Negotiations lasted 15.5 hours: 10th Judicial Package accepted! Here are the details...

The Draft Law on Amendments to the Law on the Execution of Penal and Security Measures and Certain Other Laws, known in the public eye as the "10th Judicial Package," has been accepted by the TBMM Justice Commission.

With the proposal, changes are being made to the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law in accordance with the Constitutional Court's annulment decision.

Accordingly, in applications and reviews for appellate and supreme court appeals, the monetary limits at the time the case was filed or the complaint was made will be taken as the basis. The provision regarding the non-application of the increase in the monetary limit used for appellate and supreme court appeals due to revaluation to decisions re-rendered upon the reversal decisions of the regional court of justice or the Court of Cassation, and the requirement to base decisions on the monetary limits valid at the date of the initial decision, will be repealed.

According to the change made to the Notary Law in line with the Constitutional Court's annulment decision, notaries will be given one of the disciplinary penalties based on the nature of the situation and the severity of the act upon the determination of behaviors and actions that do not comply with the requirements of their status and duties.

Acts requiring warnings, reprimands, fines, temporary dismissal, and professional disbarment for notaries are listed separately, and the circumstances under which they will be applied are being codified. Except for professional disbarment, in disciplinary penalties, engaging in acts similar in nature and severity to those specified in the provision is also defined as an act requiring the relevant disciplinary penalty.

The title of the "Effect of previous penalties" provision in the Law is being changed to "Application of a higher or lower degree disciplinary penalty and statute of limitations." Accordingly, if a notary who has been given any disciplinary penalty commits a new act requiring a disciplinary penalty within 5 years from the date this penalty becomes final, the disciplinary penalty one degree more severe than the one provided for in the Law for this act will be applied.

For a notary who commits an act requiring a disciplinary penalty for the first time and whose work has been positive during their past service, except for situations requiring professional disbarment, a disciplinary penalty one degree lighter than the one to be given may be applied. Except for acts requiring professional disbarment, a disciplinary investigation cannot be opened if 3 years have passed since the acts requiring disciplinary investigation were learned, and a disciplinary penalty cannot be imposed if 5 years have passed since the date the act requiring the disciplinary penalty was committed. If a criminal investigation or prosecution has also been opened regarding the act requiring the disciplinary penalty, the statute of limitations periods determined in the penal codes will be applied. If the Disciplinary Board decides to wait for the result of the prosecution, the authority to impose a penalty will expire one year after the court decision becomes final.

In order to comply with these regulations, the provision of the Law on "Acting contrary to prohibitions" is being repealed, and the penalty for notaries who do not deposit the portion of the income from joint transactions related to the joint current account of notaries into the joint account within the specified time is being changed.

In line with the Constitutional Court's decision, changes are being made to the Administrative Procedure Law. Accordingly, the monetary limit at the date the case was filed will be taken as the basis for determining cases opened in the Council of State, administrative and tax courts that meet the conditions specified in the Law and where a hearing is mandatory, as well as decisions that can be appealed to the appellate or supreme court.

PRISON SENTENCES FOR ATTEMPTED CRIME AND INTENTIONAL INJURY

With the change made to the Turkish Penal Code, the lower and upper limits of the fixed-term prison sentence to be given to the perpetrator instead of aggravated life imprisonment and life imprisonment in case of attempted crime are being increased. Accordingly, in case of attempted crime, the perpetrator will be sentenced to 13 to 20 years in prison instead of aggravated life imprisonment, depending on the severity of the damage or danger caused, while this period is being regulated as 14 to 21 years; the period in the provision foreseeing 9 to 15 years in prison instead of life imprisonment is being regulated as 10 to 18 years.

Increases are also being made in the prison sentence periods for the crime of intentional injury. The lower limit of the prison sentence for a person who intentionally causes pain to another person's body or causes a deterioration in their health or perception ability is being increased from 1 year to 1 year and 6 months. If the effect of the intentional injury on the person is light enough to be remedied by a simple medical intervention, the prison sentence of 4 months to 1 year to be imposed upon the victim's complaint is being changed to 6 months to 1 year and 6 months. If the crime is committed against a woman, the lower limit of the sentence to be given is being raised from 6 months to 9 months.

