Penalties for Illegal Gambling Crimes
1. Introduction
In recent years, illegal online betting has become one of the most significant types of crime faced by both individuals and public order. Law No. 7258 on the Regulation of Betting and Games of Chance in Football and Other Sports Competitionsaims to regulate this area, thereby preventing revenue loss for the state and protecting society from illegal betting activities.
Illegal betting should not be viewed simply as a “game”; in many cases, money laundering, organized crime , and international criminal networks . Therefore, the judicial authorities' approach to the matter is extremely sensitive.
2. Legal Regulations and Elements of the Crime
2.1. Basic Regulations
Article 5 of Law No. 7258 regulates the crime of illegal betting in detail:
-
Article 5/1-a : Those who organize or operate fixed-odds or pari-mutuel betting or games of chance based on sports competitions without authorization within the country
-
Article 5/1-b: These activities from abroad and made accessible from Turkey.
In both cases, the aim is to prevent betting from taking place outside of the authorized institution (Sports Toto Organization Presidency)
2.2. Material Elements of the Crime
-
Perpetrator: Individuals and company officials may be the perpetrator.
-
Victim: Not a specific individual, but society as a whole.
-
Subject: Unauthorized betting or games of chance.
-
Verb: To establish, direct, operate, or provide technical infrastructure for a betting organization.
2.3. Spiritual Element
The crime intentionally . The perpetrator acts knowing that the game they are running is unauthorized.
3. Penalties and Sanctions
-
Article 5/1-a: Imprisonment from 3 to 5 years and a judicial fine from 1000 to 5000 days.
-
Article 5/1-b: As it constitutes an aggravated offense, it carries a sentence of 4 to 6 years imprisonment and a judicial fine of 3000 to 7000 days.
-
Additional sanctions:
-
Devices and systems used in the crime are confiscated.
-
The proceeds will be confiscated.
-
An access restriction order is issued.
-
4. Illegal Gambling from the Perspective of the European Court of Human Rights
Although the European Court of Human Rights has not issued a ruling directly regulating the crime of illegal betting, it acknowledges that states have broad discretionary powers regarding gambling and betting activities on the grounds of "public order , " "morality," and "public health."
-
ECHR – Läärä v. Finland (2003): It was accepted that state monopoly on gambling activities is legitimate in a democratic society and necessary for combating organized crime and protecting public order.
-
ECHR – Schindler v. UK (1995): It was stated that the restrictions imposed on gambling and betting activities were proportionate within the scope of Protocol No. 1 (right to property) and Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the Convention.
These decisions support the state's authority to take tough measures to combat illegal gambling in Türkiye.
5. Problems in Combating Illegal Gambling Today
-
Technological Challenges: Blocking access to sites operating through VPNs and encrypted communication channels is becoming more difficult.
-
International Dimension: Since betting servers are often located abroad, legal assistance processes are lengthy.
-
Economic Appeal: Promises of high earnings are leading young people into crime.
-
Evidence Gathering: The lawful collection of digital data requires special procedures within the framework of Article 134 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
6. Evaluation in Light of Supreme Court Decisions
1. Court of Cassation, 19th Criminal Chamber – Case No. 2019/4723, Decision No. 2020/1460.
Case:
The defendant was accused of operating an unlicensed and unauthorized online betting operation. Following technical surveillance by the police, it was determined that the defendant collected money from various individuals, accessed betting sites, and performed these accesses on behalf of others in exchange for a commission.
Assessment:
The court ruled that the defendant committed the crime of "illegal betting" as defined in Article 5 of Law No. 7258. The Court of Cassation stated that the defendant's actions constituted an organized and continuous activity, that the crime was proven, but that the decision to impose a sentence exceeding the minimum limit was not justified.
Conclusion:
The Court of Cassation overturned the conviction regarding the sentencingbut upheld the classification of the crime.
2. Court of Cassation, 11th Criminal Chamber – Case No. 2018/1132, Decision No. 2019/3489.
Case: During a search of an internet cafe, it was determined that the operator was providing customers with the opportunity to engage in illegal gambling. Police, using IP address records, found that access to betting sites was being made and that payments were being collected in cash by the operator. Assessment: The court found the defendant guilty of "providing a place and opportunity for illegal gambling." The Court of Cassation emphasized that the crime occurs if the internet cafe is used for this purpose, but that it must be proven that the operator knowingly carried out this activity. Conclusion: The Court of Cassation upheld the conviction, concluding that the operator knowingly facilitated this activity .
3. Court of Cassation, 7th Criminal Chamber – Case No. 2020/2165, Decision No. 2021/3982.
Case: The defendant created accounts for numerous individuals to engage in illegal betting using a computer and mobile phones found in their home, and collected the betting amounts through a bank account. Numerous money transfers and large sums of money deposited from different individuals were detected in the bank account statements. Assessment: The court accepted that the defendant's actions were not a one-off occurrence but were carried out regularly and in an organized manner. The Court of Cassation stated that the crime was proven when the banking records, IP address matching, and witness statements were considered together. Conclusion: The Court of Cassation upheld the conviction .
4. Court of Cassation, 19th Criminal Chamber – Case No. 2020/6182 E., Decision No. 2021/2041 K.
Incident:
During a search of a gym, it was determined that illegal betting sites were accessed via computers, customer lists were kept, and betting slips were printed out.
Assessment:
The court found that the gym owner knowingly facilitated illegal betting for customers. The Court of Cassation stated that making the physical environment of the establishment conducive to betting was sufficient for the crime to be committed.
Outcome:
The conviction was upheld.
5. Court of Cassation, 11th Criminal Chamber – Case No. 2017/5442, Decision No. 2018/9851.
Case:
The defendant worked as a regional representative for an illegal online gambling site, collected money from players, transferred this money to senior managers, and received commission in return.
Assessment:
The court accepted that the defendant played an active role within the organization and that his actions constituted a crime under Article 5 of Law No. 7258. The Court of Cassation stated that the defendant had made these activities his profession and that the sentence, which was set close to the upper limit, was appropriate.
Conclusion:
The conviction was upheld.
7. Conclusion
Illegal gambling is a serious crime that threatens not only the integrity of sporting events but also public order and the economy. Turkish law, within the framework established by the European Court of Human Rights, prévoit strict sanctions to prevent this crime. However, the rapid development of technology and the international dimension of the crime make the fight more difficult.
Therefore, both legally compliant methods of gathering evidence and international cooperation mechanisms should be strengthened.
About Post Author
