In short
Coercive detention is a compelling sanction that comes onto the agenda when certain enforcement duties listed by the statute are not complied with. That a money debt has not been paid does not by itself produce a result of imprisonment without the creditor's complaint and a decision. The file remaining open does not build this result by itself either. Breach of a payment undertaking and enforcement of maintenance are neighbouring questions. Their document, their request, and their defence do not join in the same sentence, and this text writes neither a day nor a month for either of them. The period of imprisonment is read from the duty shown by the record in the enforcement file, the service annotation, and the request petition. A ready period of confinement is not announced, and a money debt does not open this period by itself.
It should not be taken for a debtors' prison
Coercive detention is not told as a criminal record like a conviction judgment of a criminal court. In most cases the aim is to compel performance of a duty that was not performed. The sentence the creditor builds as "you did not pay" does not produce a result before the breach, the application, and the procedure the statute looks for are completed. An invoice, an ordinary contract, or a mere balance schedule cannot be shown by itself as a ground of coercive detention. The existence of the claim and the breach of the duty are read from separate records. Before a decision issues, which duty was broken, which record it rests on, and to whom service was made are separated from the file. An invoice does not stand in for these three records.
On which duty it comes onto the agenda
Breach of a payment undertaking given at the enforcement office, some duties of declaration the statute provides, and special enforcements such as maintenance are often-mentioned links. The same route does not run in every file. A sanction route is not chosen before the type of the breach, the supporting document, and the service record are read. Breach of a payment undertaking and not giving a declaration of assets are not the subject of the same petition, because in one a promise of payment is looked for and in the other a declaration of assets. The maintenance context sits under enforcement of maintenance. What is asked here is which duty can be tied to coercive detention, and a number of days is not written.
The request petition and the record
A complaint or a request is tied to the supporting record and to the papers that were served. An oral grievance does not stand in for these papers. A sentence of breach is not built before the date, the amount, the instalment arrangement, and the signature appear in the text of the undertaking. An incomplete record is not treated as completed with an account remembered later. The application petition should show which duty was broken, how this stands in the documents, and the payment made earlier. A draft decision is not treated as written before the office record and the petition annex are read together. An unsigned record is not treated as a document of breach.
From which papers the defence is read
The hearing of the person concerned and the decision stage are arranged in the statute. If the service procedure is defective, the debate on the period and the defence comes from the concrete envelope, the service annotation, and the record of knowledge. That the office is in Çankaya does not by itself choose the court where the request will be heard. The competent authority is read from the record to which the enforcement file is tied and from the papers that were served. A district address cannot be put in place of this record. An enforcement complaint and a request for coercive detention should not be taken as the same door, because one looks at the procedure of the act and the other at the breach of a specified duty. The Çankaya address does not choose this door.
Maintenance and an undertaking stand apart
An undertaking is the promise of payment the debtor gave at the enforcement office. Maintenance is the enforcement face of a claim coming from family law. Coercive detention may come onto the agenda in both, but the document, the request, and the decision are not written with the same formula. The record looked for in one may not be the enforcement order or the maintenance document looked for in the other. An invoice cannot be put in place of these two documents. Without this separation, a period of imprisonment cannot be announced, and the papers of the two files are not pasted onto each other. A maintenance document is not a copy of the undertaking record.
Conclusion
Coercive detention is the compelling sanction of selected enforcement duties. It is not a general debtors' prison. The general frame stands on the Ankara enforcement lawyer page and in the text of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code No. 2004. Without the record, the service, and the request petition, a result is not spoken of. The period comes from the duty these three papers show, and an oral complaint does not stand in for a decision. While the three papers do not stand, a period of imprisonment is not announced either, and a money debt is not treated by itself as a ground of coercive detention.