This interview is with Gökhan Cindemir, attorney at law - Turkish lawyer at cindemir law office.

Gökhan Cindemir, attorney at law - Turkish lawyer, cindemir law office

Can you tell us about your background in law and how you came to specialize in crypto law and international private law?

I began my legal career by earning my law degree from Marmara University Faculty of Law in Istanbul. Early on, I developed a strong interest in cross-border legal matters, which led me to specialize in international private law. I later pursued an LL.M. in European and Comparative Law at Ghent University in Belgium, where I deepened my understanding of cross-jurisdictional legal frameworks.

My involvement in international advocacy, including participation in the Philip C. Jessup Moot Court Competition, further strengthened my analytical and comparative legal skills. Over time, I began closely following the legal challenges emerging from the rise of blockchain technology and crypto-assets. Recognizing the regulatory gaps and the fast-evolving nature of this sector, I naturally transitioned into crypto law.

Today, I advise on the legal compliance of crypto-asset service providers, stablecoin issuers, and blockchain-related projects, with a particular focus on EU regulations such as the Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) Regulation. My expertise lies at the intersection of technology, financial regulation, and cross-border legal coordination, where I continue to contribute both academically and professionally.

What inspired you to focus on the intersection of cryptocurrency regulations and traditional legal frameworks?

My interest in the intersection of cryptocurrency regulations and traditional legal systems was sparked by the growing tension between innovation and regulation. As someone trained in both European and international private law, I witnessed how established legal doctrines often struggled to adapt to the decentralized and borderless nature of blockchain technologies. What inspired me most was the realization that legal clarity and stability are essential to unlocking the true potential of crypto-assets—without stifling innovation. I saw an opportunity to contribute to the formation of coherent legal standards that protect consumers, ensure financial integrity, and allow emerging technologies to flourish within a rules-based system.

This space uniquely combines rapid technological advancement with complex legal challenges—such as cross-border enforceability, jurisdictional questions, and compliance obligations under evolving EU regulations like MiCA. Engaging with these challenges motivates me daily, both as a legal practitioner and as a researcher committed to shaping future-ready legal frameworks.

As an expert in both Turkish law and EU regulations like MiCA, how do you navigate the complexities of cross-border crypto transactions?

Navigating cross-border crypto transactions requires a dual awareness of regulatory expectations and legal cultures. Turkish law currently lacks a comprehensive framework for crypto-assets, which creates ambiguity for businesses and investors. In contrast, the EU's MiCA Regulation introduces a harmonized regime, particularly for asset-referenced tokens and crypto-asset service providers (CASPs), offering much-needed legal clarity.

My approach begins with a comparative assessment—identifying where Turkish law diverges from or remains silent compared to MiCA. I then structure cross-border operations in a way that mitigates legal uncertainty in Turkey while ensuring compliance with EU obligations, particularly in areas like whitepaper disclosures, anti-money laundering (AML) controls, and authorization requirements for CASPs.

Additionally, I rely heavily on international private law principles to resolve issues related to jurisdiction, governing law, and enforcement. I often advise clients to structure their legal entities and smart contracts in jurisdictions with predictable regulatory environments, while also developing compliance strategies that anticipate incoming Turkish regulations.

Ultimately, the key lies in staying ahead of evolving standards while promoting legal interoperability between national and supranational regimes.

Can you share a specific case or situation where your expertise in private international law significantly impacted a crypto-related legal matter?

I was recently consulted in a case involving a dispute between a European investor and a Turkish-based crypto exchange. The investor claimed damages due to the platform's alleged failure to fulfill contractual obligations after a sudden token delisting, which caused significant financial loss. The challenge lay in the cross-border nature of the dispute—governing law and jurisdiction were not clearly established in the platform's terms of use.

Leveraging my background in private international law, I first conducted a conflict-of-laws analysis to determine which jurisdiction's laws applied. Applying the Rome I and Brussels I bis Regulations on contractual obligations and jurisdiction, I was able to argue for the investor's right to bring the case before a court in their home country under consumer protection grounds.

Furthermore, I assisted in the legal characterization of the crypto-assets in dispute, and in shaping the case strategy to ensure enforceability of any eventual judgment, even across jurisdictions.

This case emphasized the importance of clear jurisdiction clauses in crypto contracts and the strategic value of private international law in enabling legal remedies in a borderless digital environment.

How has your experience with the Turkish Commercial Code amendments in 2011 influenced your approach to adapting to new crypto regulations?

The 2011 amendments to the Turkish Commercial Code marked a significant modernization of our legal system, aligning many provisions with international standards, particularly in areas such as transparency, corporate governance, digital communication, and accounting. As a legal professional active during that transition, I witnessed firsthand how disruptive yet necessary regulatory reform can be when faced with evolving commercial realities.

That experience taught me two essential lessons which continue to shape my approach to crypto regulation today: First, legal adaptability is a professional imperative. Just as the 2011 reforms required a shift in mindset from rigid bureaucracy to compliance-oriented corporate culture, today's crypto regulations demand a nuanced understanding of both technology and public interest. Second, stakeholder education and proactive legal structuring are critical during transitional periods. Many companies in 2011 struggled simply because they underestimated the timeline and impact of legal changes. I apply that lesson now by advising crypto clients to invest early in legal compliance strategies—even before full clarity exists.

In essence, my exposure to the 2011 reform process cultivated a forward-thinking regulatory mindset. It helps me bridge the gap between traditional legal principles and novel technologies like blockchain, always with a view toward long-term regulatory alignment and cross-border operability.

What unique challenges have you encountered when advising clients on compliance with both Turkish crypto laws and EU's MiCA, and how did you overcome them?

