Lesson-like ruling on insults against Lieutenant Ebru: 'Contrary to procedure and law'

Müyesser YILDIZ

Following the scandal brought to light by journalist Barış Terkoğlu, the Istanbul 8th Criminal Judgeship of Peace, which reviewed the objection and the request for a public lawsuit filed by Ebru Eroğlu's lawyer, Namık Öztürk, first issued the following reminders regarding the duties of the Public Prosecutor:

“Article 160 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CMK) states that 'upon receiving a report or complaint, the Public Prosecutor shall immediately begin to investigate the truth of the matter in order to decide whether or not to file a public lawsuit.'

To this end, the Public Prosecutor should have written to the relevant institutions to determine the suspect's true identity and, after identifying the individual, summoned them to the Public Prosecutor's Office to provide a statement. Instead, the decision based on an evaluation made solely on the file, without performing any of these judicial procedures and without conducting any investigation or inquiry, is contrary to procedure and law.

The legal value protected by the punishment of acts of insult is the honor, dignity, and reputation of individuals; for this crime to occur, the behavior must be intended to belittle the person.

Whether an act is insulting is relative in some cases and can change according to time, place, and situation. Not every type of harsh criticism or disturbing word directed at individuals should be evaluated within the context of the crime of insult; the words must clearly constitute a concrete act or allegation of fact that could offend honor, dignity, and reputation, or constitute the act of swearing.

In the precedents of the Court of Cassation, rulings have been issued stating that 'it should be evaluated by the court whether the suspect's posts were hurtful, belittling, and damaging to the reputation of the other party in terms of content, and whether they contained the intent to insult.' Therefore, since it is considered that the discretion and evaluation regarding whether the elements of the crimes of insult and threat have been formed against the suspect should be made by the court...”

Following these findings, it was stated that the objection filed by Attorney Namık Öztürk, which was in accordance with procedure and law, was accepted;

It was definitively decided that “the decision of non-prosecution dated October 21, 2024, by the Istanbul Anatolian Chief Public Prosecutor's Office be overturned, that the decision be notified to the parties by the Istanbul Anatolian Chief Public Prosecutor's Office, and that the investigation file be sent to the Anatolian Chief Public Prosecutor's Office for the necessary actions.”