Prison sentences for intentional injury that result in aggravated consequences are also being increased. Accordingly, if the act of intentional injury causes the permanent weakening of one of the victim's senses or organs, permanent difficulty in speech, a permanent scar on the face, a life-threatening situation, or if it is committed against a pregnant woman and causes the child to be born prematurely, the lower limit of the prison sentence to be given is being increased from 3 years to 4 years; the lower limit of the prison sentence to be applied according to the effect of the fracture or dislocation on life functions resulting from the intentional injury causing a bone fracture or dislocation in the body is being increased from 5 years to 6 years.

If the act of intentional injury causes the victim to enter an incurable disease or a vegetative state, the loss of the function of one of their senses or organs, the loss of speech or reproductive abilities, permanent facial disfigurement, or if it is committed against a pregnant woman and causes the child to be miscarried, the lower limit of the prison sentence to be given is being increased from 5 years to 6 years; the lower limit of the prison sentence to be given according to the effect of the fracture or dislocation on life functions resulting from the act causing a bone fracture or dislocation in the body is being raised from 8 years to 9 years.

If death occurs as a result of intentional injury, the lower and upper limits of the prison sentence to be given are being changed from 8 to 12 years to 10 to 14 years. If death occurs as a result of intentional injury causing a bone fracture or dislocation in the body, the lower limit of the prison sentence to be given is being increased from 12 years to 14 years.

EFFECTIVE COMBAT AGAINST THE CRIME OF THREAT

The draft law aims to combat the crime of threat more effectively and ensure deterrence.

Accordingly, in threats made by stating that the victim will be caused great damage in terms of assets or that some other evil will be done, the lower limit of the prison sentence to be given upon the victim's complaint will be 2 months.

The upper limit of the prison sentence to be imposed if the threat is committed with a weapon, by the person making themselves unrecognizable, by an unsigned letter or special signs; by more than one person together, or by taking advantage of the intimidating power created by existing or assumed criminal organizations, is being increased from 5 years to 7 years.

Weapons capable of firing sound and gas cartridges are also being included in the scope of the crime of "intentionally endangering general safety." Accordingly, those who fire weapons, including those capable of firing sound and gas cartridges, or use explosives will be punished with 1 to 5 years in prison.

If the crimes of starting a fire in a way that is dangerous to the lives, health, or property of people or in a way that may create fear, anxiety, or panic in people; causing building collapse, landslides, avalanches, floods, or overflows; firing weapons, including those capable of firing sound and gas cartridges, or using explosives are committed in places where people are gathered collectively, the sentence to be given will be increased by up to one fold.

PRISON SENTENCES FOR THOSE ENDANGERING TRAFFIC SAFETY

Sentences for those who endanger traffic safety are also being increased. Accordingly, the lower limit of the prison sentence to be given to those who drive land, sea, air, or railway transport vehicles in a way that may be dangerous to the lives, health, or property of people is being raised from 3 months to 4 months; the lower limit of the prison sentence to be applied to those who drive despite being unable to drive safely due to the influence of alcohol or drugs or for any other reason is being raised from 3 months to 6 months.

It is also aimed to combat aggressive acts in traffic more effectively and to ensure the life and property safety of people in traffic. Accordingly, the title of the "Hijacking or detaining transport vehicles" provision in the Law is being changed to "Obstructing the movement, hijacking, or detaining of transport vehicles."

A person who unlawfully obstructs the movement of a land transport vehicle, stops this vehicle while it is in motion, or takes it from its destination to another place will be punished with 1 to 3 years in prison. If the subject of the crime is a sea or railway transport vehicle, a prison sentence of 2 to 5 years will be imposed.

