TC
Supreme
18. CRIMINAL DEPARTMENT
E.2015/8443
K.2015/9550
T.28.10.2015
SITUATION : The decision made by the Local Court has been appealed, but the duration of the application, the nature of the decision and the file according to the date of the crime have been discussed:
DECISION: Since there is no reason requiring the rejection of the appeal request, the basis of the work has been passed.
In the examination conducted on the basis of the minutes, documents and the content of the justification reflecting the judicial process in which the conscientious conviction was formed, it was found that other justifications were not in place.
But :
1- The legal value protected by the punishment of an insulting act is the honor, dignity and dignity of persons, and in order for this crime to occur, the behavior must occur for the purpose of humiliating the person. In some cases, whether a move is refereed or not is relative and may vary depending on time, location and situation. Any kind of severe criticism or offensive words directed at people should not be considered within the scope of insult crime, these words should clearly constitute a concrete verb or fact reference or insult verb that may offend honor, honor and dignity.
“We don’t count, we don’t stand up, we don’t respect anyone here, call your manager, prosecutor, we don’t stand up no matter who comes, we don’t count, come and get it if you can” and vulgar words of address are considered offensive to the honor, honor and dignity of the victim, since the elements of an insult crime have not been formed, a conviction decision has been made,
2-According to the admission, 125/1 of the Turkish Penal Code in determining the conviction for insulting a public official because of his duty. not taking into account the article, ignoring the fact that Article 125/3-a of the Turkish Penal Code should be applied directly,
CONCLUSION :
Contrary to the law, defendant A..K..when the reasons for the appeal and the opinion in the communiqué were evaluated on the spot, the DECISION was taken under Article 325 of CMUK. defendant S, who did not come to the appeal examination due to connection in accordance with the authority granted by the article..K..on 28/10/2015, it was unanimously decided that the file should be continued starting from the preliminary examination stage and sent to the criminal court of first instance for decision.