No. Türkiye has no free-standing statute governing franchising. The relationship runs as a sui generis contract under the general provisions of the Turkish Code of Obligations (No. 6098), together with the Industrial Property Law (No. 6769) for trademark licensing and the use of know-how, and the Law on the Protection of Competition (No. 4054) with the vertical-agreement rules.
The absence of a dedicated statute does not reduce the importance of the contract; it increases it. Trademark use, the fee and royalty structure, territory and exclusivity, operating standards, confidentiality, the post-term non-compete, termination and goodwill indemnity are shaped entirely by what the parties agree. The Court of Cassation draws by analogy on agency and exclusive-distributorship principles where they fit, so the contract is best written in line with that case law rather than against it. Nor is the absence of a statute an absence of duties: a pre-contractual good-faith disclosure obligation applies under general principles, and misleading turnover or profitability figures given before signature can create liability of their own.
Shall we apply this matter to your situation?
Tell us your specific situation in a few sentences; we'll assess it with the right team.