A person who unlawfully obstructs the movement of an air transport vehicle or takes this vehicle from its destination to another place will be sentenced to 5 to 10 years in prison. If another crime is committed for the purpose of or during the commission of these defined crimes, a sentence will also be applied for that crime.

With the change made to the Law on the Execution of Penal and Security Measures, child convicts, in addition to child detainees, are being added to the definition of "closed penal institutions for children."

The transfer of child convicts from a closed penal institution for children to a child education house will be decided as a result of a good conduct assessment. The period for re-evaluation of child convicts whose attitudes and behaviors are evaluated negatively regarding transfer to a child education house will not exceed 6 months.

Sentences imposed on child convicts who are sentenced to a total of 3 years or less in prison for intentional crimes and a total of 5 years or less in prison for negligent crimes will be served directly in child education houses.

Child convicts in these institutions, including those taken directly to a child education house, who escape, or for whom an arrest warrant is issued for another act, or who receive a disciplinary penalty of return to a closed penal institution or confinement to a room, and whose penalty has become final, or those whose actions pose a danger to institutional order or personal safety even if the disciplinary penalty has not become final for the purpose of ensuring public order and discipline, will be sent to closed penal institutions for children by the decision of the "administration and observation board."

Except for child detainees who are in a dangerous state, have a risk of destroying evidence, endanger the purpose of the investigation or prosecution or the safety of the detention center, or engage in behaviors that will allow the repetition of the crime, child detainees in crimes requiring a prison sentence of 15 years or less may be housed in child education houses with the decision of the administration and observation board and the approval of the execution judge. Child detainees who lose the conditions for being housed in child education houses will be sent to closed penal institutions for children by the decision of the administration and observation board.

The procedures and principles regarding whether child convicts are separated into child education houses according to the type of crime and sentence, the time they will spend in child education houses, their transfer to closed penal institutions for children, their direct admission to child education houses, the transfer of those admitted directly to child education houses to closed penal institutions for children, and other matters will be shown in the regulation.

For a well-behaved convict who is in an open penal institution or a child education house and has 1 year or less remaining until conditional release, in order to benefit from the probation measure, it will be required that they have spent at least one-tenth of the time they must spend in the penal institution until the conditional release date, not being less than 5 days, in the prison.

The opportunity for conditional release will be brought to convicts to whom the second-time recidivism provisions are applied. In this context, the conditional release rate will be applied as three-quarters in terms of fixed-term prison sentences. In case of application of the second-time recidivism provisions, those sentenced to aggravated life imprisonment for the crime committed in case of recidivism will benefit from conditional release if they serve 39 years, those sentenced to life imprisonment serve 33 years, in case of conviction for more than one fixed-term prison sentence, a maximum of 32 years, and two-thirds of the fixed-term prison sentence as well-behaved in the penal institution.

SPECIAL EXECUTION REGULATIONS

With the proposal, the scope of special execution provisions is being expanded, and an execution at home regulation is being introduced for convicts who have completed the age of 80.

Upon the request of the convict, the execution judge may decide that a total of 3 years of imprisonment for intentional crimes, and a total of 5 years or less for negligent crimes, excluding the crime of negligent homicide, be served in penal institutions on weekends by entering at 19:00 on Fridays and leaving at the same time on Sundays; and at nights by entering at 19:00 every day except weekends and leaving at 07:00 the next day. The execution method may also be applied on weekdays, provided that the duration is the same, according to the convict's work life and family situation and the order and functioning of the penal institutions.

Without prejudice to the legal responsibilities regarding the full compensation of the damage caused by the crime subject to conviction by restitution, restoration to the state before the crime, or compensation; the execution judge may decide that a total of 3 years of imprisonment for women, children, or persons who have completed the age of 65, a total of 4 years for persons who have completed the age of 70, a total of 5 years for persons who have completed the age of 75, and a total of 6 years or less for persons who have completed the age of 80 be served at home.