One of the most distinct challenges I've faced is navigating the significant divergence in regulatory maturity and legal certainty between Turkish crypto regulations and the EU's Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) Regulation. While MiCA provides a detailed, structured, and forward-looking framework, Turkey's regulatory environment for crypto assets remains relatively fragmented and evolving, often relying on general financial and criminal law provisions rather than dedicated crypto legislation.

This disparity creates compliance friction for clients operating cross-border or considering expansion into both jurisdictions. For example, under MiCA, issuers of asset-referenced tokens must meet robust whitepaper, capital reserve, and governance obligations, whereas Turkey currently lacks an equivalent classification or harmonized disclosure regime, leaving issuers exposed to ambiguity under general commercial or consumer protection laws.

To overcome these challenges, I have adopted a dual-pronged legal strategy. First, I help clients design their operations in line with the stricter of the two regulatory environments (typically MiCA) to ensure long-term scalability and credibility. Second, I maintain continuous communication with Turkish regulators and monitor draft legislation to provide proactive compliance insights. This has allowed me to create custom compliance protocols that account for legal gray areas in Turkey while meeting MiCA's strict obligations in EU markets.

Ultimately, success in advising on dual compliance lies in legal creativity, anticipation of regulatory evolution, and deep familiarity with both systems—not just in theory, but in how they're enforced in practice.

In your opinion, how is the evolving crypto legal landscape affecting corporate governance in Turkey, and what advice would you give to businesses looking to adapt?

The evolving crypto legal landscape in Turkey is subtly but significantly reshaping corporate governance expectations—especially for companies involved in digital assets, blockchain, and fintech. Although the country has not yet enacted a comprehensive regulatory framework equivalent to the EU's MiCA, ongoing regulatory drafts, Central Bank notices, and Capital Markets Board (CMB) interventions are setting the tone for stricter compliance and transparency.

For example, we are observing a shift toward enhanced disclosure obligations, risk management practices, and audit mechanisms—even in crypto firms that are not yet subject to sector-specific regulation. Boards of directors are increasingly expected to oversee crypto-related risks as part of their fiduciary duties, particularly where investor funds or public offerings are concerned.

My advice to businesses is twofold:

First, proactively adopt corporate governance practices that align with international best practices, such as those outlined in MiCA or FATF guidance on virtual assets, even before they become mandatory.

Second, appoint compliance officers or board-level committees with digital asset literacy to prepare for future obligations and respond swiftly to legal developments.

In essence, viewing crypto compliance not just as a legal formality but as a governance imperative is what will separate legally resilient companies from those at regulatory risk.

Can you describe a situation where you had to find innovative legal solutions for a client operating in the crypto space under the current regulatory uncertainty?

One case involved advising a Turkish fintech startup planning to issue a stablecoin backed by a basket of fiat currencies. At the time, Turkey lacked specific legislation for crypto-asset issuance, and there was significant legal ambiguity regarding how such tokens would be classified—whether as e-money, a security, or an entirely new financial instrument.

Given this uncertainty, I developed a hybrid legal strategy. We structured the issuance to avoid explicit classification as electronic money under Turkish law, while still complying with AML/CFT obligations and consumer protection principles derived from both the Turkish Capital Markets Board and European MiCA standards.

We also established an offshore SPV (Special Purpose Vehicle) in an EU jurisdiction with clearer guidance on crypto-backed tokens, using this legal entity for the issuance while maintaining operational control in Turkey. This dual approach provided regulatory shielding while preserving functional access to the Turkish market.

The innovation lay in preparing comprehensive internal compliance protocols, including a whitepaper and technical document review framework modeled on MiCA, even though it was not yet enforceable in Turkey. This forward-thinking legal structuring reassured investors and enabled the client to launch their product with reduced risk exposure and improved legal resilience.

Based on your experience, what do you believe are the most critical legal considerations for international businesses looking to engage in crypto activities in Turkey?

From my experience advising cross-border clients, the most critical legal consideration is the regulatory ambiguity surrounding crypto assets in Turkey. Unlike the EU, which has adopted MiCA, Turkey lacks a comprehensive legal framework defining the legal status of crypto-assets, their classification, and licensing requirements. This creates both flexibility and risk.

First and foremost, businesses must understand that although crypto trading is not banned, the use of crypto-assets as a method of payment is prohibited by the Central Bank of Turkey. This directly impacts how products or services can be monetized.

Second, firms must assess their obligations under anti-money laundering (AML) legislation. Cryptocurrency exchanges and wallet providers operating in Turkey must comply with Turkey's Law No. 5549 and related MASAK (Financial Crimes Investigation Board) guidelines, which require stringent KYC, record-keeping, and suspicious transaction reporting standards.

Third, legal structuring becomes essential. Many businesses choose to establish operations outside of Turkey while accessing the Turkish market digitally. This may mitigate certain regulatory burdens but does not fully shield them from Turkish jurisdiction, especially if they target Turkish residents.

Finally, reputational risk and consumer protection principles should not be underestimated. Even in the absence of strict crypto-specific laws, general obligations under the Turkish Commercial Code, Consumer Protection Law, and E-Commerce Law may apply.

In short, a combination of legal caution, compliance with existing financial laws, and readiness for rapid regulatory shifts is crucial for any international crypto-related business entering Turkey.

Thanks for sharing your knowledge and expertise. Is there anything else you'd like to add?

Yes—what I would like to emphasize is the importance of bridging legal theory with technological innovation. As we continue to see global legal systems adapt to the rise of crypto-assets, it's crucial that lawyers, regulators, and businesses work together proactively to establish robust, practical frameworks. I also believe Turkey holds great potential to become a regional hub for compliant blockchain innovation, provided that legal certainty and investor protections are enhanced. My goal is to contribute to that development through both legal counsel and academic research.