Reposting a tweet containing insults on social media also constitutes the crime of insult. This is because the elements of the crime of insult are linked together in a chain. You can review an example of a Supreme Court decision.
Criminal Division
Case Number: 2015/10377
Decision Number: 2015/12777
“Text of Justice”
COURT: Criminal Court
CRIME: Insult
RULINGS: Acquittal, conviction
The decisions rendered by the Local Court were appealed, and the case file was examined taking into account the time limit for appeals, the nature of the decision, and the date the crime was committed:
Since there were no grounds for rejecting the appeals, the matter was referred to the next stage.
Based on the examination of the minutes, documents, and reasoning reflecting the trial process, in the trial process where the conscientious opinion was formed,
it was decided not to agree with the opinion stated in the report due to the removal of insulting words about the participants from the defendant’s own Twitter account and the fact that the defendant’s defense did not comply with the normal course of life.
1-
As a result of the hearing conducted in accordance with the law, it was determined that the necessary elements were present to justify the solution reached for the defendant’s act of insult, that this act was committed by the defendant, that all allegations and defenses put forward at the stages were presented in a manner that would allow for an appeal review, and that, without any changes to the essence, it was discussed based on conscientious, definitive, consistent, and non-contradictory data, that the act was correctly characterized, and
it was appropriate to the type of crime provided for in the law,
although it was understood that the act of insult was committed due to the participant’s position as the Governor of Adana at the time, it was not deemed necessary to apply Article 125/3-a of the TKK, and since there was no counter-appeal, it could not be withdrawn,
it was understood that the JUDICIAL AUTHORITY WAS CONFIRMED with the appeal essentially being rejected based on the reasons put forward in the defendant’s defense. In the opinion of the lawyer, the reasoning in the report was not considered appropriate.
2- Regarding the appeal of the decision against the defendant…;
Other reasons were not considered appropriate.
However;
considering the fact that the defendant reposted the tweet shared by the other defendant on Twitter with his own confession, regardless of whether it stems from the elements of the crime of insulting a public official for performing his duty, it was unanimously decided to acquit the defendant instead of convicting him. The case will be sent to the main/sentencing court to be concluded, starting from the stage prior to the annulment of the trial, on the grounds that it is contrary to the law, since the participants’ and lawyers’ grounds for objection and the grounds stated in the notification were deemed appropriate.