In short
A prison visitors' list is the record of who may enter a family visit, and a relative who is not on the list is, at most institutions, not let in. The list is for security and for planning. The identity document must match the name on the list. The period is not in this text. How many persons will be written is also read from the institution's rule, and a number is not invented here.
If the record is not current, the gate may close on the visit day. Currency does not arise of itself from an oral message. The document is the paper of relationship the institution asks for. The petition does not treat an undocumented name as written.
The job of the list is a security record
The list shows in advance who will come. The check at the gate compares identity with this list. If the name is written wrongly, there is no match. A spelling error is cured by a petition and by the institution's record of correction. Without a correction, the person is not treated as having gone in. A decision is not reached while a copy of the list is still outstanding.
The list does not have to write how long the visit will last. The period is read from the arrangement the institution announced separately, and it is not carried into this text. A period is not invented. The document shows whether the name matches the identity.
Who is written
A spouse, a child, a mother, a father, and relatives the institution accepts may be written. Relationship is shown with a civil-registry document, or with a paper the institution accepts. Saying "I am a relative" while the paper is missing does not open the record. If there is a refusal, a reason may be asked for. If the reason was not written, the refusal is not announced as a ban for an indefinite time.
The frame of a family visit sits under family visit. This record is the identity gate of that visit. Which day of the week the visit falls on is not fixed here. The period is not written either. The application is directed at completing the missing document.
A lawyer's list is not the family list
A meeting with defence counsel is not a line of the family list. A meeting with a lawyer sits under meeting with a lawyer. A power of attorney does not stand in for a document of relationship. Counsel is not treated as let in by being written in the spouse column. The two applications are two documents.
Open and closed visits sit under form of visit. The form does not change who the list carries. Prohibited items sit under visit prohibitions. A ban on an item does not of itself delete the name on the list. The minutes write what was prohibited.
Update and refusal
A new spouse, or a fiancé, does not mean the list changed at the same moment. The update procedure is asked of the institution, and no period is written here. A name on the old list is not treated as having dropped of itself before the new document arrives. If there are two copies, their dates are looked at. The old copy does not erase the new application.
The right to telephone calls sits under telephone. A telephone directory is not a copy of the visitors' list. The petition does not join the two lists. There is no period in this distinction either. The decision is read from the copy of the list in hand.
How many lines the list carries is read from the institution's own rule, and no number is written here. Which name dropped is not stated before the old copy and the new copy are placed side by side. The petition does not treat a dropped name as returned without a document. If the identity document is not the same as the spelling on the list, a gate record is kept separately. If there are no minutes, a state of not being let in is not assumed.
If the refusal writing does not contain a sentence of reasons, the refusal is not announced as a ban for an indefinite time. The reason may also be that the document of relationship is missing. Once the missing document is completed, the record is read again. The application does not put the old refusal writing in place of the new document. No period is written into this renewal either, and a number of persons is not invented.
An officer's oral refusal at the gate does not of itself delete the name on the list. A deletion should appear in the institution's written record. If it does not appear, the petition recounts the oral refusal and the copy of the list separately. The decision does not dissolve the two documents in a single sentence. There is no period, and no number of persons, in this oral refusal either.
What is looked at in the list record
A prison visitors' list is the record of the relatives who will enter the visit, and it is read apart from a meeting with defence counsel. The office being in Çankaya does not change the institution's authority for the list. That is read from the document. The period is not written. In the petition, a name is not added without an identity document.
Conclusion
The visitors' list is the identity gate of a family visit. A relative who is not on the list is, at most institutions, not let in. The period and the number of persons are not written. A meeting with defence counsel is a separate door. The frame sits on the criminal law page. The basis is the Code of Criminal Procedure, Law No. 5271.