Most restriction codes concern conduct. One concerns health: a person is barred on public health grounds, on the basis of a medical assessment they may never have seen and which may be out of date, mistaken, or true at the time and irrelevant now. Because the underlying facts are medical, this is also the category in which a well-prepared challenge has the clearest evidential path. This article explains how it works.
What the code signifies
In administrative practice, the G-78 code is applied to foreign nationals assessed as posing a risk in terms of public health, and is associated in reporting with communicable disease grounds. Entry restrictions and consequences for residence follow.
As with every code, classification is administrative rather than statutory, and the position in a particular case must be established by enquiry rather than assumed.
The legal backdrop is that public health is a recognised ground on which entry may be refused and residence applications assessed under Law No. 6458.
How these records arise
- A medical examination in connection with a residence or work permit application, where a condition is identified.
- A finding at the border or during a period of treatment in Türkiye.
- Information from another state.
- A historic diagnosis that remains on the record long after treatment concluded.
- A false positive or an error in testing or in record-keeping.
- Mistaken identity.
The third and fourth are the categories most often encountered in practice: a condition treated and resolved years ago, or a test result never corrected, still operating as a bar.
Why this category is more challengeable
Security-based codes rest on assessments the administration is reluctant to disclose and difficult to disprove. Health-based codes rest on a fact — a medical condition — which can be examined, tested and evidenced.
That changes the character of the challenge. Instead of arguing that the administration has shown nothing, the applicant can put positive evidence before it: current test results, treatment records, a specialist's opinion that the person poses no public health risk.
Where a condition has been cured, is in remission, is well controlled, or was never correctly diagnosed, the factual basis of the restriction has gone — and a decision resting on a fact that is no longer true is vulnerable.
The evidence that works
Medical evidence in this context must do specific work. A general letter confirming that someone is "in good health" achieves little. What is needed:
- Current test results from a recognised laboratory, dated recently.
- A specialist report stating the diagnosis, the treatment given, the current status, and — expressly — whether the person presents a transmission or public health risk.
- Treatment history, establishing the course and its completion.
- Where a false positive is alleged, confirmatory testing by a different method or laboratory.
- Where mistaken identity is alleged, documentation distinguishing the applicant from the person in the record.
- Apostille and sworn translation where the evidence originates abroad.
The report should be commissioned with the question in mind. A physician asked to "write a letter" produces something general; a physician asked to address transmission risk, current status and fitness produces something usable.
Routes to resolution
Administrative application. Where the condition has resolved or the record is wrong, an application to the migration authorities with medical evidence is the first step. This is faster than litigation and, in this category, has a realistic prospect precisely because the evidence is objective.
Annulment proceedings. Where the administrative route fails or the restriction is maintained, an action before the administrative court within the applicable time limit — sixty days for most decisions. The court examines whether the decision has a lawful and factual basis.
Annotated visa. Where entry is needed for a defined purpose — including, in some cases, treatment in Türkiye — a consulate may issue a visa with an annotation permitting entry notwithstanding the restriction.
Where the person is undergoing treatment
An important protection operates here and is frequently overlooked.
Article 55 of Law No. 6458 provides that a removal decision shall not be taken in respect of persons who would face risk in travelling owing to serious health problems, age or pregnancy, or whose treatment for a life-threatening condition is ongoing and cannot be obtained in the country of return.
A person with a health-related restriction who is receiving treatment in Türkiye is therefore not simply exposed to removal. Where the provision applies, the correct outcome is not removal but, frequently, a humanitarian residence permit under Article 46.
Engaging this requires medical evidence addressing the specific matters the provision names — and it requires speed, because a removal decision carries a seven-day challenge period.
Privacy
Health data is sensitive personal data under Law No. 6698, and its processing is subject to stricter conditions than ordinary data. A person challenging a health-based restriction is necessarily disclosing medical information to the authorities and the court, and that disclosure should be limited to what the case requires.
In practice this means providing evidence that answers the question — current status and risk — rather than a complete medical history, and asking the lawyer to consider what genuinely needs to be filed.
Frequently asked questions
Will I be told the medical basis? Not always in detail. Establishing what is recorded is the first step.
Can the code be removed if I am cured? That is precisely the strongest case. Current evidence is what makes it.
Is a test from my own country accepted? Where from a recognised laboratory, apostilled and translated. Confirm requirements first.
How long does it take? Administrative applications are faster than litigation; both depend on the quality of the evidence.
Can I enter for treatment while it stands? An annotated visa may permit entry for a documented medical purpose.
Can I be deported while receiving treatment? Article 55 restricts removal in defined circumstances. Obtain medical evidence and take advice immediately.
Will my medical information become public? It is provided to the authorities and the court, and the disclosure should be limited to what the case requires.
Evidence decides these cases
Health-based restrictions are, of all the codes, the ones most often based on facts that have changed. That makes them the ones most often resolvable — provided current, specific medical evidence is put before the right body rather than a general letter sent to the wrong one.
Dural Hukuk establishes what is recorded, advises on the medical evidence required, makes administrative applications for correction, and brings annulment actions where a health-based restriction is maintained without a proper basis. Call +90 535 260 74 54 or use the contact form on this site.
This article is general information on Turkish law as at August 2026 and is not legal or medical advice. Obtain advice on your own record and circumstances.