Posting Another Person’s Phone Number And Insulting Them on Facebook
Republic of Turkey
Supreme Court of Appeals
12th Criminal Chamber
Case No.: 2016/10893
Decision No.: 2017/7762
Decision Date: 23.10.2017
>SHARING ON FACEBOOK IN THE FORM OF “HERE’S A QUALITY PROSTITUTE NAMED HATİCE +9053……….” AND ALSO INSULTING HER. WHEN TWO CRIMES ARE COMMITTED IN ONE ACTION, THE MOST SERIOUS OF THE TWO, THE CRIME OF ILLEGALLY DISCLOSING DATA, SHOULD BE USED TO FORM THE JUDGMENT.
The defendant was convicted of the crime of unlawfully disclosing or obtaining data.
The ruling on the defendant’s conviction for unlawfully providing or obtaining data was appealed by the defendant and the local public prosecutor, and the case file was reviewed and considered:
DECISION: Based on the trial, the evidence gathered and presented at the hearing, the court’s opinion and judgment in accordance with the results of the investigation, and the scope of the case file reviewed, the defendant’s and the local public prosecutor’s other appeals are rejected,
however;
According to the scope of the file and the defendant’s confession-containing defense; due to the defendant sharing on Facebook “Here you go, a quality whore named Hatice +9053……” thereby disseminating the participant’s personal data in the form of a mobile phone number, thereby committing the crime of unlawfully providing or obtaining data as stipulated in Article 136/1 of the Turkish Criminal Code (TCK), and committing the crime of insult as stipulated in Article 125/1 of the TCK by insulting the participant. The defendant, whose single act resulted in the commission of multiple different crimes, Pursuant to Article 44 of the Turkish Criminal Code, the defendant should be punished for the crime of unlawfully disclosing or obtaining data, which carries a heavier penalty, and no judgment should be rendered for the crime of insult. However, since judgments were rendered for both crimes, the excessive sentence imposed on the defendant is contrary to the law.
According to the acceptance and application;
1-) While the defendant’s sentence should have been increased by 1/6 pursuant to Article 125/4 of the Turkish Criminal Code, resulting in a sentence of 11 months and 20 days, the sentence was set at 12 months, resulting in an excessive sentence for the defendant, which is contrary to the law.
2-) When applying Article 53 of the Turkish Criminal Code to the defendant, it is mandatory to take into account the annulment decision of the Constitutional Court dated October 8, 2015, published in the Official Gazette dated November 24, 2015, with case number 2014/140 and decision number 2015/85.
CONCLUSION: This necessitates reversal, and since the defendant’s and the local public prosecutor’s appeals are therefore deemed valid, the judgment is hereby REVERSED in accordance with Article 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure No. 1412, which is currently in force pursuant to Article 8 of Law No. 5320, It was decided unanimously on October 23, 2017.