Threat crime
Although the crime of threat is an element of many crimes, it is also regulated in the Turkish Penal Code as an act that constitutes a crime in itself. Threat is a word of Arabic origin and means coercion or intimidation. In its decisions regarding the crime of threat, the Supreme Court has defined threat as a phenomenon that disrupts people's peace of mind.
The crime of threatis regulated under the title of crimes against freedom of the Turkish Penal Code. By regulating the crime of threat, the legislator aimed for people to live in peace and safety. This situation is stated in the justification of Article 106 of the Turkish Penal Code: "The legal value that the threat protects here is the peace and tranquility of people; thus, a feeling of insecurity in people is prevented. Therefore, with the article in question, attacks committed against people's unique peace and tranquility are punished. However, the main value that the threat wants to protect with this article is the person's freedom to decide and act." It is explained as follows.
According to Article 106 of the Turkish Penal Code, the crime of threat is committed by threatening another person that he or she will commit an attack on his or her relative's life, body or sexual immunity, or that he or she will cause great damage to his or her property or commit any other evil. As can be understood, the crime of threat is an optional and mobile type of crime. Again, no form requirement was required in terms of the commission of the crime. As a matter of fact, the crime of threat can be committed verbally, in writing or through behavior.
In the first sentence of the law article, the basic version of the crime is defined, separated by the conjunction "or", and in the second sentence, the qualified version that requires less punishment is defined. This issue will be discussed further below.
Perpetrator of the threat crime
The crime of threat can be committed by anyone, provided that it is a real person. No special qualifications were required for the perpetrator. As a matter of fact, the article of the law uses the expression "threatening person" when defining the crime and states that the perpetrator of the crime can be anyone.
VICTIM OF THREAT CRIME
The term "victim" refers to people who were attacked. The victim of the crime of threat is the person whose peace of mind is disturbed. Anyone whose freedom is violated can become a victim of crime. However, the victim of the crime must be identified. Statements that are not directed to an addressee or whose addressee cannot be identified do not constitute the crime of threat.
The person to whom a threat is directed must be able to perceive the threat. The person cannot perceive the threat directed at him for any reason or due to age etc. If he cannot understand it for reasons such as, the crime of threat will not occur. For example, since the person is asleep, he cannot perceive the threat, so no crime will occur. As a matter of fact, the Supreme Court of Appeals stated in one of its decisions that "it is wrong not to take into account the fact that, in accordance with Article 32 of the Turkish Penal Code, regarding property damage and threat crimes as of the date of the crime, the legal status of the defendant must be determined according to the results by duly obtaining a medical report on whether "due to mental illness or weakness, he cannot perceive the legal meaning and consequences of the acts he has committed, or whether his ability to direct his behavior in relation to this act has decreased or has decreased significantly." He ruled as follows.
CONDITIONS OF THE CRIME OF THREAT
The material element of the crime of threat is threatening someone else with the promise that he or she will commit an attack on his or her relative's life, body or sexual immunity.
Unfair Attack
For the crime of threat to occur, there must be a serious and unjust attack. It does not constitute a crime to notify a person committing a crime by making a bet. Although the fear of reporting affects a person's psychological state, reporting a report is not an unfair action. Likewise, words such as "If you do not pay my debt, I will go to court" cannot be considered as a threat. Regarding the incident, the Supreme Court stated that "From the examination of the file, the defendant said to the participant, who is the hospital manager, "What is your name, I will show you" at the administrative office where he went to complain about the elevators not working and the toilets being closed at the hospital where he brought his daughter for treatment. The participant claimed that the defendant uttered the words stated in the indictment, and the defendant stated that he did not accept the accusations at all stages and only said that he would complain to the Ministry of Health. When the concrete event is evaluated in the light of these explanations; the way the incident occurred, "When the aforementioned words are evaluated within the context of the whole discussion and the injustice he thinks he has been exposed to and claims, it is understood that they were made within the scope of exercising his right to complain, and according to the established jurisprudence of our Department, the said words remain within the scope of exercising his right to complain. Considering that there is a reason for compliance with the law within the scope of the "exercise of the right" regulated in Article 26/1 of the Turkish Penal Code, it is against the law to give a verdict of acquittal for the defendant, whereas it should be." There is a decision as follows. Again, if the situations listed as legality in the law exist, a crime will not occur. For example, in case of self-defense , the crime of threat will not occur.
