Criminal proceedings are not limited to judicial processes initiated only after the commission of a crime. Controlling all elements directly or indirectly related to the crime is of great importance to ensure the full administration of justice. In this context, preventing assets and stolen property obtained from a crime from circulating within society serves not only to address the consequences of the crime but also to play a preventive role in stopping new crimes.
Accordingly, under Article 165 of the Turkish Penal Code, the intentional purchase, acquisition, or acceptance of property and assets obtained from a crime by persons who did not directly participate in the crime is defined as a separate offense. In this article, we will examine the definition, elements, criminal sanctions, and practical application of the crime of selling, purchasing, or accepting stolen property.
LEGAL DEFINITION OF THE CRIME
The purchase, sale, or acquisition of property or assets obtained as a result of a crime by persons who did not participate in the crime is defined as an independent offense under Article 165 of the Turkish Penal Code. The relevant law states: “Anyone who sells, transfers, purchases, or accepts property or other assets obtained from the commission of a crime without participating in the commission of that crime shall be punished with imprisonment from six months to three years and a judicial fine of up to ten thousand days.” This provision aims to prevent property or assets obtained from a crime from being legitimized and circulated within society.
ELEMENTS OF THE CRIME
When evaluated together with its objective and subjective elements, the crime of selling, purchasing, or accepting stolen property consists of the following fundamental components:
1- Perpetrator: This crime, regulated under Article 165 of the Turkish Penal Code, is a general offense that can be committed by anyone. However, it should be noted that the perpetrator must not have participated in the original crime.
2- Act (Actus Reus): The crime is structured as an optional act crime. The optional acts defined by the legislator that constitute the crime are as follows:
- Acceptance of Stolen Property: This includes accepting stolen property through means other than purchase. For example, if a mobile phone obtained through fraud is accepted by the perpetrator’s friend under the guise of a “gift,” it falls within this scope. Similarly, assigning a car obtained through robbery to someone for free, or accepting money derived from a crime under the name of a “donation,” also constitutes this offense.
- Purchase of Stolen Property: This act refers to buying an item with economic value obtained from a crime for a certain price. If the perpetrator knowingly, or while having the obligation to know, purchases property derived from a crime, this constitutes the offense. For instance, if a jeweler buys a gold bracelet well below market value, knowing it is stolen, this indicates the commission of the crime.
- Sale or Transfer of Stolen Property: Under this optional act, the perpetrator sells or transfers stolen property in their possession without participating in the original crime. For example, an antique dealer who displays historical artifacts smuggled from abroad with forged documents in their shop and sells them to third parties commits this optional act. Similarly, a person who attempts to transfer electronic devices obtained from a crime by posting them online is also liable under this offense.
3- Legal Value Protected by the Crime: The legal values protected by the crime of buying and selling evidence or stolen property are the right to a fair trial, public order, and the security of judicial proceedings.
4- Mental Element (Mens Rea): This crime can only be committed intentionally. For the crime to occur, the perpetrator must know that the property purchased or accepted was obtained from another crime. If the perpetrator is unaware that the property was derived from a crime, they cannot be held criminally liable. Similarly, it is not required for the perpetrator to know the specific type of crime from which the property originated; it is sufficient that the perpetrator generally knows the property was obtained as a result of a crime.
PERSONAL EXEMPTIONS FROM PUNISHMENT
Article 167 of the Turkish Penal Code No. 5237 provides for exemption from punishment or a reduction in penalty based on certain familial relationships for some offenses committed against property. The crime of accepting stolen property also falls within the scope of this provision. According to this article:
1- Cases of Full Exemption from Punishment: If the crime of accepting stolen property is committed to the detriment of the following persons, no punishment shall be imposed on the perpetrator.
