Solidarity With OTHERS published a report in March 2026 examining the use of police custody and pre-trial detention against pregnant women in Türkiye between the state of emergency declared after the attempted coup of July 2016 and the end of 2025.
The report, Pregnancy Behind Bars: Pre-Trial Detentions of Pregnant Women in Turkey, considers how detention measures have affected pregnant women, particularly in investigations involving alleged links to the Gülen movement. It compares documented practices with Türkiye’s domestic legal framework and international standards governing liberty, healthcare and the treatment of women in detention.
The authors describe arrest and pre-trial detention as procedural measures intended to preserve evidence and support the administration of justice, rather than as punishments. Because they directly restrict liberty before a final conviction, the report says they should be exceptional, necessary and proportionate, and should be imposed only when less restrictive measures would not be sufficient.
According to the report, concerns documented since 2016 include detention decisions that were allegedly insufficiently reasoned, extended periods of detention without timely indictments, restricted access to healthcare and unsuitable detention conditions. The authors say pregnancy creates additional responsibilities because deprivation of liberty may affect both maternal and foetal health.
Legal standards and alternatives to detention
The report reviews the United Nations Bangkok Rules, which address the treatment of women prisoners and non-custodial measures for women offenders. It notes that these rules favour alternatives to detention wherever possible for pregnant women and women with dependent children.
Under the standards cited by the report, custody should generally be considered only in serious cases where continued detention is necessary and the person presents an ongoing risk. Decisions should also take account of the best interests of the child.
The report says possible alternatives include bail, judicial supervision and house arrest. Judges should assess the need for detention individually and explain why such alternatives would be inadequate in the circumstances of a particular case.
Other international standards examined include the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, known as the Nelson Mandela Rules, and the European Prison Rules. These require people deprived of liberty to receive humane treatment and appropriate healthcare, with additional protection for those in vulnerable situations.
The report highlights rules prohibiting the use of restraints during labour, childbirth and the period immediately afterwards. It also says pregnant women should not be subjected to disciplinary isolation and should receive accommodation, nutrition, hygiene and medical care appropriate to their condition.
The publication further considers protections under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention against Torture, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the European Convention on Human Rights.
Taken together, the report says these instruments establish that pre-trial detention should not be the general rule, that detention must be justified by necessity and proportionality, and that all people deprived of liberty must be treated with respect for their dignity. It argues that applying apparently identical rules without considering pregnancy may produce unequal and disproportionately harmful consequences for women.
Health risks and reported practices
The authors identify pregnancy as a period of heightened physical and psychological vulnerability. Factors including nutrition, sleep, hormonal changes and immune-system function may affect the health of both the woman and the unborn child.
According to the report, conditions commonly associated with closed detention facilities—including stress, restricted access to healthcare and limitations in hygiene or nutrition—may intensify these risks. Pregnant detainees therefore require timely prenatal and postnatal healthcare, appropriate accommodation and individual assessment.
The report also examines the principle of individual criminal responsibility. It argues that the unborn child should not experience avoidable adverse consequences as a result of criminal proceedings concerning the mother. This requires authorities to consider the possible effects of custody and detention when deciding whether a less restrictive measure could achieve the same procedural purpose.
Alongside its legal analysis, the publication examines selected cases involving pregnant women between 2016 and 2025. Its focus is primarily on investigations and prosecutions for alleged membership or leadership of a terrorist organisation concerning people accused of affiliation with the Gülen movement.
The study uses a mixed methodology combining analysis of legal standards with case-based research. Information was collected through media monitoring, examination of open-source material and documents, and analysis of posts on the social media platform X. The authors say social media information was cross-checked against other available sources where possible.
The publication cautions that the cases included do not represent every woman who may have been held in custody or pre-trial detention while pregnant. The authors assess that other cases may not have been publicly identified because of fear, limited reporting and restrictions on media access or publication.
The report also reviews Türkiye’s constitutional guarantees and criminal procedure safeguards, as well as provisions governing the postponement of prison sentences, prison administration and the preservation of contact between mothers and children. It distinguishes between pre-trial detention, imposed while criminal proceedings are continuing, and the enforcement of a sentence following conviction.
Its central conclusion is that the detention of pregnant women cannot be considered only as a matter of criminal procedure. According to the authors, it also engages the rights to health, liberty and humane treatment, as well as the state’s responsibility to protect maternal and foetal health.
The report argues that detention decisions must therefore involve a concrete, individual assessment of the woman’s condition, the procedural reasons for detention and the availability of alternatives. It says heightened safeguards are required throughout pregnancy, childbirth and the postnatal period.