Application of the Crime of Deliberate Environmental Pollution in Terms of Location

Entrance

Environmental protection is not only a national but also an international legal issue in today's world. Global threats such as climate change, depletion of natural resources, and pollution have forced states to develop more effective regulations to combat environmental crimes. In this context, the crime of intentionally polluting the environmentis one of the important types of crimes regulated in the Turkish Penal Code (TCK) with the aim of protecting the environment.

In addition to its criminal aspects, the territorial application of this crime is of particular importance in the legal system. This is because environmental crimes often concern not only the place where they are committed, but also other regions and even countries due to their wide-ranging effects on the environment and public health. This article will examine the territorial application of the crime of intentionally polluting the environment , along with the provisions of the Turkish Penal Code, Supreme Court precedents, international law perspectives, and problems in practice.

1. What is the crime of intentionally polluting the environment?

1.1. Amendments in the Turkish Penal Code

Turkish Penal Code Article 181/1:
“A person who intentionally releases waste or residues into the soil, water, or air in a manner contrary to the technical procedures determined by the relevant laws and in a way that will harm the environment shall be punished with imprisonment from six months to two years.”

According to this article, the elements of the crime are:

The act intentionally .
of waste or residue into water, soil, or air,
The act is contrary to the relevant legislation,
It poses a risk of harming the environment.

2. Implementation in Terms of Location

2.1. General Principle

Turkish Penal Code Article 8:
"Turkish laws shall apply to crimes committed in Turkey."

Accordingly, the place where the crime was committed determines the jurisdiction of Turkish courts.

2.2. Location Where the Crime Was Committed

When determining the "crime scene" in environmental crimes, two criteria are taken into account:

The place where the act was committed: The place where the waste or residue was left.
The place where the consequence occurs: Where pollution originates, where the environment is damaged, or where there is a risk of damage.

Both locations are considered the scene of the crime.

3. Characteristics of Environmental Crimes

Environmental crimes differ from classic crimes:

a spreading effect . Waste is left in one area, but its impact can reach kilometers away.
a transnational nature . An environmental crime committed in one country can have consequences in neighboring countries as well.
It affects society as a whole. The victims are not specific individuals, but the entire society and future generations.

Therefore, territorial application rules are interpreted broadly in environmental crimes.

4. Application Examples

Discharging Waste into the Sea: If a factory discharges waste into the Sea of Marmara, this renders Turkish territorial waters the jurisdiction where the crime was committed.
Air Pollution: If a facility in Istanbul releases toxic gases into the atmosphere, causing pollution in surrounding provinces, the crime could be considered committed both in Istanbul and in the affected provinces.
Soil Pollution: In Ankara, the act of illegally burying waste determines the location where the burial took place as the site where the crime was committed.

5. Supreme Court Case Law

The 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, Case No. 2014/2563 E., Decision No. 2015/4892 K., stated: “The place where the waste is dumped into the soil is the place where the crime is committed. However, if the pollution has consequences in other areas, these areas are also considered the crime scene.”
The Supreme Court Criminal General Assembly, Case No. 2017/12-348 E., Decision No. 2018/523 K., stated: "The risk of harm to the environment is sufficient; the act does not need to produce any consequences."
The 18th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, Case No. 2019/4236 E., Decision No. 2020/2784 K., stated: “The place where the crime is committed is the place where the act is performed; the consequences that spread to the surrounding area may create jurisdiction for prosecution in other places as well.”

6. International Law Perspective

Environmental crimes are also of international importance:

The Aarhus Convention: Recognizes the right to access information about the environment and the right to protect the environment.
The Stockholm and Rio Declarations state that environmental crimes can give rise to international accountability.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has emphasized that environmental pollution should be assessed within the scope of the right to life and the right to protection of privacy.

In this context, environmental crimes are debated not only in terms of national but international jurisdiction .

7. Human Rights Dimension

The territorial application of the crime of intentionally polluting the environment directly concerns human rights :

The right to life (ECHR Article 2),
The right to live in a healthy environment (Article 56 of the Constitution),
Protection of private life (ECHR Article 8).

Environmental pollution directly affects the quality of life in society and the health of individuals.

8. Reflections on Daily Life

A ship that illegally discharges waste into the sea off Istanbul will be tried in Turkish courts, given that the crime was committed there.
Waste buried in Hakkari could affect not only that region but also surrounding provinces through groundwater. In such a case, multiple local courts may have jurisdiction.
Illegal waste incineration, a common occurrence in industrial areas, can give rise to jurisdiction both at the location where the act is committed and in the areas reached by the smoke.

9. Criticisms

Jurisdiction conflict: There is debate over which court has jurisdiction in environmental crimes that have consequences in multiple locations.
Difficulty in collecting evidence: When the effects of pollution are felt in different areas, collecting evidence becomes more difficult.
Deterrent effect of penalties: Even when there is jurisdiction, penalties are criticized for not being sufficiently deterrent in practice.
Lack of international cooperation: Interstate cooperation is insufficient in addressing transnational environmental crimes.

Conclusion

The crime of intentionally polluting the environmentis one of the most fundamental provisions of the Turkish Penal Code aimed at protecting the environment. The geographical application of the crime is interpreted broadly due to the characteristics of environmental crimes; both the place where the act is committed and the place where the consequences occur are considered the crime scene.

The precedents set by the Supreme Court of Turkey broaden the scope of jurisdiction in environmental crimes by considering not only the place where the act was committed, but also the regions where its effects are observed. International law also recognizes the transnational nature of environmental crimes and imposes an obligation of cooperation on states.

In conclusion, the territorial application of the crime of intentionally polluting the environment not only determines jurisdiction but is also of vital importance in terms of human rights, public health, and the protection of future generations

Single Blog Title