The institution of reconciliation was introduced into Turkish competition law with the Law on Amending the Law No. 7246 on the Protection of Competition dated 16.06.2020 and Article 43 of the Law on the Protection of Competition No. 4054. In this respect, the "Regulation on the Reconciliation Procedure to be Applied in Investigations Regarding the Abuse of Dominant Position" ("Reconciliation Regulation") was published by the Competition Authority in the Official Gazette dated 15.07.2021 and numbered 31542.

The first example of the institution of reconciliation in Turkish competition law emerged with the decision of the Competition Board, numbered 21-37/524-258 and dated 05.08.2021. In this decision, as a result of the reconciliation texts submitted by the undertakings party to the investigation within the scope of the investigation opened to determine whether Türk Philips Ticaret A.S., Dünya Dis Ticaret Ltd. Sti., Melisa Elektrikli ve Elektronik Ev Esyalari Bilg. Don. Ins. San. Tic. A.S, Nit-Set Ev Aletleri Paz. San. Ve Tic. Ltd. Sti. and GIPA violated Article 4 of the Law No. 4054, it was decided to terminate the investigation with a compromise for each party. Thus, the decision of the Competition Board regarding the undertakings concerned took its place as the first decision in terms of the implementation of the settlement system.

First of all, it should be noted that revealing the violations of competition, determining the severity and duration of the violation and determining the responsibilities of the undertakings in terms of this violation often require long periods of time, therefore reconciliation institutions are needed. In this respect, reconciliation procedures have been included in the scope of competition regulations by the competition authorities.

As a matter of fact, the concept of compromise can be defined as; "Methods based on the principle of obtaining a reduction in the penalty and agreeing on certain measures in return for undertakings admitting that they have committed the violation under investigation and giving up certain rights granted to them and allowing the early termination of the investigation."1 in its shortest and general form.

All arrangements regarding how the reconciliation institution will be initiated, how it will be carried out and its results are stipulated in the Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition and in the Regulation on the Procedure of Reconciliation to be Submitted in Investigations Regarding the Abuse of Dominant Position, Agreements Restricting Competition, Concerted Actions and Decisions. In the light of these regulations, it turns out that the institution of reconciliation has the opportunity to be implemented in terms of all kinds of violations within the scope of Articles 4 and 6 of Law No. 4051, including clear and serious violations.

In accordance with Article 43 of the Law No. 4054, the Competition Board may initiate the reconciliation procedure ex officio or upon the request of the relevant parties after the investigation has started. In the relevant article, it is also stipulated that the Competition Board may reach an agreement with the undertakings or associations of undertakings that have accepted the existence and scope of the violation until the notification of the investigation report, and a reduction of up to twenty-five percent can be applied to the administrative fine as a result of the reconciliation procedure. On the other hand, it has been regulated that in case this process results in reconciliation, the administrative fine and the issues in the reconciliation text cannot be the subject of a lawsuit by the parties.

However, the Competition Board may postpone its decision if more detailed research is needed to reveal the nature and scope of the alleged violation regarding the initiation of the reconciliation process. Again in the Reconciliation Regulation, it is also stated that in cases where the Competition Board initiates the reconciliation process ex officio, it will invite the undertakings involved in the investigation to the reconciliation negotiations and that the parties must inform the Authority in writing whether they want to start the settlement negotiations within fifteen days from the notification of this invitation. It is also emphasized that notifications made after this period will not be taken into account.

In the Reconciliation Regulation, it is foreseen that the reconciliation negotiations will start as soon as possible, once the undertakings that are the parties to the investigation submit the request for reconciliation in writing to the Authority or accept the invitation of the Competition Board in due time. On the other hand, it is also regulated that the fact that one of the parties to the investigation has started negotiations does not mean that he has accepted any alleged violation and that it will be possible for the parties to withdraw from this process until the presentation of the reconciliation text. On the other hand, the Reconciliation Regulation also includes regulations stating that in cases where the process does not result in reconciliation, if the invitation sent by the Competition Board is not accepted by the undertaking party to the investigation or if this invitation is not responded to within the time limit, reconciliation cannot be requested.

As a result, in return for saving in terms of resources due to the reduction in time and punishment, along with the trial costs caused by the mediation procedure and long investigation and administrative judicial processes, the undertakings that are party to the investigation waive their right to defense and appeal. In the event that the process results in reconciliation, the administrative fine and the issues in the reconciliation text will not be the subject of a lawsuit.


1. Pektas, 2008 M. (2008)," Rekabet Hukukunda Alternatif Bir Yol; Uzlasma", Rekabet Kurumu Uzmanlik Tezi. s.14

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.