Is it a crime under TCK 122? The Aybüke Pusat incident could be taken to court

Actress Aybüke Pusat was recently targeted by TRT and removed from the series she was starring in due to a boycott post she shared on her social media account. Following the incident, which caused a major stir in public opinion, there is a debate over whether those responsible for her removal from the series (TRT management, the producer) committed a crime. In this context, ChatGPT evaluated whether Pusat suffered a legal grievance.

ChatGPT responded to the question, "TRT announced to the public that actress Aybüke Pusat was fired because she made a boycott post due to her political views. In this case, does this constitute a crime under Article 122 (TCK Article 122) for the film company management or TRT management?" as follows:

1. WHAT IS THE CRIME TYPE UNDER TCK 122/1-D?

“Preventing a person from being hired or continuing to work in a job due to language, race, nationality, color, gender, political opinion, philosophical belief, religion, sect, or similar reasons…”

is punishable by imprisonment from 1 to 3 years for the individuals involved.

2. WHAT HAPPENED IN AYBÜKE PUSAT’S CASE?

• Aybüke Pusat made a boycott post in line with her political views.

• TRT announced with an official statement that her contract was terminated for this reason.

• Therefore, it has been explicitly admitted by TRT that “her employment contract was terminated due to her political views.”

3. DOES THIS ACTION FALL UNDER THE SCOPE OF TCK 122/1-D?

If the following elements are met, yes, a crime may have been committed:

Therefore, if these three elements are met, criminal liability may arise for TRT management and/or the film company management under TCK 122/1-d.

4. WHO IS RESPONSIBLE? TRT? OR THE PRODUCER?

• If TRT employed her as a staff artist:

› TRT management would be directly responsible.

• If she was working through a series/film production company:

› If the dismissal occurred due to pressure from the production company's employer or TRT, both could be investigated.

5. ARE THERE SUCH EXAMPLES IN JUDICIAL DECISIONS?

• Currently, there are few precedent cases regarding an actor being fired directly due to their political views and this being punished under TCK 122.

• However, in Court of Cassation (Yargıtay) decisions, acts of refusing to hire or firing someone specifically due to reasons such as language, sect, or political views have been accepted as crimes.

6. EVALUATION IN TERMS OF THE CONSTITUTION AND THE ECHR:

• Dismissal due to an opinion protected by freedom of expression (Constitution Art. 26 / ECHR Art. 10) can form the basis for both criminal liability and compensation lawsuits.

• Furthermore, for TRT officials who are public servants, misconduct in office (TCK 257) may also come into question.

Conclusion:

If Aybüke Pusat was fired due to a post in which she expressed her political views, and if this was explicitly done for this reason, and the post did not contain hate speech or a crime, criminal liability may arise for TRT executives and/or production company executives under TCK 122/1-d.