PRACTICE AREA 08
Bid Rigging Offences
Investigation, prosecution and effects on the tender process. Content will be added through the admin panel and published only after legal approval.
Bid Rigging in Public Procurement under Turkish Law
The offence of bid rigging criminalises conduct that disrupts competition and decision-making processes in public procurement through the acts expressly prescribed by law. Article 235 of the Turkish Penal Code (“TPC”) enumerates these acts exhaustively. An error in the tender specifications, an issue concerning the estimated cost, an error in the evaluation process, or any other breach of public procurement legislation does not, in itself, constitute the offence. The specific act, intent, duties and individual contribution of the person concerned, together with lawfully obtained evidence, must be assessed as a whole.
1. Scope of the Offence
Article 235 of the TPC applies to tenders for the purchase or sale of goods and services, leases, and construction works conducted on behalf of public institutions or organisations. The provision also covers certain auctions, reverse auctions and transactions undertaken by entities connected with the public sector.
The first matter to be determined is whether the relevant transaction constitutes a tender capable of falling within the scope of the offence. The Criminal General Assembly of the Court of Cassation has held that an irregularity occurring in a direct procurement procedure, which is not a tender procedure, cannot in itself be assessed within the scope of Article 235 of the TPC.
2. Acts Constituting Bid Rigging under Article 235 of the TPC
Under the law, the following conduct may constitute bid rigging:
Preventing, by fraudulent conduct, a person who possesses the required qualifications or satisfies the relevant conditions from participating in a tender or in any transaction forming part of the tender process, or enabling an unqualified person to participate in the tender;
Excluding goods offered from evaluation by falsely representing them as non-compliant with the specifications despite their compliance, or accepting goods for evaluation by falsely representing them as compliant despite their non-compliance;
Enabling others to gain access to information relating to bids that is required to remain confidential under the applicable legislation or tender specifications;
Preventing a qualified person, through force, threats or other unlawful conduct, from participating in a tender or in any transaction forming part of the tender process; and
Entering into an express or tacit agreement among persons wishing to participate or already participating in the tender for the purpose of influencing the tender conditions, particularly the tender price.
This exhaustive list may not be extended by analogy. The alleged conduct must be examined separately in terms of the relevant stage of the tender process and whether the person concerned was capable of carrying out the alleged act. The cancellation of the tender, the exclusion of a bid, and any allegation of loss to the public must each be assessed separately.
3. Why Every Procurement Irregularity Does Not Constitute a Criminal Offence
Article 5 of Public Procurement Law No. 4734 sets out fundamental principles such as transparency, competition, equal treatment, reliability and the efficient use of public resources. A breach of these principles may result in the cancellation of the tender, corrective action, disciplinary liability or liability for damages. Criminal liability, however, requires separate proof of one of the acts enumerated in Article 235 of the TPC and the requisite intent.
Article 17 of Law No. 4734 regulates prohibited acts and conduct and provides for referral to the public prosecutor’s office, together with the associated consequences, where such conduct constitutes a criminal offence.
Pursuant to Articles 9 and 61 of Law No. 4734, the estimated cost may not be disclosed, and confidential tender and bid information may not be used for the benefit of any person. Any allegation concerning the disclosure or leakage of confidential information must therefore be investigated. However, liability under Article 235 of the TPC cannot be established unless it is determined that the information related to the bids and was confidential, who enabled access to it, by what conduct such access was enabled, and whether the requisite intent existed.
Disciplinary liability and liability for damages under Article 60 of Law No. 4734 are likewise distinct from criminal liability.
4. Intent, Loss to the Public, Benefit and Individual Criminal Liability
The offence may only be committed intentionally. Negligence, a difference in legal interpretation or a failure to exercise due care is not sufficient. In relation to agreements between tender participants, there must be a specific purpose to influence the tender conditions, particularly the tender price.
The absence of loss to the public does not automatically preclude the commission of the offence. Except where the offence is committed through force or threats, the law prescribes a reduced penalty where no loss to the public has occurred.
Obtaining a benefit is not a general constituent element of the offence. Where a public official obtains a benefit as a consequence of bid rigging, the commission of an additional offence may also be considered, provided that the relevant statutory conditions are satisfied.
Criminal liability is personal. A company director, employee or tender commission member cannot be held criminally liable solely by virtue of their title or position. Their authority, knowledge, intent and individual contribution to the alleged conduct must be established.
Criminal penalties cannot be imposed upon legal entities. Where the statutory conditions are met, security measures specific to legal entities, debarment from public tenders, and consequences affecting the relevant contract may nevertheless arise.
5. Penalties and Consequences for Participation in Public Tenders
The basic form of the offence under Article 235 of the TPC is punishable by imprisonment for a term of three to seven years. Where the offence is committed through force or threats, the minimum term of imprisonment is five years. Any act involving more serious bodily injury or threats may be punished separately.
