Çekmeköy Criminal Cases - Stalking Offence and Legal Protection

Çekmeköy Criminal Cases - Stalking Offence and Legal Protection Stalking may involve repeatedly following a person against their wishes, repeatedly calling or messaging them, attempting to contact them through social media or other communication channels, or continuing to reach them through third parties. Where the statutory requirements are met, such conduct may constitute the independent criminal offence of stalking under the Turkish Criminal Code. The offence is regulated under Article 123/A of the Turkish Criminal Code No. 5237. It entered into force in 2022, when persistent stalking conduct was established as a separate criminal offence. Under Article 123/A, persistently physically following another person or attempting to contact that person through communication devices, information systems or third parties may constitute an offence where the conduct causes serious distress to the victim or causes the victim to fear for their own safety or the safety of a person close to them. Accordingly, matters involving stalking, repeated messaging, repeated telephone calls, social media contact, stalking by a former partner, repeated contact by a former spouse, following a person to their home or workplace, contact through third parties, stalking despite a restraining order, Çekmeköy criminal cases and Çekmeköy criminal lawyer require an assessment of all circumstances of the case. What Is the Stalking Offence? The offence protects a person's peace, security and ability to conduct daily life freely. Not every disturbing act automatically constitutes stalking under Article 123/A. The conduct specified by law must be carried out persistently, and it must cause one of the consequences identified by the provision. One is serious distress to the victim. The other is concern for the safety of the victim or a person close to them. The nature, repetition and duration of the conduct, the relationship between the parties, whether the victim clearly rejected contact and the effect of the conduct on the victim may therefore be important. Which Provision Regulates Stalking? Stalking is regulated under Article 123/A of the Turkish Criminal Code. The offence was introduced by Law No. 7406 and entered into force following publication in the Official Gazette on 27 May 2022. Stalking conduct satisfying the statutory requirements may therefore be assessed as an independent criminal offence. What Are the Requirements of the Offence? There must first be physical following or an attempt to establish contact through one of the means specified by law. The conduct must be persistent. It must also cause serious distress to the victim or cause the victim to fear for their own safety or the safety of a person close to them. A single message, telephone call or coincidental encounter therefore does not automatically establish the offence. The conduct must be assessed as a whole. What Does "Persistent" Mean? Article 123/A requires persistent conduct. Persistence is not determined solely through a fixed mathematical number. Repetition, frequency, duration and continuation despite the victim's rejection of contact may all be relevant. Repeated calls or messages after the victim has clearly stated that no further contact is wanted may therefore support an assessment of persistence. Can One Message Constitute Stalking? As a rule, the structure of the offence requires repeated conduct. A single message may therefore fail to satisfy the persistence requirement. However, depending on its content, the message may potentially constitute a threat, insult or another offence. The absence of stalking does not necessarily mean that no criminal-law issue exists. Can Repeated Messages Constitute Stalking? Yes, where the statutory requirements are met. Repeated messages through WhatsApp, SMS, Instagram, Telegram, email or other channels may amount to attempts to establish contact through communication tools or information systems. The number of messages alone is not decisive. Their duration, the victim's rejection of contact, use of different channels and effect on the victim should be assessed together. Can Repeated Telephone Calls Constitute Stalking? Yes. Repeated calls may fall within Article 123/A, particularly where they continue despite the victim clearly stating that contact is unwanted. In a 2026 Court of Cassation decision, the case concerned repeated conduct involving messages and 20 telephone calls to a spouse who was living separately. The Court also addressed the aggravated form because a restraining measure had previously been imposed against the defendant. This does not establish a fixed numerical threshold applicable to every case. Does Refusing to Answer the Phone Prevent the Offence? No. Article 123/A covers an attempt to establish contact, not only successful two-way communication. The fact that the victim refuses to answer calls or messages therefore does not automatically prevent the offence from arising. Can Repeated Social Media Messages Constitute Stalking? Yes. Social media platforms may qualify as information systems through which contact is attempted. Repeated messages, contacting the victim through different accounts or opening new accounts after being blocked may be relevant to the assessment. What If the Victim Blocks the Offender and the Offender Creates New Accounts? This may be relevant evidence of persistence. Blocking may indicate that the victim does not wish to communicate. Opening new accounts, using different numbers or moving to other platforms in order to continue contact may therefore be important when assessing Article 123/A. Can Messages From a Fake Account Constitute Stalking? Yes. Using a fake or anonymous account does not itself prevent criminal liability. Where the identity of the person operating the account can be established, the conduct is assessed under the ordinary requirements of Article 123/A. Is Repeatedly Viewing a Social Media Profile Stalking? Simply viewing a publicly accessible profile is not necessarily equivalent to attempting to establish contact. The statutory forms of conduct under Article 123/A must be considered. A conclusion that stalking