Except for those sentenced to aggravated life imprisonment, the execution judge may decide that the sentences of convicts who are sentenced to imprisonment or whose judicial fine is converted into imprisonment during the execution process, and who are determined to be unable to maintain their lives alone in penal institution conditions due to a severe illness or disability they are exposed to, and who are evaluated not to pose a serious and concrete danger in terms of public safety, according to the procedure determined in the relevant provision, be served at home.

The situation of the convict will be examined by the Chief Public Prosecutor's Office according to the procedure determined in one-year periods. If it is determined according to the examination results that the convict has recovered, the execution judge will revoke the decision regarding the serving of the sentence at home. The convict will be monitored by the probation directorate and the local law enforcement authorities. It will be mandatory for convicts with a total sentence of more than 10 years to be tracked through the use of electronic devices. In case of acting contrary to these obligations, the decision regarding the serving of the sentence at home will be revoked by the execution judgeship.

The execution judge may decide that the sentences of female convicts who have passed 6 months from the date of birth and are sentenced to a total of 5 years or less in prison or whose judicial fine is converted into imprisonment during the execution process be served at home. For those whose sentence is decided to be served according to the special execution method, the provisions of the execution of the sentence by applying conditional release and probation measures according to the execution regime they are subject to will be applied.

Convicts who do not fulfill certain obligations regarding the application of probation will not be able to benefit from special execution methods.

A compliance regulation is being made for the opportunity for conditional release to be granted to convicts to whom the second-time recidivism provisions are applied.

The provision requiring well-behaved convicts who are in an open penal institution or a child education house and have 1 year or less remaining until conditional release to spend at least one-tenth of the time they must spend in the penal institution until the conditional release date in order to benefit from the probation measure will not be applied to crimes committed before the date it enters into force.

REGULATIONS FOR PUBLICATIONS IN THE INTERNET ENVIRONMENT

With the proposal, changes are being made to the Law on the Regulation of Publications Made on the Internet and Combating Crimes Committed Through These Publications in line with the Constitutional Court's annulment decision. The definition of "removal of content from publication" in the Law is being changed to "removal of content from the internet environment."

The definition of "warning method" is regulated as "the notification made by the Institution or persons claiming that their rights have been violated due to the content of the publication made in the internet environment."

When the measure of "removal of content from publication" is applied, the content in question may be removed from the internet environment in a reversible manner when necessary.

The title of the Law's provision on "Removal of content from publication and blocking access," which was annulled by the Constitutional Court, is being changed to "Violation of personal rights." According to the re-regulated provision, persons claiming that their personal rights have been violated due to the publication content may apply to the criminal judgeship of peace for the removal of the content and/or blocking of access.

A decision to remove the content and/or block access will be made by the criminal judgeship of peace within 24 hours in cases where the violation can be understood at first glance without the need for a detailed examination.

Upon the request of persons claiming that their personal rights have been violated due to the publication content, the criminal judgeship of peace will decide that the applicant's name not be associated with the internet addresses subject to the violation in cases where the violation can be understood at first glance without the need for a detailed examination. The search engines to be notified will be included in the decision. In cases where the violation cannot be understood at first glance without the need for a detailed examination, the application will be rejected.

The criminal judge of peace will make a decision limited only to the publication where the violation occurred within the scope of this provision. A decision to block access to the entire publication made on the internet site cannot be made. However, if an opinion is formed that the violation cannot be prevented by the method of blocking access to the content by specifying the URL address, or if the requirement of the content removal decision has not been fulfilled, a decision to block access to the entire publication made on the internet site may be made, provided that the justification is clearly stated.

The decision made by the criminal judge of peace will be sent directly to the Union to be notified to the access providers and the relevant content and hosting providers. This decision will be notified to the access providers and the relevant content and hosting providers by the Union. Upon notification, the requirement of the decision will be fulfilled immediately and within 4 hours at the latest.

In case the publication subject to the decision, which is related to the violation of personal rights, is also published at other internet addresses, the relevant person may apply to the Union and request that the decision be applied for these addresses as well. If the request is accepted by the Union, the existing decision will also be applied for these addresses. An objection may be made to the judgeship that made the decision against the acceptance of the request by the Union. This provision will not be applied in decisions to block access to the entire publication on the internet site.