In cases other than those involving force or threats, where no loss to the public has occurred, the applicable penalty is imprisonment for a term of one to three years. The court determines the sentence in accordance with the particular circumstances of each case.
Under Article 59 of Law No. 4734, the institution of criminal proceedings may result in the person concerned and other persons connected to that person as specified by law being prohibited from participating in public tenders until the conclusion of the proceedings. This restriction does not amount to a conviction.
Judicial debarment following a conviction and administrative debarment must be assessed separately, as they are subject to different conditions and produce different legal consequences.
6. Investigation and Defence Rights
The offence under Article 235 of the TPC is not subject to a complaint as a prerequisite for investigation. Upon becoming aware of facts giving rise to the appearance that an offence has been committed, the public prosecutor is required to investigate the matter, collect evidence both for and against the suspect, and safeguard the suspect’s rights.
Where sufficient suspicion exists, an indictment is issued. Where sufficient evidence cannot be obtained, the public prosecutor issues a decision of non-prosecution. The court must base its judgment on lawfully obtained evidence examined and discussed during the hearing.
The suspect or defendant must be informed of the allegations against them and advised of their rights to legal assistance, to remain silent and to request the collection of exculpatory evidence. The scope and official records of any statement-taking, search, seizure or digital examination should be reviewed without delay.
The existence of an allegation does not constitute an admission or proof of guilt.
7. Companies Claiming to Have Suffered a Violation of Their Rights
Rather than merely alleging that “the tender was rigged”, an application should identify which specific act enumerated in Article 235 of the TPC was allegedly committed, by whom, at which stage of the tender process, and in what manner.
The tender registration number, tender notice and documentation, addenda, bids, tender commission decisions, notifications made through the Electronic Public Procurement Platform (“EKAP”), correspondence, access logs and a chronology of events should be preserved in their original form. No document or digital record should be fabricated, deleted, altered or otherwise manipulated.
A criminal complaint submitted to the public prosecutor’s office does not replace a complaint to the contracting authority, an application for review before the Public Procurement Authority, or judicial proceedings. Nor does it suspend or interrupt the time limits applicable to those remedies.
As public procurement remedies are generally subject to short statutory time limits, the criminal allegations and their consequences for the bid, debarment and contract should be assessed concurrently.
8. Persons and Companies Facing Allegations
The tender file, correspondence, EKAP and electronic-signature records, authorisation documents, tender commission minutes, access records and accounting data should be preserved in their original form, and a detailed chronology should be prepared.
It should be documented who made each decision, on the basis of which information, and within which chain of authority and approval. Before any statement or defence is submitted, the specific alternative act alleged under Article 235 and the evidence relied upon should be carefully reviewed.
9. Legal Assistance
An allegation of bid rigging may have consequences in relation to criminal liability, public procurement remedies, debarment from public tenders and the continuation of a company’s commercial activities.
The matter should therefore be examined from both public procurement law and criminal procedure perspectives from the time of the initial complaint, statement request or request for documents. Persons or entities claiming to have suffered a violation of their rights are advised to obtain legal assistance before the applicable time limits expire.
10. Frequently Asked Questions
Does every unlawful procurement act fall within the scope of Article 235 of the TPC?
No. One of the acts exhaustively enumerated in Article 235, together with intent, the conditions applicable to the principal offender or participation in the offence, and supporting evidence, must be established.
Does the absence of loss to the public mean that no offence has been committed?
No. In cases other than those involving force or threats, the absence of loss to the public is regulated as a circumstance requiring a reduced penalty.
Does an application to the public prosecutor’s office affect the time limit for an application before the Public Procurement Authority?
No. Criminal investigations, administrative complaints, applications for review before the Public Procurement Authority and judicial proceedings are governed by separate conditions and time limits.
Why is legal assistance important in cases involving allegations of bid rigging?
The offence of bid rigging requires knowledge and concurrent application of two distinct areas of law: public procurement law and criminal law. Legal assistance should therefore be obtained to ensure that both aspects are handled together and simultaneously, thereby preventing any loss of rights.
11. Related Content and Contact Information
Legal Assistance in Public Procurement Procedures • Litigation Process Management • Decisions of the Public Procurement Board • Court Decisions • Frequently Asked Questions
For a preliminary assessment, Kılıç Law may be contacted by providing the tender registration number, the contracting authority, the relevant stage of the tender process, the alleged or suspected conduct, the date on which the matter was discovered, and, where applicable, the deadline for filing an application.
Disclaimer
This text is intended solely to provide general guidance and information. It does not constitute a legal opinion or a guarantee as to the outcome of any matter. The constituent elements of the offence, the available evidence, applicable time limits and legal remedies must be assessed in each individual case by reference to the date of the alleged conduct and the legislation in force.
Legislation last reviewed: September 2026.
Principal Legal Sources
Is a deadline approaching?
You can get in touch stating the tender number, the contracting authority, the subject of the application and the deadline known to you. Sending the form does not create a lawyer–client relationship and does not create an undertaking to monitor deadlines.