In our legal system, the crime of blackmail, regulated under Article 107 of the Turkish Penal Code, is defined as an act of attack involving the threat to disclose or attribute matters that would harm a person’s honor or reputation, with the aim of providing benefit to oneself or another. This type of crime is regulated under Article 107 of the Turkish Penal Code, and both the perpetrator and the victim can be any person.
Article 107/1 of the Turkish Penal Code states: “A person who, on the grounds that someone has the right or is obliged to do or not do something, forces that person to do or not do something illegal or not obligatory, or to gain an unjust advantage, shall be punished with imprisonment from one to three years and a judicial fine of up to five thousand days.”
Article 107/2 continues: “If the threat involves the disclosure or attribution of matters that would harm a person’s honor or reputation with the purpose of benefiting oneself or another, the penalty in the first paragraph shall apply.”
As can be understood from the relevant regulations above, the crime can also be described as a special form of the offense of threat. In this type of crime, there is also a threat involved, but the legal values it targets are limited. To explain in more detail, while the crime of threat involves an unlawful attack or other harm that is announced to occur in the future to the victim, in blackmail, as stated in the first paragraph of Article 107, the perpetrator tries to make the victim behave in a certain way by using something they have a right to or are obliged to do.
Blackmail is an optional offense, and the crime is completed by the commission of any one of the following three acts. These acts are:
Threatening to disclose or attribute matters that would harm the victim’s honor or reputation (Article 107/2)
Forcing the victim to do or not do something illegal or something they are not obliged to do (Article 107/1)
Forcing the victim to gain an unlawful benefit (Article 107/1)
The Requirement of a Complaint for the Crime
Since the crime type is not explicitly stated in the law as requiring a complaint, its prosecution is not dependent on a complaint. Investigation and prosecution are conducted ex officio. The public prosecutor can initiate investigation and inquiry ex officio as soon as they become aware of the act.
The Applicability of Reconciliation/Mediation to the Crime
The law does not provide for reconciliation (mediation) in the case of the crime of blackmail. However, since the investigation and prosecution of blackmail is not dependent on a complaint, and it is not one of the catalog crimes listed in Article 253 of the Criminal Procedure Code, it is therefore not possible to resort to reconciliation for this crime.
Distinction Between the Crime of Blackmail and the Crime of Extortion
The crime of blackmail should not be confused with the crime of extortion by coercion. While anyone can be the perpetrator of blackmail, in the crime of extortion by coercion, the perpetrator must be a public official who uses the authority and influence of their position to obtain a benefit.
Distinction Between the Crimes of Blackmail and Threat
The crime of blackmail should not be confused with the crime of threat. In the crime of threat, the victim is faced with the announcement of a future wrongful harm or unlawful attack; whereas in blackmail, the perpetrator forces the victim to act in a certain way based on something they have a right to or are obliged to do. In this sense, blackmail is a more limited crime compared to threat.
Blackmail Crime in Terms of the Mode of Commission
In the crime of blackmail, general intent alone is not sufficient; the perpetrator must also act with the specific intent to force someone to do or not do something illegal or not obligatory, or to gain an unjust advantage. In terms of form, it is a crime that cannot be committed through negligence.
The crime is a consequence-related offense connected to the act and does not require completion. It does not matter whether the victim is actually affected by the blackmail or whether the perpetrator achieves their purpose. However, since the act constituting the material element of the crime is divisible, the crime is amenable to an attempt.
Aggravating Circumstances
If the crime of blackmail is committed against multiple persons through a single act, the provisions on consecutive (chain) offenses shall apply. In such a case, the penalty imposed on the offender is increased.
- According to Article 43 of the Turkish Penal Code,
- “If the same offense is committed more than once against the same person at different times within the framework of a decision to commit a crime, a single sentence shall be imposed. However, this sentence shall be increased by one-fourth to three-fourths.
- If the same offense is committed against multiple persons through a single act, the provision of Article 43/1 of the Turkish Penal Code shall also apply. In this case, the penalty for the offense shall be increased by one-fourth to three-fourths.”
The Institution of Effective Remorse
The institution of effective remorse is not regulated for every type of crime in the law. It is applicable only to those offenses for which a specific provision exists. There is no such provision for the crime of blackmail. Therefore, a reduction in the sentence based on effective remorse is not applicable to this offense.
The Enforcement Regime Applicable to the Crime
In cases of blackmail, the competent court is the Criminal Court of First Instance, since the upper limit of the penalty prescribed by law is taken into consideration, and the maximum sentence for the crime of blackmail is up to three years of imprisonment.
The penalty for the crime of blackmail is the same for all forms of the offense. According to Article 107/1 of the Turkish Penal Code, the punishment for blackmail is imprisonment from 1 to 3 years and a judicial fine of up to 5,000 days.
It is worth noting that the judge cannot impose only a prison sentence or only a judicial fine. As can be understood from the conjunction “and” used in the relevant article, both penalties must be imposed separately.
In cases where a legal entity gains an unlawful benefit as a result of the commission of the crime of blackmail, security measures specific to legal entities shall also be imposed.Sample Court of Cassation Decisions on the Crime of Blackmail
The Joint Commission of the Crimes of Blackmail and Threat
In light of the above explanations, when the concrete case is examined; after the defendant was unable to reach the complainant by phone to learn the truth about the rumor that he was being barred from entering the village of Sinekçiler, and after receiving no response to the insulting and threatening messages he initially sent, he then sent another message stating: “This is going to escalate, you will lose that seat, we have something in our hands too, the newspaper that wasn’t distributed during the election was scanned and will be sent to everyone, everyone will know.”
Despite the court’s decision to comply with the reversal, the element of “obtaining benefit” in the crime of blackmail was not clearly demonstrated or sufficiently discussed. Furthermore, a conviction was rendered based on abstract reasoning, without proper evaluation and analysis in accordance with the reversal decision…
(Court of Cassation, 4th Criminal Chamber, Decision dated 09/03/2017, Docket No: 2017/11, Decision No: 2017/7254)
Blackmail Crime Based on the Threat of Harm to a Person’s Honor, Dignity, and Reputation
In the indictment, it is stated that the defendant sent messages to the complainant containing phrases such as “… you have photos taken,” “I swear I am now uploading them to the computer, I am free of guilt,” and “You will get married; if you do not, I will kidnap your daughter and spread all the pictures I have of you on the internet worldwide.”
Without discussing whether these statements constitute the crime of blackmail as regulated under Article 107/2 of the Turkish Penal Code, the defendant was convicted of the crime of threat. This is a reason for reversal.
(Court of Cassation, 4th Criminal Chamber – Decision No: 2020/12115)
The Case of the Crime Committed Through Means of Communication
Considering that the victim and the defendant were in an emotional relationship, that the victim wanted to separate from the defendant but the defendant did not accept this situation, and therefore sent messages to the victim and also called the victim, making statements such as, “I have private images of you; if you leave me, I will publish these images on the internet, put them on the school’s website, and show them to your family,”
without taking into account that the defendant’s actions constitute the crime of blackmail by threatening to disclose or attribute matters that would harm the victim’s honor or dignity, and issuing a verdict of acquittal with a legally insufficient and inadequate justification, this constitutes grounds for reversal.
(Court of Cassation, 4th Criminal Chamber – Decision No: 2018/21962)
