Threat is the statement that another person will carry out an attack on the life, body or sexual inviolability of himself or his relative.
WHAT IS THE PENALTY FOR THE OFFENCE OF SIMPLE THREAT?
A person who threatens another person by stating that he will carry out an attack on the life, body or sexual inviolability of himself or his relative shall be sentenced to imprisonment from six months to two years.
In the case of threatening to cause a great loss in terms of assets or other evil, upon the complaint of the victim, imprisonment up to six months or a judicial fine shall be imposed.
WHAT IS THE PENALTY FOR THE OFFENCE OF QUALIFIED THREAT?
If the threat is committed; a) with a weapon, b) by making oneself unrecognisable, by unsigned letter or special signs, c) by more than one person together, d) by taking advantage of the intimidating power created by existing or deemed to exist criminal organisations, the perpetrator shall be sentenced to imprisonment from two years to five years.
NOTE:
If the offence of intentional killing, intentional injury or damage to property is committed with the purpose of threatening, the perpetrator shall also be sentenced for these offences.
With this article, “threat” itself has been criminalised. As it is known, threat is foreseen as a separate element in some other offences. Here, the legal value protected by the threat is the peace and tranquillity of persons; thus, a sense of insecurity is prevented. Therefore, this article penalises attacks against the peace and tranquillity of human beings. However, the main value that the threat seeks to protect with this article is the freedom of the person to make decisions and act.
Threats often constitute an element of another offence. However, in this definition of the offence, the threat itself is defined as an independent offence. In this respect, the offence of threat is a general and complementary offence.
In the case of a threat, the victim is informed of an encroachment or evil, the realisation of which is conditional upon the perpetrator’s request not being fulfilled. The subject of the threat is the notification that the life or body integrity of the person will be exposed to danger, that a certain act constituting a crime will be committed, that force will be used in general or that any evil or injustice will be committed.
The characteristic of the threat is that whether the evil will be realised or not depends on the will of the threatener. Whether the threatened evil will be realised or not depends on the discretion of the perpetrator in reality or at least in appearance. However, this does not necessarily mean that the threatened evil will be realised by the perpetrator; a threat can also be made by informing a third party that this evil will be realised.
In terms of the occurrence of the offence, it is not important whether the threatened evil is realised or not. The threat must be of an objectively serious nature. In other words, there must be an objective probability that the threatened evil will be realised in the event that what is requested is not fulfilled. If the words uttered and the behaviour performed are not suitable, sufficient and appropriate to achieve results in terms of creating a serious fear on the addressee, it cannot be claimed that the threat has occurred. Whether the words and behaviours of the perpetrator are suitable and sufficient to cause serious fear and anxiety on the addressee must be investigated in each concrete case. It is not necessary that the threat, which is objectively serious in nature, has an effect on the addressee in the concrete case.
Although the perpetrator has tried to threaten the victim with words and behaviours that are objectively serious, the victim may not have taken these words and behaviours seriously. In this case, the threat is still realised. The realisation of the threat should not depend on whether it is effective on the addressee or not. The perpetrator must also know that he has aroused the conviction in the other party that he has the means and power to realise the threatened rape. Once this conviction has been aroused in the victim, it does not matter whether the perpetrator does not actually have the means and power to realise the threatened rape. The victim may have been made to believe that the threatened rape is serious by using deception. However, a person is not threatened with the statement that he/she may be subjected to an evil based on superstitious beliefs.
The threatened evil may not be directed against the victim, but against a third party. However, in this case, there must be a certain relationship of kinship and closeness between the victim and the third party.
In the case of a threat, the person is forced or compelled to perform a certain behaviour by intimidating him/her with the statement that the threatened violation will occur in the future.
In the definition made in the first paragraph of the article, a distinction is made according to the legal value towards which the threat is directed. Accordingly, the basic form of this offence is when the threat is made by stating that the victim will commit an attack on his/her life or the life, bodily or sexual inviolability of himself/herself or his/her relatives. On the other hand, if the threat is made with the assumption that the threat will cause great damage to the victim in terms of his/her assets or other evil deed, it requires a lesser penalty compared to the basic form of the offence. Furthermore, investigation and prosecution for this offence is made subject to the complaint of the victim.
In the second paragraph of the article, the qualified forms of threats that require a heavier penalty are shown. These are the situations that are suitable to create serious concerns in the victim about the seriousness and intensity of the intimidation power covered by the threat. If the threat is carried out with a weapon, it is much easier to create a fear of its seriousness. Likewise, if the threat is made by a person who makes himself or herself unrecognisable or by several persons acting in concert, the fear is very intense.
There is also no hesitation about the fear that arises when a person is threatened by an unsigned letter or by using special signs. For example, an unsigned letter sent to a person will constitute a grave threat as it will eliminate the person’s ability to defend himself/herself. Again, the use of pictures of knives with blood dripping from the tip of the knife in the letters sent to a person, i.e. the use of a special sign, may intensify the fear.
It has been deemed appropriate to include the threatening power of criminal organisations, secret or open, existing or deemed to exist, as a qualified form of the offence, since it can frighten people in such a way that they panic.
In the third paragraph of the article, it is stated that if the offence of intentional killing, intentional injury or damage to property is committed with the purpose of threatening, a penalty will be imposed for these offences. in order to emphasise the seriousness of the threat, the person may have killed or injured another person or damaged his/her property. ln such cases, the real cumulative provisions should be applied and punishment should also be imposed for these offences.
You can access our other article examples and petition examples by clicking here.