occurred should therefore not be based solely on the allegation that someone viewed a profile. What Is Physical Stalking? Article 123/A expressly includes persistent physical following. Following a person from their home, repeatedly following them on their way to work, waiting outside their school or workplace or systematically appearing at locations they visit may fall within this concept. Coincidental encounters must be distinguished from deliberate and persistent following. Can Repeatedly Waiting Outside a Home Constitute Stalking? Depending on the circumstances, yes. Repeatedly coming to the victim's home, waiting for them to leave or monitoring their movements may constitute physical following. The effect on the victim is also relevant. Can Waiting Outside a Workplace Constitute Stalking? Yes. Repeatedly appearing outside the workplace, monitoring arrival and departure times or waiting in the area to establish contact may fall within physical stalking. If the conduct causes the victim to change or leave employment, the aggravated form may also become relevant. Can Following Someone to School Constitute Stalking? Yes. Repeatedly following a student on the route to school or waiting outside the school may fall within Article 123/A. Where the victim is a child, the aggravated form of the offence may apply. Can Following Someone by Car Constitute Stalking? Physical following is not limited to following on foot. Systematically following a victim or the victim's vehicle by car may fall within the provision. Vehicle plates, CCTV footage and witness statements may be relevant evidence. Can Contact Through Third Parties Constitute Stalking? Yes. Article 123/A expressly includes attempts to contact the victim through third parties. For example, repeatedly asking mutual friends, relatives or colleagues to tell a victim who has blocked the offender to make contact may be relevant. Is Sending One Message Through a Friend Always an Offence? No. One ordinary attempt at communication does not automatically constitute stalking. Persistence and the statutory consequences must still be established. Repeatedly involving different people after the victim has clearly rejected contact may, however, contribute to the offence. Can Repeatedly Sending Flowers or Gifts Constitute Stalking? A single flower or gift does not automatically constitute stalking. However, repeatedly sending gifts to the victim's home or workplace despite a clear rejection of contact, particularly when combined with other following or communication conduct, may be assessed as part of the overall course of conduct. Can Bank Transfer Descriptions Be Used to Continue Contact? They may form part of the overall assessment. In a criminal case reflected in Constitutional Court materials, allegations included sending money to the complainant's bank account and using transfer descriptions to communicate, together with repeated calls and messages. This does not mean that an ordinary bank transfer is itself stalking; the entire course of conduct remains decisive. Can Repeated Calls by a Former Partner Constitute Stalking? Yes. A past romantic relationship does not create a continuing right to call, message or follow another person after the relationship ends. Persistent attempts to establish contact after the victim has terminated the relationship and communication may fall within Article 123/A. Does Wanting Reconciliation Prevent Criminal Liability? No. An intention to reconcile, apologise or restart a relationship does not automatically make persistent conduct lawful. The question is whether the statutory elements of Article 123/A are satisfied. A statement such as "I only wanted to talk" does not by itself eliminate liability where the required elements are established. Can Stalking by a Former Spouse Constitute an Aggravated Form? Yes. Commission against a spouse from whom the offender is divorced or in respect of whom a separation decision has been made is among the aggravated circumstances under the provision. Repeated calls, messages, visits to the home or workplace and physical following after separation must therefore be assessed accordingly. Can Stalking Occur While Divorce Proceedings Are Pending? Yes. The fact that a marriage has not yet legally ended does not provide one spouse with an unrestricted right to follow or contact the other against their wishes. Separate residence, rejection of contact, protective measures and the impact of the conduct must be considered. In its decision of 19 January 2026, the Court of Cassation assessed repeated calls and messages directed at a spouse living separately and held that an existing restraining measure required consideration of the aggravated form. Must the Victim Be Afraid? Not necessarily. Article 123/A refers not only to fear but also to serious distress or concern for the safety of the victim or a person close to them. Physical assault or an explicit death threat is therefore not required. How Is Serious Distress Determined? Not every annoyance amounts to serious distress. Frequency, duration, manner of conduct, the history between the parties, continuation despite rejection and impact on the victim's daily life may all be considered. Changes to telephone numbers, social media accounts, daily routes or security practices may be relevant depending on the circumstances. Whose Safety May Be the Subject of Concern? The provision is not limited to concern for the victim's own safety. Concern for the safety of a person close to the victim may also satisfy the statutory consequence. What Are the Aggravated Forms of Stalking? More severe punishment is provided where the offence is committed against a child, against a divorced spouse or a spouse subject to a separation decision, where it causes the victim to change their school, workplace or home or leave school or employment, or where it is committed by a person already subject to a restraining or non-approach measure. Is Stalking a Child Punished More Severely? Yes. Commission against a child is an aggravated form. Depending on the circumstances, other offences may also need to be examined. Is Stalking a Divorced Spouse Punished More Severely? Yes. Commission against a