12,637 papers · updated 18 Sept 2026livingmeta.ai
← Browse all papers
AI evidence extraction

Artificial Intelligence Regulation in Türkiye: Current Position and Future Trajectory

Osman Gazi Güçlütürk · Turkish Academy of Sciences eBooks · 2026

AI-generated evidence extraction, verified across multiple analytical personas. Not a substitute for the peer-reviewed original.

5/10
Relevance
1/4
Quality (LMQS)
I
Evidence
0
Citations
0.00
FWCI

This is an AI analysis. Read the peer-reviewed original at the publisher: https://doi.org/10.53478/tuba.978-625-6110-86-1.ch12

Methodology & findings

Study design

Critical legal and policy analysis examining existing legal norms, institutional structures, and legislative proposals.

Main result

The study found that "Türkiye does not yet have a stand-alone AI-specific statute" but existing legal frameworks are being applied to AI applications. Additionally, "harmonisation with the EU AI Act (AIA) is not a mere policy choice but a commercial and technical necessity due to the Customs Union relationship between Türkiye and the EU." The authors emphasize that "AI is not a transient hype but becoming a permanent and horizontal element of the Turkish legal framework."

Reports effect sizes.

Research paradigm

Interpretivist; critical policy analysis

Author conclusions

The authors conclude that "AI is not a transient hype but becoming a permanent and horizontal element of the Turkish legal framework" and emphasize "the importance of Türkiye developing a unique regulatory strategy that fosters innovation while protecting fundamental rights."

Risk of bias

Selection bias in legislative sources analyzed (only documented proposals); potential temporal bias (study published 2026, analyzing recent proposals); author perspective on regulatory necessity may reflect particular stakeholder interests; no discussion of competing regulatory philosophies or dissenting viewpoints regarding AI governance approach.

Open questions raised

  • The study identifies the need for Türkiye to develop a unique regulatory strategy that balances innovation with fundamental rights protection, addressing gaps in AI-specific legislation and the institutional coordination between the newly established cybersecurity authority (SGB) and the Directorate General for National Technology and Artificial Intelligence (MTYZGM).
  • Türkiye's lack of stand-alone AI-specific legislation
  • the need for unique Turkish regulatory strategies beyond EU harmonization
Data: not_statedCode: not_statedExtracted from: pdfAgreement 77%

Explore related topics

Institutional PolicyAI GovernancePolicy Analysis

Related papers

← Browse all papers