Supreme Court’s Retweet Admitting Crime Is On The Agenda

The 18th Penal Chamber of the Supreme Court overturned the decision that retweeting with defamatory content is not a crime. This was not the first decision of the Supreme Court on this issue.

Insulting a group or individual in social media posts can lead to penalties up to jail time for the person sharing the post. On the other hand, social media users can also use another user by quoting an insulting post. can be penalized at the same rate.

Today, another decision has been made on this issue, especially concerning Twitter users. About the user who previously retweeted another user’s tweet with insulting content from his own account. The prosecution decision was overturned by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled that the user’s retweeted post was sufficient evidence for an indictment for insult.

The retweet is enough to file an indictment for defamation:

In the aforementioned file, the claimant person, from his own account, made by another account and “scumbag, despicable, nasty, liar, arms dealer, filthy, disloyal, dishonest, corrupt, slobbering, dishonestHe filed a criminal complaint about the post, which included the following statements. The Public Prosecutor’s Office decided not to prosecute on the accusation. The objection to the decision was also rejected by the 3rd Criminal Judgeship of Peace.

With the notification of the Supreme Court of Appeals Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office to overturn the law, the file was later to the agenda of the 18th Penal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals. came. As a result of the investigation, the department decided to issue an indictment for insulting the suspect’s Twitter account named “@…” where the name and surname of the suspect are written, mentioning the plaintiff. have enough evidence attracted attention and overturned the local court decision.

The Supreme Court, in its decision,Whether the suspect’s action is confirmed or not should be determined as a result of the discussion and evaluation of all the evidence together by the court. According to the statements made, the decision not to prosecute the suspect and the decision of the authority regarding the rejection of the objection given as a result of the objection to this decision is unlawful.” he stated.

Saying “Retweet doesn’t mean I approve the post” doesn’t save:

The Supreme Court has made similar decisions before. Making a statement about a similar decision made last year, Faculty of Law Faculty Member Prof. Dr. Ender Ethem Atay used the following statements about the decision:

“In the penal code, individuals are prohibited from doing certain attitudes and behaviors. Those who commit the crime of insult via social media are primarily guilty of tweeting. The 18th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation also saw the person who spread this tweet as having participated in the crime in the same way. His previous decisions have already been in this direction. In other words, if an act was committed by someone and someone else spread the same act in the same way and methods, that act is considered to have been committed.


source site-39