divorced spouse or a spouse subject to a separation decision is an aggravated circumstance. What If the Victim Has to Move Home? Where stalking causes the victim to change residence, the aggravated form may apply. The causal relationship between the stalking and the move must be established in the particular case. What If the Victim Leaves Their Job? If stalking causes the victim to change workplaces or leave employment, the aggravated form may become relevant. What Happens If Stalking Continues Despite a Restraining Order? Commission by a person who is already subject to a restraining order or an order not to approach the victim's home, school or workplace may constitute an aggravated form. The Court of Cassation's 19 January 2026 decision likewise held that the aggravated provision should be applied where the defendant had been subject to a restraining measure. Separate consequences for breach of a measure under Law No. 6284 may also require consideration. Can a Stalking Victim Seek a Restraining Order? Depending on the circumstances, yes. In addition to criminal proceedings, stalking may fall within the protective and preventive framework of Law No. 6284. The relevant framework covers women, children, family members and victims of unilateral stalking. Measures may include restrictions on approaching or contacting the victim, depending on the case. Are a Criminal Complaint and a Restraining Order the Same Thing? No. A criminal complaint under Article 123/A concerns investigation of an alleged criminal offence. Protective or preventive measures under Law No. 6284 constitute a separate mechanism designed to protect the victim. Both mechanisms may be relevant in the same case. What Is the Penalty for Stalking? The basic form of Article 123/A carries imprisonment from six months to two years. Where an aggravated circumstance applies, the penalty is imprisonment from one to three years. The actual sentence is determined by the court according to the circumstances and the general rules governing sentencing. Is Stalking Subject to Complaint? Yes. Investigation and prosecution of stalking under Article 123/A depend on a complaint. The statutory complaint period must therefore be observed. The starting point and calculation of the period may require case-specific assessment, particularly where conduct is repeated over time. What Happens If the Complaint Is Withdrawn? Because the offence is complaint-based, withdrawal may affect the criminal proceedings. A 2025 Court of Cassation decision records proceedings in which the stalking case was dismissed following withdrawal of the complaint. Where threats, insults, injury or other offences are also alleged, their procedural regimes must be assessed separately. Is Stalking Subject to Reconciliation? No. Although stalking is complaint-based, it is not subject to reconciliation. The Ministry of Justice's current Reconciliation Guide expressly identifies Article 123/A as an exception for which reconciliation is unavailable. The Constitutional Court also noted in a 2025 constitutional review decision that stalking is excluded from reconciliation under Article 253 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. What Evidence Can Be Used? Evidence capable of demonstrating repetition and continuity is particularly important. Call records, messages, WhatsApp communications, social media messages, communications from different accounts, emails, CCTV footage, vehicle and route footage, witness statements, security records, police reports and protective orders may all be relevant. Messages showing that the victim rejected further communication may also help establish context. Evidence must be obtained lawfully. Can Screenshots Be Evidence? Screenshots from social media and messaging applications may be considered. Their authenticity, completeness and lawful acquisition remain important. Where possible, preserving the full communication flow together with dates and times may be more informative than isolated screenshots. Can Call Records Be Evidence? Yes. Call records may demonstrate the frequency and timing of attempted contact. The 2026 Court of Cassation decision referred to messages and 20 calls directed at the victim spouse as part of the established conduct. Call records do not, however, automatically establish every element of the offence and must be considered with the remaining evidence. Can CCTV Footage Be Evidence? Yes. Lawfully obtained footage from areas surrounding the victim's home, workplace, school or regular route may be relevant to physical stalking allegations. Repeated presence in the same locations on different days may be assessed together with other evidence. Is Witness Testimony Important? Yes. Colleagues, family members, neighbours and other persons who directly observed the conduct may provide relevant testimony. Direct observations should be distinguished from information merely repeated to the witness by the victim. Does Deleting Messages Eliminate the Evidence? Not necessarily. Messages may remain on the other party's device, and other digital evidence may be available depending on the lawful investigative measures applicable to the case. Proper and lawful preservation of digital evidence is therefore important. What If the Victim Replied to Some Messages? Replying to some communications does not automatically prevent the offence. The communication as a whole must be assessed. A response intended to terminate contact or made because of fear is different from ongoing voluntary and mutual communication. What If the Messages Were Mutual? Genuinely mutual and voluntary communication may be relevant to whether persistence and the required consequences are established. However, initially mutual communication may later be terminated by one party. Persistent contact after that point requires separate assessment. What Is the Difference Between Stalking and Disturbing the Peace of Individuals? Article 123/A focuses on persistent physical following or attempts to establish contact through specified means and the statutory consequences produced by that conduct. The offence of disturbing the peace of individuals has different statutory elements. The appropriate