- One of the spouses who has not been granted a separation decree,
- Ascendants or descendants, or in-laws of the same degree,
- Adoptive parent or adopted child,
- One of the siblings living together in the same household
2- Cases of Reduced Punishment: If the crime is committed against the following persons, a penalty is imposed upon complaint, but this penalty is reduced by half:
- One of the spouses who has been granted a separation decree,
- One of the siblings not living in the same household,
- An uncle, maternal or paternal uncle, aunt, niece/nephew, or second-degree in-laws living together in the same household
COMPLAINT PERIOD, STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS, AND COMPETENT COURT
The crime of purchasing or accepting stolen property is not subject to a complaint and is investigated ex officio by the public prosecutor. Although there is no complaint period required for the investigation of the crime, the statute of limitations for filing a case is 8 years. This period begins from the date the crime was committed.
The crime of purchasing or accepting stolen property falls within the scope of reconciliation provisions. Therefore, the court is required to apply the reconciliation procedure during the investigation or prosecution phase. If reconciliation cannot be achieved, the trial will continue, and the competent court for such cases is the Criminal Court of First Instance.
SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE, POSTPONEMENT, AND FINES
The penalty for the crime of purchasing or accepting stolen property is imprisonment from 6 months to 3 years and a judicial fine of up to ten thousand days. Considering the lower and upper limits of the penalty, it is possible to decide on the postponement of the sentence or the deferral of its announcement; however, this crime is not subject to the provisions of effective remorse.
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
“…Following the report made by the complainant regarding the theft of their phone on 02/01/2014, investigations revealed via the obtained HTS report that the phone was first used by the defendant on 16/01/2014 after being stolen. After the phone was blocked by the prosecutor’s office, a stolen notification message was sent to the phone. In the defendant’s statement, it was understood that they purchased and used the phone from a street vendor in Karşıyaka; upon receiving the stolen message, they went to return the phone to the seller and reclaim their money, and when they could not find that person, they sold the phone to another individual present there. In light of this, instead of convicting the defendant for the crime of purchasing or accepting stolen property, the court mistakenly evaluated the evidence and acquitted them in writing. This required annulment, and since the reasons for appeal submitted by the local Public Prosecutor were deemed valid, the verdict was unanimously REVERSED for the stated reason…” (Supreme Court of Appeals, 17th Criminal Chamber, 2019/12498 E., 2020/349 K., 09.01.2020)
“…According to the case file and the events, the motorcycle stolen from the victim’s yard on 23/03/2012 was found about a month later with a person named Semih. Semih stated that the defendant’s son had sold him the motorcycle. The defendant claimed that they had received the motorcycle from a person whose identity they did not know and whom they could not identify from the criminal records album. However, the court failed to consider that it would be contrary to the ordinary course of life for the defendant not to know that a motorcycle sold without a license or plate was stolen. Instead of convicting the defendant for the crime of purchasing or accepting stolen property subject to reconciliation, the court accepted the defendant’s statements aimed at avoiding liability and acquitted them with an unfounded written justification. This necessitated reversal…” (Supreme Court of Appeals, 17th Criminal Chamber, 2019/3455 E., 2019/14871 K., 27.11.2019)
“…Considering that the defendant consistently maintained at all stages that they purchased the bicycle in question from a person whose identity they did not know and that they did not commit the crimes of theft and violation of domicile, and taking into account the long period between the date of the crime and the date the bicycle was in the possession of witness M.G., there is insufficient evidence to convict the defendant for stealing the bicycle. Although the defendant’s actions in this context constitute the crime of receiving stolen property under Article 165/1 of the Turkish Penal Code No. 5237, convicting them for theft and violation of domicile is contrary to the law…” (Supreme Court of Appeals, 2nd Criminal Chamber, 2014/23125 K.)
Lawyer. Gökhan AKGÜL & Lawyer. Yasemin ERAK
ANTALYA CRIMINAL LAWYER – ANTALYA LAWYER
The crime of selling, purchasing, or accepting criminal property is one of the offense types subject to serious sanctions under the Turkish Penal Code. In such cases, expert legal support is necessary both to protect the rights of the victim and to ensure the right to a fair trial for the person facing criminal allegations. With the assistance of a lawyer in Antalya, the correct legal steps can be taken during this process, and a professional defense can be prepared during the investigation and trial stages. An experienced criminal lawyer in Antalya ensures that their client’s rights are effectively protected and that the process is conducted in the most just manner in cases involving the sale or acceptance of criminal property.
