regarded this phrase as mandatory and did not grant the judge discretion as to the duration of maintenance. The principal target of the annulment decision is this automatic indefinite duration; post-divorce maintenance itself has not been abolished.
What are the conditions for post-divorce maintenance?
- The spouse claiming maintenance must be one who would fall into poverty because of the divorce; they must be in a position where they cannot support themselves on their own income.
- The fault of the spouse claiming maintenance must not be greater than the fault of the other spouse. A spouse who is equally at fault may also claim maintenance.
- The person liable for maintenance need not be at fault; the law states this expressly (Art. 175/2).
- Maintenance is determined in proportion to the financial means of the person liable; maintenance cannot be imposed on a spouse who has no ability to pay.
- Maintenance must be claimed; the judge does not award post-divorce maintenance of their own motion.
Among the conditions, the one most often confused is the criterion of "kusuru daha ağır olmamak" "not being more at fault" (unofficial translation). The law requires not that the person claiming maintenance be less at fault, but that they not be more at fault. For this reason, in its decision dated 09.06.2026, the 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation reversed the dismissal of the post-divorce maintenance claim of a woman who was equally at fault (also quoted below). The criteria by which the amount of maintenance is determined are a separate subject and are explained in the guide how is the amount of maintenance determined.
Has Indefinite Maintenance Been Abolished? Current Position
As of 09.11.2026, the answer to the question of whether indefinite maintenance has been abolished is no. The Constitutional Court annulled the phrase "süresiz olarak" "for an indefinite period" (unofficial translation), but postponed the entry into force of the annulment provision for nine months from the publication of the decision in the Official Gazette. Since the decision was published on 30.09.2026, indefinite maintenance remains in force until 30.06.2027.
For those asking whether indefinite maintenance is being abolished or will be abolished, the answer is yes; however, its abolition depends on 30.06.2027, the date on which the annulment will enter into force. The question of when indefinite maintenance was introduced sometimes concerns the source of the phrase and sometimes the date of the annulment decision: the phrase appears in Article 175 of the Turkish Civil Code dated 22.11.2001 and numbered 4721, while the annulment decision was published in the Official Gazette on 30.09.2026.
The news that indefinite maintenance has been annulled and the information that indefinite maintenance has been abolished are not the same thing. The annulment decision has been given and published; this is definitive. Abolition, however, depends on the day on which the annulment enters into force. The decision was given by majority vote, while the nine-month postponement of entry into force was decided unanimously. The operative part of the decision reads as follows:
Constitutional Court, 04.06.2026, E. 2025/156, K. 2026/131 (annulment, by majority vote; postponement of entry into force, unanimous), Official Gazette 30.09.2026, Issue 33386
"22/11/2001 tarihli ve 4721 sayılı Türk Medeni Kanunu’nun 175. maddesinin birinci fıkrasında yer alan “...süresiz olarak...” ibaresinin Anayasa’ya aykırı olduğuna ve İPTALİNE, Engin YILDIRIM, Selahaddin MENTEŞ ile Kenan YAŞAR’ın karşıoyları ve OYÇOKLUĞUYLA, iptal hükmünün Anayasa’nın 153. maddesinin üçüncü fıkrası ile 30/3/2011 tarihli ve 6216 sayılı Anayasa Mahkemesinin Kuruluşu ve Yargılama Usulleri Hakkında Kanun’un 66. maddesinin (3) numaralı fıkrası gereğince KARARIN RESMİ GAZETE’DE YAYIMLANMASINDAN BAŞLAYARAK DOKUZ AY SONRA YÜRÜRLÜĞE GİRMESİNE OYBİRLİĞİYLE 4/6/2026 tarihinde karar verildi."Unofficial translation
"It was decided on 4/6/2026 that the phrase "...for an indefinite period..." in the first paragraph of Article 175 of the Turkish Civil Code dated 22/11/2001 and numbered 4721 is contrary to the Constitution and that it be ANNULLED, BY MAJORITY VOTE, with the dissenting votes of Engin YILDIRIM, Selahaddin MENTEŞ and Kenan YAŞAR, and UNANIMOUSLY that, pursuant to the third paragraph of Article 153 of the Constitution and paragraph (3) of Article 66 of Law No. 6216 dated 30/3/2011 on the Establishment and Rules of Procedure of the Constitutional Court, THE ANNULMENT SHALL ENTER INTO FORCE NINE MONTHS AFTER THE PUBLICATION OF THE DECISION IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE."