classification depends on the nature of the conduct and which statutory requirements are established. Can Stalking and Threats Occur Together? Yes. If the offender sends threatening messages while persistently following or contacting the victim, the elements of the threat offence may also arise. A threat is not required for stalking. Where threats occur during the course of stalking, the possibility of multiple offences must be considered. Can Stalking and Insult Occur Together? Yes. Insulting the victim during repeated communications may separately raise the offence of insult. Stalking, insult and threats are distinct offences. Can Stalking and Violation of Privacy Occur Together? Depending on the facts, yes. Following someone and secretly recording private images or unlawfully obtaining private information are not the same conduct. Where stalking includes separate conduct infringing privacy, the elements of the relevant privacy offence must also be examined. Can Stalking and Violation of the Inviolability of the Home Occur Together? Yes, depending on the circumstances. Where a person persistently follows the victim and also enters the victim's home without consent, both Article 123/A and the offence concerning the inviolability of the home may require assessment. Each offence has separate statutory elements. Does the Offender's Motive Matter? Statements such as "I wanted to reconcile", "I only wanted to talk", "I wanted to apologise" or "I was worried about them" may form part of the factual assessment but are not independently decisive. The principal question is whether the statutory elements of Article 123/A are established. An assertion of good intentions does not automatically legalise persistent unwanted conduct. Which Court Has Jurisdiction Over the Offence? Given the penalties prescribed by Article 123/A and the general rules on criminal court jurisdiction, stalking cases are generally heard by the Criminal Court of First Instance. Where a more serious connected offence is also alleged, the jurisdictional assessment may change. Where Are Stalking Cases in Çekmeköy Handled? The primary territorial rule in criminal proceedings is based on the place where the offence was committed. Where stalking conduct takes place in Çekmeköy, the Istanbul Anatolian judicial district and the territorial rules of criminal procedure are relevant in identifying the competent prosecution office and court. Because stalking may consist of conduct occurring in several places and through different communication channels, territorial jurisdiction may require a case-specific assessment. What Can a Victim of Stalking Do? Preserving evidence may be particularly important. Messages and call records, social media account details and usernames, CCTV footage and information concerning potential witnesses should be preserved where relevant. Because the offence is complaint-based, the statutory complaint period must also be considered. Depending on the circumstances, protective or preventive measures under Law No. 6284 may also be requested. Victims of unilateral stalking are included within the protection framework of the legislation. How Is the Defence Assessed? For a suspect or defendant, relevant issues may include whether the communication was genuinely persistent, whether voluntary mutual communication continued, the purpose and context of contact and whether the consequences required by Article 123/A occurred. Claims that coincidental encounters were presented as systematic following, or that mutual communication was characterised as unilateral stalking, must be examined through the evidence. A criminal conviction requires the statutory elements to be established through lawful evidence. Çekmeköy Criminal Lawyer Assistance Stalking cases cannot be assessed merely by counting messages or telephone calls. The duration of the conduct, whether the victim clearly rejected communication, whether different channels were used after blocking, whether physical following occurred and whether serious distress or security concerns resulted must all be considered. A past marriage or romantic relationship does not itself legalise later unwanted contact. Existing restraining or non-approach measures are particularly significant because they may trigger the aggravated form. The Court of Cassation's 2026 decision confirmed the relevance of the aggravated provision where stalking occurred despite an existing restraining measure. It is also important that stalking is complaint-based but excluded from reconciliation. Accordingly, matters involving Çekmeköy criminal cases, stalking, repeated messages, repeated telephone calls, stalking by a former partner, stalking by a former spouse, unwanted social media contact, following a person to their workplace, stalking despite a restraining order and Çekmeköy criminal lawyer should be assessed comprehensively from the perspectives of both criminal liability and protective measures. Conclusion Stalking is an independent criminal offence addressing persistent following or attempts to establish unwanted contact. Under Article 123/A, the offence may arise where a person persistently physically follows another person or attempts to establish contact through communication tools, information systems or third parties, causing serious distress or concern for the safety of the victim or someone close to them. The basic form carries imprisonment from six months to two years. Where the offence is committed against a child or a divorced or legally separated spouse, causes the victim to change their school, workplace or residence or leave school or employment, or is committed by a person already subject to a restraining or non-approach measure, imprisonment from one to three years may apply. The offence is subject to complaint but is not subject to reconciliation. Depending on the circumstances, protective measures under Law No. 6284 may also be available. For this reason, stalking allegations should be assessed by examining the entire course of conduct rather than an isolated message or encounter, including repetition, duration, whether communication was unwanted, the methods used, the impact on the victim and the available evidence.