APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF CONCURRENT OFFENSES IN CASES WHERE MULTIPLE PERSONS ARE INSULTED AND ONE OF THE VICTIMS IS THE PRESIDENT
APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF CONCURRENT OFFENSES IN CASES WHERE MULTIPLE PERSONS ARE INSULTED AND ONE OF THE VICTIMS IS THE PRESIDENT
1. General Statement of the Problem
In criminal law, the principle of cumulative offenses comes into play when the crime of insult is directed at more than one person through a single word, statement, social media post, or other single act.
Although the issue appears simple at first glance, the legal classification changes when one of the victims is the President.
For example, in a single social media post by the perpetrator;
"X, Y, and the President are dishonorable."
Let's assume that he used an insulting expression targeting each of the three individuals separately.
Here;
- The actions directed at X and Y constitute defamation under Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code
- The act directed against the President falls under Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code, which is insulting the President
This brings up the issue of the crime.
The fundamental legal question in this case is:
Will the perpetrator be punished for three separate offenses, will the principle of concurrent offenses of the same type be applied under Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code, or will the principle of concurrent offenses of different types be applied under Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code, resulting in a conviction only for the offense requiring the most severe penalty?
To solve this problem, it is first necessary to distinguish between social institutions of the same kind and those of different kinds.
2. Concurrence of Offences of the Same Kind: Turkish Penal Code Article 43/2
According to Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code No. 5237;
If the same crime is committed against multiple persons with a single act, the provisions regarding continuous crimes apply.
This arrangement is referred to in theory and practice a kind of conceptual concurrence of ideas .
For Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code to be applicable;
- There is only one legal act involved,
- Committing the same crime with this act,
- committing the crime against multiple victims
is necessary.
In this case, separate penalties are not imposed for each victim.
A single basic penalty is determined, and due to the reference to Article 43/1 of the Turkish Penal Code, the penalty is increased by one-quarter to three-quarters. This is also the explicit provision of Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code.
3. For example, insulting two people with the same words
The perpetrator turned to two people at the same time;
"You're both thieves."
If, in this case, it is accepted that the words specifically targeted both victims, instead of imposing two separate penalties for two separate acts of insult;
Turkish Penal Code Article 125 + Turkish Penal Code Article 43/2
The provisions will be applied.
The Supreme Court also finds it unlawful to impose separate convictions when multiple individuals are insulted with words that constitute a single legal act at the same time and place, and accepts that Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code should be applied.
Therefore;
If two individuals, X and Y, are insulted with a single act;
Separate penalties under Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code for X + Separate penalties under Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code for Y
in its place;
single penalty under Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code + increased penalty under Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code
It is applied.
4. Why is the situation different when one of the victims is the President?
The problem changes when one of the victims becomes the President.
Because insulting the President is not merely an aggravated form of the crime of insulting an ordinary person or a public official, as defined in Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code.
The legislator has regulated this a separate type of crime in Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code.
According to Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code, a person who insults the President shall be punished with imprisonment from one to four years. If the crime is committed publicly, the sentence shall be increased by one-sixth. Prosecution is subject to the permission of the Minister of Justice.
The Constitutional Court also specifically emphasizes that the crime of insulting the President is regulated separately from the general crime of insult. According to the Court, in cases of insult against the President, not only the honor and dignity of the individual but also the state function and values represented by the President are protected. Therefore, Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code is regulated in the section relating to crimes against the State, not in the section on "Crimes Against Honor".
This systematic distinction is extremely important from a social perspective.
5. Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code is applicable only to "The Same Crime"
The fundamental condition of Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code the same crime is committed against more than one person with a single act.
For example;
If X, Y, and Z have been insulted with a single act within the meaning of Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code, then Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code may be applied.
However;
X → Turkish Penal Code Article 125
Y → Turkish Penal Code Article 125
President → Turkish Penal Code Article 299
In this situation, the same type of crime does not apply to all victims.
Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code regarding X and Y;
With regards the President, Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code applies.
Therefore, grouping all three victims directly under Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code and stating that "multiple people were insulted" is technically problematic.
At this point, the concept of a different type of concurrent offense, namely Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code, comes into play.
6. Different Types of Concurrent Offences: Turkish Penal Code Article 44
According to Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code;
A person who, by committing a single act, causes the commission of more than one different crime, shall be punished for the crime carrying the most severe penalty.
The basic principle here is;
One act + different crimes = one sentence for the crime that warrants the most severe punishment
It can be expressed as follows.
The Supreme Court's Criminal General Assembly accepts that, for Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code to be applicable, a single act must violate more than one different type of crime in a legal sense.
Therefore, the perpetrator has only one explanation;
both Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code,
and also Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code
If it leads to a result within this scope, a different kind of social intellectual assessment should be made.
7. The Supreme Court's Direct Decision on Insulting the President and the Prime Minister with the Same Act
The decision of the 4th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals dated November 23, 2020, constitutes a highly important example regarding this very issue.
In this specific case, the defendant insulted both the President and the Prime Minister at the same place and time.