The operative part contains two separate decisions: the annulment of the phrase and the day on which the annulment enters into force. The operative part contains no separate provision on existing maintenance decisions. For this reason, the following three points should be read together in a summary of the current position on indefinite maintenance: the phrase has been annulled, the annulment has not yet entered into force, and annulment decisions do not have retroactive effect.
| Information | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Decision given by | Constitutional Court (review of norms) | Decision reference |
| Docket and decision numbers | E. 2025/156, K. 2026/131 | Decision reference |
| Date of decision | 04.06.2026 | Operative part |
| Official Gazette | 30.09.2026, Issue 33386 | Publication record |
| Annulled | The phrase "süresiz olarak" "for an indefinite period" (unofficial translation) in TMK Art. 175/1 | Operative part |
| Voting | Annulment by majority vote; postponement of entry into force unanimously | Operative part |
| Postponement | Nine months from publication | Operative part, Constitution Art. 153/3 |
| Day on which the annulment enters into force | 30.06.2027 (30.09.2026 + nine months) | Calculation |
When Will Indefinite Maintenance Be Abolished?
The timetable for the question of when indefinite maintenance will enter into force or when it will be abolished is established under Article 153 of the Constitution. As a rule, an annulled provision ceases to have effect on the day the annulment decision is published in the Official Gazette. Where it considers it necessary, the Constitutional Court may postpone this day to a later date; the postponement may not exceed one year from the day the decision is published. In the specific decision, the postponement was set at nine months.
"Kanun, Cumhurbaşkanlığı kararnamesi veya Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi İçtüzüğü ya da bunların hükümleri, iptal kararlarının Resmi Gazetede yayımlandığı tarihte yürürlükten kalkar. Gereken hallerde Anayasa Mahkemesi iptal hükmünün yürürlüğe gireceği tarihi ayrıca kararlaştırabilir. Bu tarih, kararın Resmi Gazetede yayımlandığı günden başlayarak bir yılı geçemez."
"Laws, Presidential decrees or the Rules of Procedure of the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye, or provisions thereof, shall cease to have effect on the date on which the annulment decisions are published in the Official Gazette. Where necessary, the Constitutional Court may also decide on the date on which the annulment provision shall enter into force. That date shall not exceed one year from the date on which the decision is published in the Official Gazette." (Unofficial translation)
"İptal kararının yürürlüğe girişinin ertelendiği durumlarda, Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi, iptal kararının ortaya çıkardığı hukuki boşluğu dolduracak kanun (…) teklifini öncelikle görüşüp karara bağlar."
"In cases where the entry into force of an annulment decision is postponed, the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye shall debate and decide with priority on the law (…) proposal that will fill the legal gap arising from the annulment decision." (Unofficial translation)
"İptal kararları geriye yürümez." "Annulment decisions shall not have retroactive effect." (unofficial translation)
In paragraph 35 of the decision, the Constitutional Court based the postponement on the view that the legal gap arising from the annulment of the phrase would be of a nature to harm the public interest. The postponement period is the period left to the legislature to adopt a new regulation. In calculating the last day of the nine-month period, the publication date of 30.09.2026 was taken as the basis and nine months were added; this calculation is not a calendar day written in the decision itself, but the application to the calendar of the expression "dokuz ay" "nine months" (unofficial translation) in the operative part.
Is indefinite maintenance before Parliament, and when will the law be enacted?
The constitutional answer to the question of whether indefinite maintenance is before Parliament lies in the fourth paragraph of Article 153: where the entry into force of an annulment decision is postponed, the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye debates with priority the bill that will fill the gap. That provision imposes an obligation of priority; it does not determine the content of the law or its date of adoption. The regulation of indefinite maintenance has long been on the public agenda and in the debates on judicial packages (yargı paketleri, omnibus bills amending judicial legislation); however, as at 09.11.2026, the date of last review of this article, the phrase "süresiz olarak" "for an indefinite period" (unofficial translation) still appears in the text of TMK Art. 175 as read from the Adalex legislation record, and no new statutory provision amending the phrase appears in that record. For this reason, no date can be given in answer to the question of when the law on indefinite maintenance will be enacted; what is settled is that, even if no further regulation is adopted, the phrase will cease to have effect on 30.06.2027.
