Introduction:
The Turkish legal system offers a myriad of measures under the umbrella of judicial control to manage individuals suspected of criminal activities. Of these, the exit ban has garnered significant attention, both domestically and internationally. This article delves deep into the nuances of the exit ban as a form of judicial control in Turkey.

1. What is an Exit Ban?
An exit ban, as defined by the Turkish Code of Criminal Procedure (TCCP), is a restriction placed on a suspect, preventing them from leaving the country. It’s one of the various obligations that can be imposed under judicial control.

2. Rationale Behind Exit Bans:
At its core, the exit ban serves a dual purpose:

• Securing Legal Proceedings: To ensure that suspects remain within the jurisdiction, thus avoiding any potential flight risk and ensuring they face legal proceedings.
• Protection of Public Interests: In certain high-profile or sensitive cases, the suspect’s departure might be deemed contrary to national interests.

3. Imposition of Exit Bans:
As per Art. 109, if there are grounds for arrest, a decision to put the suspect under judicial control may be rendered. This can result in imposing an exit ban. Importantly, even in scenarios where there’s a legal prohibition against arrest, exit bans can still be applied.

4. Other Judicial Control Measures vs. Exit Ban:
While the TCCP lists various judicial control obligations, from regular visits to financial safeguards, the exit ban stands out for its direct implications on an individual’s freedom of movement. It can significantly affect a person’s professional, educational, and personal pursuits, especially if they have commitments or connections outside of Turkey.

5. Critiques and Controversies:
The imposition of exit bans has been the subject of critique:

• Overreach: Concerns arise when exit bans are applied too broadly, potentially affecting not just genuine flight risks but also journalists, activists, and academics.
• Human Rights Concerns: Prolonged exit bans, especially when applied without clear justification, might be seen as an infringement on human rights, particularly the right to freedom of movement.

6. Implementation & Oversight:
The decision to impose an exit ban, as with other forms of judicial control, is made considering the specifics of the case. The Justice of Peace, during the investigation phase, or the trial court, during the prosecution phase, issues these decisions. The views of the public prosecutor, the suspect, and their defense counsel play a crucial role in this.

Conclusion:
Exit bans, as a form of judicial control in Turkey, exemplify the delicate balance between upholding the integrity of the judicial process and ensuring individual rights. Their application, while valuable in specific contexts, necessitates rigorous oversight and a commitment to justice and human rights.