Supreme Court;
- The action against the President falls under Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code
- The action against the Prime Minister falls under Article 125/3-a of the Turkish Penal Code
that it is within the scope of
However, it acknowledged that words constitute a single legal act
The court therefore stated that the act constituted two different crimes with a single deed and that the defendant should be punished for the crime requiring the most severe penalty under Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code .
This decision is extremely important in terms of resolving the issue.
8. Concrete Example: Insulting the President and Two Citizens in the Same Post
This can be evaluated using the following example:
The perpetrator made a single post on their social media account;
“Ahmet, Mehmet, and the President…”
They used a common expression that is insulting in nature.
There are three victims here.
In terms of Ahmet
The crime of insult falls under Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code.
In terms of Mehmet
The crime of insult falls under Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code.
Regarding the President
The crime of insulting the President falls under Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code.
In this case, two separate concurrent relationships can arise within the same event.
9. First, the Same Kind of Social Idea Regarding Ahmet and Mehmet
Ahmet and Mehmet are both victims of the same crime, namely the crime of defamation as defined in Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code.
If the insult is committed with a single act;
In terms of Ahmet + Mehmet;
Turkish Penal Code Article 125 + Turkish Penal Code Article 43/2
Its implementation could be considered.
Under normal circumstances, a single sentence should be determined for these two victims and increased in accordance with Article 43 of the Turkish Penal Code.
However, the fact that the same act also targets the President creates a problem under Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code in the second stage.
Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code is a separate crime in relation to the 10th President
The same statement directed at the President would not be evaluated under Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code; it would be evaluated under Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code, which is a special type of crime.
Therefore, the same verb;
On the one hand, insulting one or more persons within the scope of Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code
On the other hand, insulting the President falls under Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code
This has led to the following result.
At this point, the principle of different types of concurrent offenses, i.e., Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code, should be applied.
11. Can Article 43/2 and Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code be applied consecutively to the same act?
This is where the real problem lies.
The following method might be considered at first glance:
- Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code applies to Ahmet and Mehmet.
- Due to the number of victims, the penalty is increased according to Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code.
- Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code is determined from the perspective of the President.
- Then, by applying Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code, whichever is more severe is chosen.
However, the Supreme Court's current approach, in particular, that a cautious approach should be taken to applying Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code first to the same act, and then additionally applying Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code for the same act .
In its decision dated March 10, 2026, the 4th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation found it unlawful for the court to increase the sentence by applying Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code after determining the crime requiring the most severe punishment under Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code. The Chamber removed the application of Article 43/2 from the judgment because the conditions for its application were not met.
Therefore, it is not possible to mechanically superimpose the provisions regarding the combination of offenses on one another.
12. In Our Opinion, the Correct Legal Solution
With a single verb;
- Multiple individuals have been insulted under Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code
- If the same act constitutes an insult to the President under Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code,
First, it must be determined whether the action truly constitutes a single legal act .
If only one verb is present;
Since different types of crimes arise under Articles 125 and 299 of the Turkish Penal Code, the fundamental relationship of concurrence of offenses should be evaluated within the scope of Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code.
The Supreme Court's approach to the case of insulting the President and the Prime Minister with the same act also supports this.
In this case, instead of sentencing the perpetrator separately for both crimes, be punished for the crime that carries the heaviest penalty, .
In this specific case, this offense would most likely fall under Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code, which concerns insulting the President.
13. Why is Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code inapplicable?
Because Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code concerns the same crime.
Insult under Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code and insulting the President under Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code are different types of crimes regulated in different articles of the law and protecting different legal values.
Indeed, in the crime of insulting the President;
- a different basic penalty,
- different prosecution conditions,
- different systematic locations,
- different protected legal values
that is the case.
Therefore;
"Ultimately, since they all constitute defamation, Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code should be applied."
This type of assessment is insufficient.
Although Article 43/1 of the Turkish Penal Code states that the basic and aggravated forms of a crime are considered the same, Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code is not merely an aggravated form of Article 125; it is an independent type of crime.
14. Important Distinction: The Result Changes Completely If It's Not a Single Action
The assessment made so far a single act in legal terms .
For example, the perpetrator made a single post;
“Ahmet is a thief, Mehmet is dishonorable, and so is the President…”
Even if the words used are distinct but belong to the same context, the legal singularity of the act must be discussed separately.
To give a clearer example;
- At 12:00, Ahmet was insulted
- At 2 PM, Mehmet was insulted
- insulting the President at 6 PM
If this has been done, then it is no longer possible to speak of a single act within the meaning of Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code.
In this case, each crime is evaluated within its own specific circumstances.
The provisions regarding continuous offenses can be discussed if the same criminal intent exists for acts falling under Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code.
A separate act directed against the President constitutes an independent crime under Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code.
Therefore, temporal unity alone is not sufficient; legal unity of action must also be investigated.
15. Different sentences within a single statement do not always count as a single verb
There is another important distinction, especially in social media crimes.
The presence of a single "tweet," video, speech, or post does not automatically mean the presence of a single action.
For example, the perpetrator is in the same video;
First, a long section of insults about Ahmet,
then another statement directed at Mehmet,
then a completely separate insult directed at the President
if it is doing so;
It should be assessed whether actions and intent can be separated from each other.