Weight of Attack
In the crime of threat, there is a double distinction in terms of the severity of the attack. If the threat is directed to the person's life, body and sexual immunity, it will be sufficient for the crime to be considered objectively serious. If the threat is directed to assets, the damage must be great.
Subject of the Threat
For the crime of threat to occur, the threat must be directed to the life, physical and sexual immunity, or property of the person or a relative. In addition, notification of other evil is also considered a threat. An attack on life is carried out by threatening death. An attack on bodily immunity refers to situations such as causing pain to the person or deteriorating his health. Other threat refers to the situation where the perpetrator's threat to the victim does not specify what the evil will be. In other words, if the person's life, body, sexual integrity or property is threatened with something other than his/her property, the existence of other evil notification will be mentioned.
Impact of the Threat
Another condition required for the crime to occur is the availability of the threat. In the justification of Article 106, it is stated that "Whether or not the threatened evil will occur is not important for the crime to occur. The threat must be objectively serious. In other words, there must be an objective possibility that the threatened evil will occur if what is requested is not fulfilled. If the words spoken and the behavior performed are not sufficient, sufficient and appropriate to produce results in terms of creating serious fear on the person addressed, it cannot be claimed that the threat has occurred. The perpetrator's words and behaviors are appropriate enough to create serious fear and anxiety on the addressee." It is necessary to investigate whether the threat is objectively serious or not. Although the perpetrator wanted to threaten the victim with words and behaviors that were objectively serious, the threat still occurred. Whether or not the threat is realized should not be dependent on whether the perpetrator has the means and power to commit the threatened rape. "Once this belief is aroused in the victim, it does not matter whether the perpetrator actually has the means or power to commit the threatened rape. The victim may have been persuaded by deception that the threatened rape was serious. However, a person is not threatened by a statement that he or she may be exposed to harm based on superstitious beliefs." The conditions under which the crime will occur are stated by using expressions such as:
Delivering the Threat to the Victim
For the crime of threat to occur, the victim must know that the evil will happen. The crime of threat is completed when the victim is informed. The crime of threat also occurs if a notification is made through a third party. However, if the victim is not aware of the threat, the crime will not occur.
INTENTION IN THREAT CRIME
The crime of threat is a crime that can be committed intentionally. It is not possible to commit the act by negligence. General intent is sufficient for the crime to occur. The existence of special intent is not required.
Words Spoken During a Fight Are They Considered a Threat?
According to the Supreme Court, threatening words spoken during a fight do not constitute the crime of threat. In order for a crime to occur, the perpetrator must use his words in a conscious and deliberate manner. However, there can be no talk of any planning during a fight. In addition, since the threatening words spoken by people to each other during a fight occur as a result of impulsive emotions, the crime of threat cannot be considered.
QUALIFIED CONDITIONS OF THE THREAT
1-Threat with a Weapon
The use of weapons increases the fear of the victim. For this reason, the legislator has regulated that the punishment should be aggravated in case of armed threat. In order to talk about a threat with a weapon, the threatening act must be carried out with a weapon. In other words, the fact that the perpetrator is carrying a gun alone does not require a qualified situation to occur. Displaying the weapon is sufficient to constitute the crime. Situations such as the authenticity of the weapon or whether it works or not are not important in terms of the occurrence of the crime. However, if the victim knows that the gun is not real, a qualified situation does not occur. In addition, if the weapon is displayed in the absence of the perpetrator, the qualified crime will not occur. As a matter of fact, the Supreme Court stated that "In the incident where the defendant took out his gun and used threatening expressions (I will fill the bullets of this gun with that man's man) by asking the victim in his absence, in an environment where the victim was not present and witnesses were present, it was understood that the intimidating feature of the gun was not realized against the victim in the threatening action and that the victim learned about the incident after the law enforcement seized it. "The legal status of the defendant must be determined based on the results." There is a decision as follows.
2- The perpetrator commits the crime of threat by making himself unrecognizable
If the perpetrator puts himself in a position where he cannot be recognized in any way, this is considered an aggravating reason for the crime of threat. If the victim does not know who the danger is coming from, this will also create fear. Since the victim, who does not know the person who carried out the attack, will have difficulty defending himself, it is envisaged that the penalty will be increased.
3- Committing the Crime of Threat by Unsigned Letter
Again, in such cases, it is undoubtedly that the fear experienced by the victim will increase. Since increasing the penalty for the crime of threat is linked to an increase in fear, there is no doubt that a qualified form of the crime of threat will occur in this case. For this qualified situation to occur, the victim must not know who sent the letter.
