Revocation of a broadcasting licence is the heaviest administrative sanction in Law No. 6112, and it is not discretionary: the Law ties it to defined situations. Most of them arise not from a single event but from a process, and not missing the intermediate steps is the only way to avoid the end of it.
1. Second repetition of a grave breach
Where broadcasting contravenes Article 8/1 sub-paragraphs (a), (b) or (d), or Article 8/4, a repetition within one year of notification of the sanction decision leads to suspension for up to ten days; on a second repetition the licence is revoked (Art. 32/5). Those sub-paragraphs cover the existence and independence of the state and its indivisible integrity, incitement to hatred, praising and encouraging terrorism, and the Article 8/4 bans on matchmaking programmes, promotion of products with health claims contrary to their own legislation, and prize promises through premium-rate numbers.
2. Two repetitions after the twenty-breach threshold
For the remaining sub-paragraphs of Article 8/1, for Article 8/2 and for the commercial communication provisions, the ladder is longer: more than twenty breaches within one year → suspension of up to five days; repetition of the same breach → five to ten days; second repetition → licence revocation.
3. Loss of a licence condition
Article 32/6 sets up a three-step process, and each step is a chance.
| Step | What happens | Period |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | The undertaking is given time to satisfy the condition | 30 days |
| 2 | If it does not, broadcasting is suspended | 3 months |
| 3 | If it still does not, the licence is revoked and use of the channel and frequency is ended | — |
The same process applies where the obligation in Article 6/5 is not met; that addition was made in 2017 by Decree Law 690 and enacted in 2018 by Law 7077.
4. A licence obtained by deception
Article 32/7 has one sentence and no steps: an undertaking found to have obtained compliance with the licence conditions by deception has its licence revoked. There is no warning, no cure period and no suspension stage. The Law also states the financial consequence: the licence fee and the annual channel and frequency use fee are not refunded.
5. Broadcasting contrary to a sanction decision
The last sentence of Article 32/5: an undertaking whose programmes or broadcasts have been suspended and which continues broadcasting contrary to the requirements of the decision, despite notification, has its licence revoked. A single act suffices.
6. Third breach of a publication ban
Article 7/4 builds a separate ladder for broadcasting contrary to publication bans and restrictions imposed under Law No. 6112 or Press Law No. 5187: broadcasting is suspended for one day; on repetition within a year, up to five days; on a second repetition, up to fifteen days; on a third repetition the licence is revoked.
Broadcasting without a licence is a criminal matter
Continuing to broadcast after revocation is no longer an administrative question. Under Article 33/1, natural persons and, for legal persons, board members and the general manager face one to two years’ imprisonment and a judicial fine of one thousand to five thousand days; security measures under Article 60 of the Turkish Criminal Code apply to the legal person, and unlicensed transmission equipment is sealed and closed by RTUK.
Challenging a revocation
Revocation is an administrative sanction decision and falls under Article 32/9: recourse is to administrative justice under Law No. 2577, but the action must be brought in the administrative court within fifteen days of notification. The critical detail is that bringing an action does not suspend enforcement; a stay of execution must be requested separately.
The full set of sanction steps is in the maximum penalty guide, and the fifteen-day deadline in the appeal guide.