The Supreme Court's Criminal General Assembly also considers, in matters of concurrent offenses, not only the number of physical acts but also whether the act is singular in a legal sense.
Therefore, the court;
- whether the words follow each other
- whether or not they are within the same context
- whether separate intents against the victims emerged,
- whether the expressions are divisible
It should be examined.
In cases of insulting the 16th President, permission to prosecute is also required
According to Article 299/3 of the Turkish Penal Code, prosecution for the crime of insulting the President requires the permission of the Minister of Justice.
Therefore, when the same act may be evaluated under both Article 125 and Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code, the necessary conditions for prosecution under Article 299 must be fulfilled with regard to the section concerning the President.
The Supreme Court rulings also state that the outcome of the investigation into the action against the President should be examined and the provisions regarding the aggregation of offenses should be evaluated accordingly.
Therefore, ignoring file number 299 and ruling only under article 125 with respect to other victims may result in an incomplete investigation.
17. Summary of the Supreme Court's Approach to the Issue
Three fundamental principles emerge in the practice of the Supreme Court:
Firstly:
If the same offense of insult is committed against more than one person with a single act, Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code applies.
Secondly:
If a single act constitutes both insulting the President and insulting another person under Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code, then the concept of concurrent offenses of different types under Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code comes into play.
Thirdly:
After determining the most serious crime by applying Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code, it is incorrect to automatically apply Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code separately in a way that would again make the same act a reason for increased punishment.
18. The Final Legal Solution in a Concrete Example
Let's revisit our example:
The perpetrator made the same social media post within the same context;
Ahmet + Mehmet + President
He used insulting language about her.
Step one: Is it a single verb?
If yes, then the rules regarding assembly are applied.
Second stage: Are the crimes the same?
Regarding Ahmet and Mehmet:
Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code → the same crime.
From the President's point of view:
Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code → a different crime.
Third stage:
In terms of Ahmet and Mehmet, there is an abstract relationship of concurrent offenses of the same kind, as defined in Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code.
However, since the same legal act also constitutes the crime of assault against the President under Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code, an assessment of the different types of concurrent offenses under Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code should be made for the entire case.
Fourth stage:
According to Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code, the crime that carries the most severe penalty is determined.
In specific circumstances, this crime would generally fall under Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code, which concerns insulting the President .
Fifth stage:
Establishing a separate conviction under Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code for the same single act, and then applying an additional sentence under Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code based on the same multiple victims, may constitute a violation of the principle of "one punishment for one act.".
Therefore, considering the recent decisions of the Supreme Court of Appeals, to impose a sentence for the crime that carries the most severe penalty under Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code .
19. A Different Example: One Statement to the President, Different Statements to Others
In this example, however, the result might be different:
First, the perpetrator;
"Ahmet and Mehmet are thieves."
he says.
Then, in a separate voluntary action;
"The President too..."
he says.
If it is accepted that statements can be separated in both material and legal terms, then there may no longer be a single act.
In this case;
Insulting Ahmet and Mehmet:
Turkish Penal Code Article 125 + Article 43/2.
Insulting the President:
Turkish Penal Code Article 299.
In this case, actual concurrence of punishments, i.e., separate punishments, may come into play.
Therefore, being in the same conversation or making the same social media post alone is not sufficient for the application of Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code.
The court must first determine the number of offenses
20. Conclusion
When the crime of insult against multiple persons is committed with a single act, the basic rule is the principle of concurrent offenses of the same type. Accordingly, if the same insult offense is directed at multiple victims, separate penalties are not imposed for each victim; a single penalty is determined and increased within the scope of Article 43 of the Turkish Penal Code.
However, the legal situation changes if one of the victims is the President.
Because while the act against other victims constitutes the crime of insult under Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code, the act against the President constitutes a separate type of crime under Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code
Therefore, if both the President and other persons have been insulted with a single, indivisible act, then not only Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code but also of concurrent offenses of different kinds in Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code should be considered.
According to the Supreme Court's practice regarding direct insult to the President and another person with the same act, in legal terms, if Article 299 and Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code are violated together with a single act, Article 44 of the Turkish Penal Code should be applied, and a conviction should be made for the crime requiring the most severe penalty.
Therefore, the summary formula can be formulated as follows:
One act + multiple ordinary victims + Turkish Penal Code Article 125 → Turkish Penal Code Article 43/2, concurrent offenses of the same kind.
Single act + ordinary victim + President → Turkish Penal Code Articles 125 and 299 (different crimes) → Turkish Penal Code Article 44 (ideal concurrence of offenses of different types) → punishment for the most serious crime.
Multiple separable acts + ordinary victims + the President → If the conditions of Article 43/2 of the Turkish Penal Code are met, it is possible to apply it to other victims and to issue a separate judgment against the President under Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code.
Therefore, in such cases, the main determining issue is not the number of victims, but whether the act is legally singular or not. If the act is singular, Article 44 applies; if the acts can be separated, the provisions of Article 43/2, depending on the conditions of actual concurrence of offenses, will be relevant.
About Post Author