In case the content subject to blocking access has been removed, the judge's decision will automatically become void. In case the content subject to the decision to block access to the entire internet site has been removed, the decision will be revoked by the criminal judgeship of peace that made the decision upon the request of the interested party. In this context, objections can be made against the decisions made by the criminal judgeships of peace according to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code. The judge whose decision is objected to or the authority authorized to examine the objection may listen to the parties if they deem it necessary. Access providers and the officials of the relevant content and hosting provider who do not fulfill the requirements of the said decisions will be punished with a judicial fine from 1000 days to 5 thousand days.

In case the requirement of the content removal decision is not fulfilled by a foreign-sourced social network provider with more than 10 million daily access from Turkey, the Union will notify the social network provider again upon the application made by the relevant person to ensure the implementation of the decision. If the requirement of the decision is not fulfilled within 24 hours despite the notification, an application may be made to the criminal judgeship of peace that made the decision for the internet traffic bandwidth of the social network provider to be narrowed by 50 percent by the relevant person.

If the content is not removed within 30 days from the implementation of the judge's decision regarding the acceptance of the application, an application may be made to the criminal judgeship of peace that made the decision for the internet traffic bandwidth of the social network provider to be narrowed by up to 90 percent by the relevant person. In the decision the judge will make upon the second application, they may determine a lower rate, provided that it is not lower than 50 percent, taking into account the nature of the service provided. The decisions made by the judge will be sent to the Union to be notified to the access providers. The requirements of the decisions will be fulfilled by the access providers immediately and within 4 hours at the latest from the notification. In case the requirement of the content removal decision is fulfilled, the decision regarding the narrowing of the internet traffic bandwidth will be revoked by the criminal judgeship of peace that made the decision upon the request of the interested party.

REGULATIONS FOR THE COUNCIL OF JUDGES AND PROSECUTORS

With the proposal, changes are being made to the Law on Private International Law and Procedural Law in line with the Constitutional Court's annulment decision.

Accordingly, even if a choice of law is made in the employment contract, in case there is a law more closely related to the mentioned contract according to all conditions of the situation, the possibility of applying the law more closely related to the employment contract instead of the law determined by the employment contract is granted within the scope of the judge's discretion, excluding the provisions that the law of the place where the work is performed must apply at the time the work is performed.

According to the change made to the Law on the Council of Judges and Prosecutors, those whose membership in the Council ends among those selected from the membership of the high court will return to their high court membership duty they came from to complete the remaining term of office without the need for any procedure and without the requirement of a vacant position, and the first vacant member position will be allocated to them.

Those whose membership in the Council ends for any reason, except for the completion of the term of office, among those selected from judicial and administrative judges and prosecutors, will be appointed to a duty deemed appropriate in one of the three separate places they prefer, taking into account their acquisitions by the General Assembly. Among those who complete their term of office, members selected from among judicial judges and prosecutors may be selected to the Court of Cassation membership, and members selected from among administrative judges and prosecutors to the Council of State membership by the General Assembly, regardless of whether there is a vacant position. In case there is no vacant position, the first vacant member positions will be allocated to them.

Election or appointment procedures will be carried out within 30 days from the date the Council membership ends. Until the election or appointment procedure is carried out, the relevant persons will be considered on leave and will continue to benefit from the personal rights of Council membership.

According to the change made to the Code of Civil Procedure in line with the Constitutional Court's annulment decision, the legal transaction was made in the application of the monetary limits in the provisions regarding the obligation of proof by document and the prohibition of proof by witness against the document; the amount at the date the case was filed will be taken as the basis in the application of the monetary limits in the provisions regarding decisions that can be appealed to the appellate court, decisions that cannot be appealed to the supreme court, and the supreme court review and hearing.

The negotiations in the TBMM Justice Commission lasted approximately 15.5 hours.