Turkey’s Celebi Challenges India’s Security Ban, Citing Lack of Justification and Threat to Jobs

Turkish airport ground-handling firm Çelebi Aviation has filed a legal petition in the Delhi High Court to challenge India’s abrupt decision to revoke its security clearance, calling the move legally unsustainable and devoid of substantive reasoning.

The decision, announced on May 16, came amid growing political pressure and public anger in India over Türkiye’s perceived pro-Pakistan stance in the India-Pakistan conflict.

Celebi: No Warning, No Explanation

In its court filing, Celebi Airport Services India argued that the government’s order threatens:

• The livelihoods of 3,791 employees

• Investor confidence in India

• Operational stability at five major Indian airports: New Delhi, Kerala, Bengaluru, Hyderabad, and Goa

“The vague rhetoric of ‘national security’ is not backed by any detailed reasoning or evidence,” Celebi stated, asserting that no prior notice was given before the ban.

Ownership and National Security Debate

Although Çelebi’s shareholders are registered in Türkiye, the company emphasized that its majority controlling interests lie with firms not based in Türkiye, challenging the grounds of India’s claim that Turkish links pose a national risk.

The government has not yet publicly detailed any specific intelligence or legal justification behind the action.

Political Pressure and Protests

India’s Minister of Civil Aviation Murlidhar Mohol stated that the government acted on public and political demands. In a post on X, he acknowledged widespread calls to remove Celebi, citing the need to “protect national interests.”

The Shiv Sena party, a key ally in Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s coalition, has held protests in Mumbai, demanding Celebi be ousted from its operations at Mumbai Airport.

Court Hearing Expected Monday

The Delhi High Court is expected to hear the case on Monday, where Celebi will argue for the reinstatement of its security clearance and a review of the national security claim it describes as unsubstantiated.

This case may set a precedent for how geopolitical tensions and domestic political sentiments can affect foreign businesses operating in India, especially those with ownership ties to countries under political scrutiny.