News about the bill, committee and General Assembly stages does not change the law to be applied unless the law is published in the Official Gazette. The text to be taken as the basis in an Official Gazette search on indefinite maintenance is the publication of the Constitutional Court's decision dated 30.09.2026.
Why Did the Constitutional Court Annul Indefinite Maintenance?
The Court held that the phrase was contrary to Articles 2, 5 and 17 of the Constitution. The essence of the reasoning is that providing for post-divorce maintenance categorically as indefinite, without any criterion being required, places a heavy burden on the person liable for maintenance and leaves the judge no possibility of determining the duration according to the specific case.
In paragraph 19 of the decision, it was stated that the wording of the rule does not contain a clear provision making indefinite maintenance mandatory in every case, whereas established practice regarded the rule as mandatory, and it was concluded that the rule was not clear and precise to an extent leaving no room for doubt. In paragraph 30, it was emphasised that the person liable for maintenance remaining bound for life by the consequences of a marriage after it has ended removes the reasonable balance that the State must strike between conflicting rights. The framework the Court expects from the new regulation is set out in paragraph 31:
Constitutional Court, 04.06.2026, E. 2025/156, K. 2026/131, reasoning paragraph 31
"Buna göre yoksulluk nafakası, kural olarak durumun gerektirdiği ölçüde belirli bir süreyle sınırlandırılabileceği gibi bazı durumlarda öngörülecek koşulların varlığı halinde nafaka alacaklısı lehine nafaka süresinin uzatılarak yaşam boyunca nafakaya hükmedilebilmesine imkan sağlanması da devletin çatışan haklar arasında adil bir denge kurma yükümlülüğünün sonucudur. Çatışan çıkarlar arasında dengenin kurulabilmesi için yoksulluk nafakasına 4721 sayılı Kanun’un 176. maddesi kapsamında irat biçiminde hükmedilecek durumlarda hakime; bunun süresini, evliliğin süresi, nafaka alacaklısı eşin yaşı, eğitim ve sağlık durumu ile ekonomik ihtiyaçlarını kendi imkanlarıyla karşılayabilme kapasitesi gibi birçok unsuru dikkate alarak somut olayın kendi özel şartları içinde belirleme yetkisi tanınması, bu kapsamda belirli ve öngörülebilir bir çerçeve oluşturulması gerekir. Bununla birlikte somut olayın özellikleri gereği nafakanın süresiz olarak hükmedilmesini gerektiren hallere ilişkin kriterlerin de kuralda açık ve net biçimde yer alması makul dengenin sağlanması bakımından kaçınılmazdır."Unofficial translation
"Accordingly, just as post-divorce maintenance may, as a rule, be limited to a specific period to the extent required by the situation, enabling maintenance to be awarded for life in some cases, by extending the duration of maintenance in favour of the maintenance creditor where conditions to be laid down are met, is also a consequence of the State's obligation to strike a fair balance between conflicting rights. In order for a balance to be struck between conflicting interests, in cases where post-divorce maintenance is to be awarded in the form of periodic payments under Article 176 of Law No. 4721, the judge must be granted the power to determine its duration within the particular circumstances of the specific case, taking into account many factors such as the duration of the marriage, the age, education and health of the spouse who is the maintenance creditor and their capacity to meet their economic needs by their own means, and a specific and foreseeable framework must be established in this context. Nevertheless, it is unavoidable, for the reasonable balance to be achieved, that the criteria relating to the cases in which, owing to the characteristics of the specific case, maintenance must be awarded for an indefinite period are also set out clearly and precisely in the rule."
The paragraph carries two conclusions together. First, post-divorce maintenance may still be awarded for life after the decision; the Court did not prohibit lifelong maintenance, but required its conditions to be set out clearly in the law. Second, factors such as the duration of the marriage, the age of the maintenance creditor, their education and health and their capacity to support themselves were listed for determining the duration. The factors listed are criteria the Court gave by way of example; which periods and conditions will be included in the law is within the discretion of the legislature.
In the decision, Yıldız SEFERİNOĞLU concurred in the annulment on different grounds, while Engin YILDIRIM, Selahaddin MENTEŞ and Kenan YAŞAR cast dissenting votes. Dissenting opinions and opinions setting out different reasoning are not the binding reasoning of the decision; the quotations above are taken from the majority reasoning of the Court.
What Will Happen to Indefinite Maintenance Currently Being Paid?
