WHAT IS THE CRIME OF EXTORTION AND ITS PUNISHMENT?

1. Introduction

The honesty, impartiality, and loyalty of public officials in performing their duties is a fundamental requirement of the rule of law. Providing public services in exchange for personal gain directly undermines the credibility and transparency of these services. The Turkish Penal Code defines such interest-based relationships as crimes in various ways. One of these crimes extortion, punishes a public official for obtaining personal gain by abusing the power or influence afforded by their position.

The crime of extortion is often confused with bribery and embezzlement, but it differs in its unique elements, such as the perpetrator being a public official, the victim's will being impaired, and the abuse of public power. This study will examine the elements of the crime of extortion under Article 250 of the Turkish Penal Code, the types of the crime, the penalties, the differences with similar crimes, and the Supreme Court's precedents.

---

2. Legal Regulation (Turkish Penal Code Article 250)

Article 250 of the Turkish Penal Code is regulated in three paragraphs. Accordingly;

Turkish Penal Code Article 250/1 (Extortion by Coercion):

"If a public official uses the influence afforded by their position to force a person to provide a benefit to themselves or another person, they shall be sentenced to imprisonment for eight to twelve years and a judicial fine of up to five thousand days."

Turkish Penal Code Article 250/2 (Extortion by Persuasion):

"If a public official deceives a person by pretending to perform a task that is not actually part of their public duty, thereby obtaining a benefit for themselves or another person, they shall be sentenced to imprisonment for six to ten years and a judicial fine of up to five thousand days."

Turkish Penal Code Article 250/3 (Turning a Blind Eye to an Offer of Self-Benefit):

"If a public official accepts a benefit offered to him in exchange for not performing or avoiding performing a duty he is obligated to perform in the course of his duties, he shall be sentenced to imprisonment for five to ten years and a judicial fine of up to five thousand days."

---

3. Elements of the Crime

A. Fail

The perpetrator of the crime of extortion can only a public official . According to Article 6/1-c of the Turkish Penal Code, a public official is a person who participates in the conduct of public activity, whether permanently, periodically, or temporarily, through appointment, election, or any other means. For example:

• Police officers

• Municipal employees

• Teachers

• Police officers

• Enforcement officers

It could be the culprit.

B. Victim

The victim can be anyone. The person whose will is influenced by the public official could be a private individual or a representative of a legal entity. Whether the victim benefits is irrelevant; what matters is that the perpetrator benefits.

C. Movement

The crime of extortion can be committed in three different ways:

1. By Coercion – When a public official forces a victim to give a benefit through pressure, threat, or the use of their official authority.

2. Persuasion (Deception) – A situation where a public official deceives a victim by presenting a false situation as real, thereby gaining an advantage.

3. Acceptance of a Spontaneous Offer of Benefit – A public official accepting an offer of benefit for a task that is required to be performed as part of their duties.

D. Interest

The benefit can be material or intangible. What matters is whether the public official gains a direct or indirect advantage for himself or a third party as a result of this action.

E. Kast

The crime with direct intent . The perpetrator must have the intention of obtaining a benefit outside of their official duties as a public official or by abusing their position.

---

4. Difference from Bribery and Embezzlement Crimes

---

5. Criminal Sanctions

• Extortion through coercion: 8-12 years imprisonment + judicial fine

• Extortion through persuasion: 6-10 years imprisonment + judicial fine.

• Turning a blind eye to a bribe offer: 5-10 years imprisonment + fine.

Judicial fines can be imposed up to 5000 days. Suspension of the announcement of the verdict (HAGB) or postponement is generally not applied, depending on the severity of the crime.

---

6. Supreme Court Case Law

SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS, 5TH CRIMINAL DIVISION Case No: 2014/2377 Decision No: 2016/4151

• Article 250 of the Turkish Penal Code
• The Crime of Extortion

Based on the trial proceedings, the evidence gathered and presented at the decision-making stage, the court's conclusions and assessments in accordance with the investigation results, and the contents of the examined file, the other appeals deemed unfounded are rejected

However;

...The defendant, who works in the Machine Supply service, told the complainant, who came to the institution to inquire about the death pension for his sister due to her husband, that the death pension could be granted by paying 6,250 TL after checking the insurance information on the computer, and that he created the impression that he worked in the allocation service where the debt was made, thus corrupting the complainant's will. The complainant, believing and expecting that the defendant would use his authority and resources in accordance with the law, believed this and paid the money in question. Given that the court also accepted the facts in this way, the defendant's act of fraudulently benefiting himself by abusing the trust provided by his established position constitutes the crime of extortion by persuasion, and considering Article 250/4 of the Turkish Penal Code, added by Article 86 of Law No. 6352, the court erroneously ruled for the crime of fraud, without considering that he should be punished in accordance with Article 250/2 of the same law

According to the acceptance;

Although the reasoning behind the judgment acknowledges that the act falls under Article 255 of the Turkish Penal Code, applying Article 157 of the same Code creates a contradiction in the judgment

Since the defendant's appeals are deemed justified due to the illegality of the judgment, and taking into consideration Article 8/1 of Law No. 5320, the judgment is hereby REVERSED in accordance with Articles 321 and 326/last paragraph of the Code of Criminal Procedure, by unanimous decision on April 21, 2016.

---

7. Effective Repentance (Turkish Penal Code Article 251)

• If a victim of extortion reports the crime to the authorities before it is discovered, they will not be punished.

• If the application is made after the crime has been discovered but before the verdict, the sentence reduced by half .

• This provision applies only to the victims (those who provided the benefit); it does not apply to public officials.

---

8. Equivalent in International Law

In OECD, Council of Europe, and UN conventions, embezzlement is defined as the abuse of office by a public official. Turkey, being a party to these conventions, criminalizes not only bribery but also unilateral forms of personal gain such as embezzlement.

---

9. Problems in Implementation

• The distinction between coercion and persuasion is not clearly defined in practice.

• a public official exerts tacit pressure and the victim gives their "consent," the distinction between bribery and embezzlement is debatable.

• The type (material or moral) and value of the benefit can affect the punishment.

• The abuse of the principle of effective repentance, where victims become "informants" to avoid punishment, complicates the judicial process.

---

10. Conclusion and Evaluation

The crime of extortion is the use of public power by a public official for personal gain. The most important difference from bribery is that the victim's will is compromised. Article 250 of the Turkish Penal Code aims to guarantee the security and transparency of public services by classifying this type of crime into three categories based on different modes of conduct.

Judicial decisions emphasize the perpetrator's use of coercion, abuse of public power, and violation of the victim's will when determining punishment. However, in practice, careful consideration should be given to factors such as the distinction between bribery and embezzlement, the degree of coercion, and the influence of the public official's position.