4- Committing the Threatening Crime with Special Signs
Special signs should increase fear in the victim. Signs resembling death, pictures dripping blood, etc. In these cases, the qualified form of the crime occurs.
5- Committing the Threat Crime with More than One Person
The victim's ability to protect himself from a threat committed by more than one person is significantly reduced. The fear he experiences increases at the same rate. For this reason, this situation is regulated as a qualified situation. In order for this qualified situation to occur, all of the perpetrators must be direct perpetrators. Additionally, the perpetrators must have intent to threaten. In other words, all of the perpetrators must have known that they were threatening the victim according to a plan. Regarding the issue, the Supreme Court said, "In the incident, it is wrong to make judgments about the defendants on insufficient grounds without explaining how the defendants agreed and planned and carried out the action they took with the will to participate in the suddenly developing discussion environment." There is a decision in the form.
6- Committing the Threat Crime by Taking Advantage of the Frightening Power Created by Existing or Assumed Criminal Organizations
For a qualified situation to occur, the organization must be a criminal organization. The organization does not have to actually exist. Even in the event of an assumption, a qualified situation will occur. The organization must have a frightening effect.
THE CASE THAT MITIGATES THE PUNISHMENT FOR THE CRIME OF THREAT
The lawmaker has regulated that if the perpetrator of the crime of threat threatens another person by saying that he will attack his or her relative's life, body or sexual immunity, he will be sentenced to imprisonment from six months to two years, and if he threatens that he will cause great damage to his property or do other evil, upon the complaint of the victim, he will be sentenced to imprisonment of up to six months or a judicial fine. As can be understood from the regulation, the punishment for the crime of threat is divided into two according to the legal value to which the threat is directed. The basic form of the crime is included in the first sentence of the article, and the qualified version that requires less punishment is included in the second sentence.
In order for the perpetrator's sentence to be reduced, the threatened person must have been threatened with property or other evil. There is no legal explanation here as to what other evil is. It can be said that other evils are personal values such as people's private lives or honor or prestige.
PUNISHMENT FOR THREAT CRIME
If the threat targets the life, body and sexual immunity of the person, the perpetrator is punished with imprisonment from 6 months to 2 years.
If the threat is directed against the victim's assets, the perpetrator will be sentenced to up to 6 months in prison.
In case of the qualified circumstances mentioned above, the perpetrator is punished with imprisonment from 2 to 5 years.
POSTPONEMENT OF THE ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE JUDGMENT IN THE CRIME OF THREAT
If the perpetrator is sentenced to imprisonment of 2 years or less, HAGB provisions may be applied. Since no damage will occur due to the crime of threat, the condition of repairing the damage in terms of HAGB does not apply.
THREAT CRIME COMPLAINT PERIOD
If the threat is directed to the life, body and sexual immunity of the person or his/her relative, no complaint is required. If the threat is directed to assets, follow-up is carried out upon complaint. Complaint period 6 months.
THREATEN CRIME RECONCILIATION
The simple form of the crime of threat is within the scope of TCK 106/1 mediation. Qualified cases are not within the scope of conciliation.
COMMITTED TO THREAT CRIME
At the beginning of our analysis, we stated that the crime of threat is accepted as an element in some crimes. For example, threat is an element of crime in terms of plunder crime. In such cases, the perpetrator is not punished for the crime of threat in accordance with the provisions of the compound crime.
TCK 106/3. A special regulation is included in the article. Accordingly; If the crime of intentional killing, intentional injury or damage to property is committed for the purpose of threatening, an additional penalty will be imposed for these crimes.
In some cases, two crimes may occur simultaneously. For example, if the perpetrator shoots into the air to threaten the victim, he/she commits both the crime of deliberately endangering general security and threatening with a weapon. In such cases, the perpetrator is not punished for two separate crimes. According to the rules of society, the perpetrator is punished for the crime with a more severe penalty. In cases where two crimes occur, the perpetrator will be punished only for the crime of threatening with a weapon, since the penalty for threatening with a weapon is more severe.
If the victim is insulted in addition to the crime of threat, the perpetrator is also punished for the crime of insult.
It is possible to apply chain crime provisions in the crime of threat.
Legal Representation & Consultation
This article is provided for general legal guidance. To discuss your specific lawsuit or legal matter with a qualified attorney, please contact our office.