In order for the offence of defamation to occur, it must be intended to attack the person’s honor, honor, dignity, dignity, or to humiliate the person. Every rude and unkind discourse cannot be considered an insult. Moreover, whether the word is an insult or not may vary depending on the situation of the event, people, place and time. Moreover, people equipped with administrative powers should approach their criticism with greater tolerance. You can look at the example Supreme Court decision.
18. Criminal Department
Base Number: 2015/39470
Decision Number: 2017/9714
“Case Law Text”
Court :Criminal Court
The sentence given by the Local Court was appealed, the file was discussed according to the duration of the application and the nature of the decision and the date of the crime:
As there were no reasons for the refusal of the appeal request, the work was moved to its merits.
In the examination according to the minutes, documents and content of the justification reflecting the hearing process in which conscientious blood is formed;
The legal value protected by the punishment of the act of insult is the Honor, Honor and dignity of persons, and in order for this crime to occur, the behavior must occur in order to humiliate the person. In some cases, whether a movement is offensive or not is relative and can vary depending on time, place, and situation. Any heavy criticism or offensive words directed at public officials or civilian citizens should not be considered in the context of an insult offense, and the words should clearly constitute a specific verb or fact that may offend Honor, Honor and dignity, or an act of abuse.
On the other hand, it is recognized in the case law of the ECHR that officials who have been given certain administrative powers should show greater tolerance for criticism of their words and actions. In an application for insulting statements made against public officials, the ECtHR is examining whether the words subject to the application pose a real danger of destroying public confidence in the performance of that official.
In a concrete case subject to trial; when the accused lawyer did not start the trial at the previously announced hour, referring to the judge, he loudly shouted, “If they ran out of tea, I will say another tea”, asking who said the word, he said, “I told you, will you do your trial? “you go in and do your trial,” he said on the warning of the polytheist, “you go in and do your trial, you spoke to me like this in the previous trial,” the words, the Honor, Honor and dignity of the polytheist is not offensive, disturbing, rude and out of courtesy, so the elements of the offense are not formed by reputation, regardless of whether the defendant is acquitted of this crime, instead of deciding on his conviction,
It was unanimously decided on 27.09.2017 to overturn the provision in violation of the communique, to send the file to the main/sentencing court to be continued and concluded starting from the stage before the annulment of the trial.