Post-divorce maintenance awarded by a final divorce judgment does not end of its own accord because of the annulment decision. Article 153 of the Constitution states expressly that annulment decisions do not have retroactive effect; the operative part of the Constitutional Court's decision also contains no separate provision on the position of existing maintenance awards.
This does not mean that existing maintenance cannot be changed. The ending, termination, increase and reduction of post-divorce maintenance in the form of periodic payments are already regulated in TMK Art. 176, and these remedies can be used today as well, independently of the annulment decision. Whether a new law will introduce a transitional provision for existing maintenance awards, on the other hand, cannot be known until the law is published; this article does not speculate on this matter.
"İrat biçiminde ödenmesine karar verilen maddi tazminat veya nafaka, alacaklı tarafın yeniden evlenmesi ya da taraflardan birinin ölümü halinde kendiliğinden kalkar; alacaklı tarafın evlenme olmaksızın fiilen evliymiş gibi yaşaması, yoksulluğunun ortadan kalkması ya da haysiyetsiz hayat sürmesi halinde mahkeme kararıyla kaldırılır."
"Maintenance or pecuniary compensation ordered to be paid in the form of periodic payments ends automatically if the receiving party remarries or if either party dies; it is terminated by a court decision if the receiving party lives as if actually married without marrying, if their poverty ceases or if they live a dishonourable life." (Unofficial translation)
"Tarafların mali durumlarının değişmesi veya hakkaniyetin gerektirdiği hallerde iradın artırılması veya azaltılmasına karar verilebilir."
"Where the financial circumstances of the parties change or where equity so requires, an increase or reduction of the periodic payment may be ordered." (Unofficial translation)
| Situation | Outcome | Remedy | Legal basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| Remarriage of the maintenance creditor | Maintenance ends automatically | No court decision is required | TMK Art. 176/3 |
| Death of either party | Maintenance ends automatically | No court decision is required | TMK Art. 176/3 |
| The creditor living as if actually married without marrying | Maintenance is terminated | Action for termination of maintenance | TMK Art. 176/3 |
| Cessation of the creditor's poverty | Maintenance is terminated | Action for termination of maintenance | TMK Art. 176/3 |
| The creditor living a dishonourable life | Maintenance is terminated | Action for termination of maintenance | TMK Art. 176/3 |
| Change in the financial circumstances of the parties, or equity | Maintenance is increased or reduced | Action for increase or reduction | TMK Art. 176/4 |
What should the parties receiving and paying maintenance pay attention to during this period?
The party paying maintenance should not discontinue payment of their own accord by citing the annulment decision. A final maintenance decision is an enforceable judgment (ilam, the written judgment document); enforcement proceedings may be initiated for unpaid months, and the accumulated debt may be claimed together with interest. If termination or reduction is sought, evidence should first be gathered: the creditor's record of insured employment, regular income, shared address with the person they live with or the change in the parties' income should be shown concretely in the statement of claim.
The party receiving maintenance, for their part, should keep documents showing their own state of poverty, such as income and health records, in order in case an action is filed. If the court decision contains no criterion for the annual increase of maintenance, an action for increase should be filed separately. When the new law is published, the transitional provisions should be examined separately for both parties.
The action for increase of maintenance and the calculation of the annual increase are covered separately in the guide on the action for increase of maintenance and its calculation, and the calculation of an approximate amount in the maintenance calculation tool.
Post-Divorce Maintenance in Pending Divorce Actions
In actions decided up to 30.06.2027, courts apply TMK Art. 175 with its wording in force. Although the rule that post-divorce maintenance is indefinite continues during the transitional period, the law already permits a decision for maintenance to be paid as a lump sum, that is, in a single payment, instead of as monthly periodic payments (TMK Art. 176/1). A decision of the 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation given after the Constitutional Court decision draws attention to this option.
2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, 29.06.2026, E. 2026/734, K. 2026/7297 (reversal as regards post-divorce maintenance; unanimous)
"Yoksulluk nafakasının toptan ya da irat biçiminde ödenebilmesine karar verilebilmesi için, kusurun niteliği, evliliğin süresi, tarafların ekonomik ve sosyal durumları ile ödeme gücü ve isteklerinin göz önünde bulundurulması gerektiği açıktır."Unofficial translation
"It is clear that, in order for it to be decided that post-divorce maintenance may be paid as a lump sum or in the form of periodic payments, the nature of the fault, the duration of the marriage, the economic and social circumstances of the parties and their ability to pay and their wishes must be taken into consideration."
