Legal ambiguity is a significant problem in the urban transformation process in Turkey because of its negative impact on the right to legal remedies and rule of law. It also has an existential relation with informality which has always been one of the main determinants of Turkey’s complex urbanization and housing history. In this research, I focused on legal ambiguity in urban transformation processes based on a case study of two neighborhoods in İstanbulGaziosmanpaşa, Pazariçi, and Sarıgöl. The study draws on findings from analysis of related laws, regulations, and case files of urban transformation processes: i.e., plan changes, risk area declarations, urgent expropriation decisions as well as participant observation and semistructured interviews. Through a close examination of the material and urban transformation(hi)stories of the examined neighborhoods, I benefited from the interdisciplinary methodological approach on the intersection between doctrinal research and case study research. Breaking down the lines between doctrinal research material such as case files, laws and regulations, verdicts, and case study research material such as participant observations, semi-structured interviews, policy document analysis, I achieved to understand the full meaning of legal experiences, effects of legal actions on the citizen’s life closely, detailly and holistically.

My analysis exhibits the ways in which legal ambiguity occurred in the urban transformation process and illustrates the roles of the different state powers, namely legislation, executive, local governments, and judiciary. The research reveals that legal ambiguity occurs as a product of an informal(ized) spatiolegal regime in the urban transformation process. It occurs through complementary and intertwined operations of the many legal actions implemented by the different powers of the state. I argue that the operationalization of legal actions and the political character of legal ambiguity should be understood and illustrated by focusing on complementary actions of different components.

I conclude by emphasizing that mapping the legal ambiguity with its complex and intertwined relations between different components and actions provides us with a tool to struggle against the mechanism of control over the urban transformation process.

While there is a micro-level scholarly discussion about the legal aspects of urban transformation as well as macro-level policy documents analyses of the issue, this study aims to align these two sides methodically and contextually. Through an emphasis on the intersections of law, state power, and economy, and its unique material, this analysis aims to contribute to legal studies as well as urban studies.