KÜHEYLAN HUKUK
Evaluation under Turkish Penal Code No. 5237 Art.217/A and Constitutional Court Resolution E.2022/129, K.2023/189 was prepared on the basis of legislation in force as of 2026 and official sources dated November 2026.
The crime of publicly spreading misleading information to the public was added to the Turkish Penal Code on 18.10.2022 by Law No. 7418. In order for crime to occur, a factual knowledge of the country's internal and external security, public order, or general health must be disseminated publicly in a manner conducive to disrupting public peace, and only with the intention of creating anxiety, fear, or panic among the people. His sentence is imprisonment from one year to three years; if the perpetrator has concealed his identity or acted within the framework of an organization's activity, the penalty will be increased by half. The Constitutional Court rejected the request for annulment of the sentence by its decision dated 8.11.2023. Each of these elements cannot be convicted without being individually proven.
What is the Legal Definition of Crime?
According to the first paragraph of Article 217/A of the Turkish Penal Code, a person who spreads information that is contrary to the truth about the country's internal and external security, public order and general health in a manner conducive to disrupting public peace shall be punished with imprisonment from one year to three years. The second paragraph stipulates that the penalty will be increased by half if the perpetrator commits the crime by concealing his/her true identity or within the framework of an organization's activity.
The sentence is the result of the legislator's choice to intervene through criminal law in misinformation spreading rapidly through social media and internet reporting. Crime lies in the section of the Law on crimes against public peace; protected legal value is not the reputation of individual individuals, but a sense of community peace and security. Therefore, false news about a person concerns not this article as a rule, but the provisions of insults or libel.
What are the Elements of Crime?
The wording of matter contains five elements that must occur together. Crime does not occur when one of them is missing.
Factual information: Spreading content should be a verifiable fact claim. Since thought, interpretation, criticism, prediction and value judgments are not informational, they cannot be subject to a test of non-factuality. This is where the difference between commenting that an economic indicator will get worse and making up an official data.
Limited subject area: Information must be related to the country's internal and external security, public order or general health. Misinformation about a company's commercial activity or the private life of a person falls outside this scope.
Public dissemination: Content needs to be shared in an environment where an uncertain number of people can learn. Public social media accounts, internet news sites and publishing bodies are of this nature; publicity in closed and limited participation correspondence should also be discussed.
Convenience to disrupt public peace: Content is sought to be suitable for creating an effect that can disturb social peace in the circumstances of the concrete event. The number of interactions, the time of sharing (e.g. a disaster moment), and the nature of the content are decisive in this assessment.
Special saying: The expression "simply" in the article obliges the perpetrator to act with the aim of creating anxiety, fear or panic among the public. This is not found in posts that are made for information, warning or reporting purposes and which appear to be incorrect afterwards. The existence of Saikin must be shown by the prosecution with concrete evidence.
What did the Constitutional Court decide?
The lawsuit, filed at the request for annulment of the ruling, was rejected by a majority of votes by the Constitutional Court's decision dated 8.11.2023 and numbered E.2022/129, K.2023/189. The majority have acknowledged that the material and spiritual elements of crime, sanction and qualified state are defined in sufficient clarity in the law. Members who voted against it emphasized that the concepts of "untruthful information" and "property to break public peace" are open to interpretation, which could have a deterrent effect on freedom of expression.
In terms of practice, the meaning of this decision is: The sentence is in effect; however, narrow interpretation of the elements means that both the individual application jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court and the European Convention on Human Rights 10. It's a requirement of its substance. The basic strategy of defence is to question separately whether each of the elements was established by concrete evidence.
How Does the Judicial Process Work?
The crime is not dependent on the complaint; the public prosecutor's office re'sen initiates an investigation. It is not within the scope of compromise. The incumbent court is the first criminal court. If the sentenced sentence is two years or less, it may be considered that the statement of the verdict should be withdrawn and the prison sentence postponed; if the short-term prison sentence is set, it is also possible to translate the option into sanctions.
If the crime was committed through content published on an internet news site or in printed work, 26 of Press Law No. 5187. The duration of litigation is applied in the article: In Internet news sites and daily periodicals, a public case must be filed within four months from the date of the report or submission. This period is a condition of reasoning. In shares made from a personal social media account, this is not a special period, but the general case statutes of the Turkish Penal Code apply.
Qualifying state By concealing identity or within the framework of organization activity: increase by half
If processed through the press Time to sue for 4 months on the Internet news site (Press Law Art. 26)
Event Summary Form: Fictional example: During a flood in a city, a user shared the claim that "the dam is cracked, the city will be evacuated" from his public account with the note "not confirmed, be careful". The sharing has been viewed thousands of times, the claim being denied by the governor's office. Process: An investigation has been launched and a indictment has been issued under TCK Art.217/A about the user. In defense, it has been documented that sharing is done for warning purposes and by source indications, the user immediately removes and corrects post-denial sharing. Conclusion: The content is contrary to fact and relates to public order; however, the phrase "unconfirmed" weakens the claim that the perpetrator acted solely on the purpose of creating panic. Acquittal decision must be made in the event that the special saik element cannot be proven. The defense's presentation of these evidence during the investigation phase also increases the likelihood that there is no room for prosecution.
Does re-sharing (retweet) of another constitute a crime?
Re-sharing can also be considered a propagation verb. In each sharing, however, it is also sought that the perpetrator knows that the information is false and acts solely on the cause of panic; just because it was shared is not enough for conviction.
Can journalists be prosecuted for this crime?
Yes, there is no distinction of profession in the sentence. However, for the purpose of reporting, content published with reasonable verification does not have special motive. Therefore, documents showing the source of the news are first in defense.
Can an arrest warrant be issued for this crime?
General arrest conditions of the Criminal Procedure Act apply. The moderation of the arrest in a crime with an upper limit of three years should be concretely justified as to why judicial control measures are insufficient.
Does erasing sharing eliminate punishment?
Deletion does not remove the sentence on its own, as it is completed at the time of criminal spread. However, early eradication and correction are taken into account in the evaluation of Saikin and the individualization of punishment.
What is the result of sharing with a fake (anonymous) account?
The concealment of true identity is qualified and the penalty is increased by half. In this case, the upper limit increases to four and a half years.
• No explanation of the purpose of sharing in colloquial expression and no discussion of the special element of motive in defense. • Message showing the source of my share, connection and screen footage not being stored in time. • Not objecting to the characterization of comments and critical statements as "information". • Unchecking the four-month period in Press Law Art. 26 in Internet news site publications. • No objections to the arrest decision in terms of moderation and judicial control competence.
The crime of publicly spreading public misleading information is a crime whose elements must be narrowly interpreted and come into direct contact with freedom of expression. The difference between conviction and acquittal often determines the correct editing of evidence for the purpose of sharing from the first statement. Küheylan Law Office provides legal support in the preparation of the defence from the stage of testimony in investigations and prosecutions under TCK Art.217/A, appeals to arrest and judicial control decisions, and, if necessary, the individual application process.
Important Legal Notice: The legal statements contained in this guide are prepared by the Küheylan Law Office for general informational purposes and do not qualify as legal counsel. The unique conditions of each file can change the result. Legal support from a lawyer is recommended before the investigation process begins or testimony is given. © 2026 Küheylan Law Office. All Rights Reserved.
KÜHEYLAN HUKUK