In the file that was the subject of the decision, the parties had been found equally at fault, and the post-divorce maintenance claim of the woman, who was not working and had no income, had been dismissed by the Regional Court of Appeal. The Chamber reversed the decision on this point, stating that the matter of awarding lump-sum post-divorce maintenance (toptan yoksulluk nafakası) on a one-off basis must also be taken into account in accordance with the economic and social circumstances of the parties, the duration of the marriage, the woman's age, the absence of any impediment to her working, her chance of remarrying and the principle of equity. A detailed review of the decision is on the lump-sum post-divorce maintenance decision page.
In its decision dated 09.06.2026, the same Chamber corrected the determination of fault, accepted the parties as equally at fault and reversed the dismissal of the woman's post-divorce maintenance claim. This part of the decision shows that the conditions for maintenance are assessed together with the principle of equity:
2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, 09.06.2026, E. 2026/523, K. 2026/6286 (reversal as regards fault, compensation and post-divorce maintenance; unanimous)
"Gerçekleşen bu durum karşısında kadın yararına, 4721 sayılı Kanun'un 4 üncü maddesindeki "hakkaniyet ilkesi" de dikkate alınarak, 4721 sayılı Kanun'un 175 inci maddesi gereğince uygun miktarda yoksulluk nafakasına hükmedilmesi gerekir."Unofficial translation
"In view of this situation that has arisen, post-divorce maintenance of an appropriate amount must be awarded in favour of the woman pursuant to Article 175 of Law No. 4721, also taking into account the "principle of equity" in Article 4 of Law No. 4721."
Both decisions show the current practice regarding the conditions for post-divorce maintenance: it is sufficient that the person claiming maintenance is not seriously at fault, equal fault is not an obstacle to maintenance, and discretion is exercised according to the measure of equity. The decision as a whole is examined on the page on the decision on divorce compensation in cases of equal fault. How claims for fault and maintenance are to be raised together in a contested file is explained in the guide contested divorce action.
Commonly Confused Information About Indefinite Maintenance
| Commonly heard statement | Legal position (09.11.2026) | Legal basis |
|---|---|---|
| Indefinite maintenance has been abolished | The phrase has been annulled, but the annulment enters into force on 30.06.2027 | Constitutional Court operative part, Constitution Art. 153/3 |
| The maintenance I pay has been discontinued by the annulment decision | It is not discontinued; annulment decisions do not have retroactive effect | Constitution Art. 153/5 |
| Lifelong maintenance can no longer be awarded | The Court wrote that lifelong maintenance may be made possible, provided that its conditions are set out in the law | Constitutional Court decision, paragraph 31 |
| Maintenance paid for a child will also be time-limited | The annulled phrase concerns post-divorce maintenance; child support (iştirak nafakası, maintenance for the child) is regulated in separate articles | TMK Art. 175, Art. 182, Art. 330 |
| For maintenance, the paying spouse must be at fault | Not required; fault on the part of the person liable for maintenance is not required | TMK Art. 175/2 |
| A spouse who is equally at fault cannot receive maintenance | They can; the condition is that the claimant's fault is not greater | TMK Art. 175/1, 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation 2026/6286 K. |
Legal Support in Indefinite Maintenance Files
In indefinite maintenance files, the strategy for the periods before and after 30.06.2027 should be built separately. For the party paying maintenance, the route that has legal effect today is not waiting for the annulment decision, but proving with concrete evidence the grounds for termination and reduction in TMK Art. 176: the creditor earning a regular income, living together as if actually married, or a change in the parties' financial circumstances. For the party receiving maintenance, on the other hand, the enforceability of the existing decision continues until the transitional provisions of the new law are published. In a pending action, the maintenance claim should be raised with the lump-sum payment option also considered and with the allocation of fault correctly established.
For an assessment in maintenance, termination and increase files, you can contact our office through the Adana maintenance lawyer page. The divorce process as a whole is described on the Adana divorce lawyer page.
Sources
- Constitutional Court, 04.06.2026, E. 2025/156, K. 2026/131 (Decisions Database)
- Turkish Civil Code (TMK) No. 4721, Art. 175 and Art. 176 (mevzuat.gov.tr)
- Constitution of the Republic of Türkiye, Art. 153 (mevzuat.gov.tr)
- Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 29.06.2026, E. 2026/734, K. 2026/7297
- Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 09.06.2026, E. 2026/523, K. 2026/6286