T.C. THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT
Date of Decision: 30.06.2016
CRIME OF OPPOSITION TO LAW NO. 4733 – IT WAS DECIDED THAT THERE IS NO ROOM TO WITHDRAW THE DISCLOSURE OF THE PROVISION ON GROUNDS THAT DO NOT FALL WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE FILE ON THE DEFENDANT WHO DOES NOT HAVE A CRIMINAL RECORD – VIOLATION OF THE PROVISION
SUMMARY: The decision that there is no place to leave the disclosure of the verdict on grounds that do not fall within the scope of the file without explaining how the negative opinion that the defendant, who does not have a criminal record and whose negative personality reflected in the file cannot be identified, will not commit a crime again, required to be overturned. It has been decided that the provision will be overturned.
(5271 Pp. K. m. 231) (5237 P. K. m. 51, 53) (ANY. MAH. 08.10.2015 T 2014/140 E. 2015/85 K.)
Case and Decision: The verdict given by the local court was appealed; the application was discussed and considered on behalf of the Turkish Nation after the file was read according to the nature, type of punishment, duration and date of the crime;
I. CMK’s 231st. in the defense of the defendant, who has no obstacles to the establishment of the revocation of the disclosure of the provision regulated in the article, there is no information and documents about the damage in the file, as well as the amount of damage not reported to the defendant, taking into account that the amount of damage to the defendant is not reported to the customs authority, the amount of “customs duties and other co-effective taxes and financial burdens provided for in the import of the goods subject to be accounted for is a public loss to the defendant and, if necessary, Criminal Procedure 231/9 of the Code. a decision should be made taking into account the paragraph of the article, while the defendant, who does not have a criminal record and whose negative personality reflected in the file cannot be identified, will not commit a crime again without explaining how the negative opinion was formed on the grounds that it does not fall within the scope of the file 5237 of the TCK 51 and 5271 of the CMK 231 of the CMK 5271. non-application of the articles,
II. 24.11.2015 29542 published in the Official Gazette numbered and Date, Date 08/10/2015 of the Constitutional Court, decision by decision of principles and Article 53 of the Penal Code No. 5237 2014/140 2015/85. due to the cancellation of some parts of the article, there is an obligation to re-evaluate this article,
53 OF the TCK. article 3. in accordance with paragraph 1. the rights and powers of the defendant, written in paragraph (c) of paragraph (c), regarding custody rights over his own child, as well as conditional release from performing a guardianship or trusteeship service, rights and powers related to those outside the child, and 1. provision shall be made in writing, without regard to the fact that it must be decided to deprive the other deprivation of rights written in the paragraph until the execution of the sentence is completed,
III. According to the date of the crime and the nature of the seized goods, the decision on the power of attorney fee in favor of the customs administration, which has not been harmed by the crime and has no right to participate in the case,
Conclusion: Contrary to the law, since the defendant’s appeals have been considered in place as of this date, 8/l of Law No. 5320. article 321 of CMUK No. 1412, which is in force in accordance with its article. the violation of the provision in accordance with the article was decided unanimously on 30.06.2016.