A complaint ending in a non-prosecution decision or an acquittal does not, on its own, show that the complainant committed the crime of false accusation. For false accusation (iftira), a person must attribute to a definite or identifiable individual an unlawful act that the accuser knows that individual did not commit, with the aim of having a criminal investigation or prosecution opened or an administrative sanction imposed. The content of the application must be examined, together with what the applicant knew at the time and the facts on which the applicant relied.
This distinction matters in two respects. A genuine victim should not be discouraged from applying merely because they cannot yet prove their claim with all the evidence. On the other hand, the complaint route cannot be turned into a means of knowingly making false accusations and drawing another person into judicial or administrative proceedings. Criminal liability, the protection of personality rights and compensation claims, however, are not subject to the same conditions.
This article explains the limits of the right to complain in respect of applications to the prosecutor's office, law enforcement agencies (kolluk), CİMER and competent administrative authorities, the proof of false accusation, the relevant court decisions and the ways to apply. Allegations spread through news and social media are a related but distinct field of application. The assessment is based on the sources reviewed as of October 13, 2026.
When is the right to complain legally protected?
Submitting sufficient evidence for a conviction is not required to apply
The freedom to seek justice requires that a person can ask the competent authorities to examine an event they believe to be unlawful. The applicant cannot be expected to conduct the investigation like a prosecutor, find all the witnesses or commission technical examinations by their own means. Under CMK Article 160, establishing the truth of the event and collecting evidence both in favor of and against the suspect is the duty of the Chief Public Prosecutor's Office. [2]
An observation, correspondence, document, inconsistent payment record or another concrete fact may justify an application. That such material is not enough to secure a conviction is one thing; that it has been deliberately fabricated is another. A person who misjudges the legal nature of an event has not committed false accusation merely because the crime name they used was not accurate.
For example, a person may see that their property has been taken away and ask for the event to be investigated. If the examination shows that the property was taken by an authorized official, this does not in itself show that the applicant knew of that authority beforehand. The assessment must be made not only by reference to the outcome, but according to the information and circumstances at the time of the application. This example is not a summary of an actual decision.
Suspicion, hearsay and certain knowledge must be kept apart
The event directly witnessed by the applicant, the explanation heard from someone else and the conclusion drawn from them should not be presented with the same degree of certainty. Stating the source of a piece of information, and indicating which part is based on observation and which on suspicion, increases the accuracy of the account. However, merely saying "I suspect" or "I want it investigated" does not give legal protection to a narrative of an event that is deliberately invented.
A rumor may be the subject of a request for investigation; however, it cannot be presented as a personally verified observation. The reliability of the source, the concreteness of the act alleged, the counter-information available and the way in which the person against whom action is requested was identified are considered together. An anonymous or unsigned notice is also assessed on the basis of its content and the evidence obtained; the fact that the applicant's identity is not immediately known does not change the elements of the offense.
What are the elements of the crime of false accusation under TCK Article 267?
An unlawful act must be attributed to a specific person
The subject of the crime of false accusation is not limited to conduct that is criminal under the penal law. An unlawful act that, if the conditions are met, requires an administrative or disciplinary sanction may also be the subject of the attribution. However, not every unjust accusation used in everyday speech is false accusation within the meaning of TCK Article 267. The specific act, the person and the aim of sanction must be determined. [1]
It is not necessary for the person's name to be written explicitly; it may be sufficient that the whole application and the circumstances of the event make clear who is meant. On the other hand, general dissatisfaction directed at an undefined group does not show that false accusation exists against each individual within it. Whether criticism of a company or institution attributes a specific act to a particular real person must also be examined separately. Private law protection of the reputation of an institution is a separate question.
The perpetrator must know that the attribution is contrary to the truth
The condition in the law that the person "knows they did not commit" the act is at the heart of false accusation. The fact that an attribution cannot be verified, careless wording or the applicant's misinterpretation of events cannot take the place of this knowledge. For false accusation, the falsity of the attribution and the knowledge of its falsity must be shown separately. [1]
Intent is usually determined not by direct confession but by documents and the circumstances of the event. For example, an applicant who claims that a delivery was not made despite a delivery document they signed themselves, reverses the content of a record they know to be accurate, or describes as having occurred a conversation they know did not take place, may be significant in this regard. In each case, whether the document was in fact known, the scope of the attribution and possible explanations must also be assessed.
The fact that the applicant is a lawyer, physician, manager or public official does not automatically prove that they knowingly made a false attribution. Professional knowledge and access to records may be used to determine the level of concrete knowledge; however, a professional title does not take the place of proof of intent.
The form of application and the purpose stated in the law must be present
TCK Article 267 regulates the attribution made by way of a report or complaint to the competent authorities, or through the press and broadcasting. The purpose is to bring about the opening of an investigation or prosecution against the target person, or the imposition of an administrative sanction. Mere insulting words, gossip or any quarrel between persons do not contain these elements. [1]
To complete the basic offense, it is not required that the target person be convicted or subjected to an administrative sanction. The authority's failure to act on the application does not, by itself, make a deliberate attribution lawful. On the other hand, protective measures imposed on the target person and serious consequences become important in determining the sanction, together with the additional conditions set out in the law.
Why is a non-prosecution or acquittal decision not, on its own, evidence of false accusation?
The reasoning of the decision and the information at the time of attribution are examined together
A decision not to prosecute may be given for reasons such as the absence of sufficient suspicion to bring a public action or the absence of any possibility of prosecution. An acquittal may rest on other legal grounds. A finding that the act was not committed by the accused and a finding that it has not been established that the act was committed are not the same data in the examination of false accusation. In every case, it must separately be examined whether the earlier complainant knew that the act had not been committed. [1; 2] For a separate assessment of the subject, the article insufficient evidence and acquittal in criminal proceedings may be consulted.
Expiry of the limitation period, absence of a complaint, withdrawal or another procedural reason that ends a file also does not, of itself, show that the accusation was deliberately invented. Rather than presenting only the operative part of the decision, its reasoning, its evidence and its finality should be examined. In annulment of an administrative sanction, it is also important on what ground the act was found to be unlawful: procedure, competence, legal characterization or the factual event.
The Court of Cassation's acquittal example of January 25, 2024
In its decision of January 25, 2024, E.2023/1363, K.2024/792, the Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 8. Ceza Dairesi) examined a file in which a person who claimed that municipal enforcement officers had demanded money from them was prosecuted for false accusation. Whether the money was handed over and whether the event took place was disputed between the parties. After the first-instance court convicted, the regional court of appeal reached an acquittal. [4]
The chamber assessed the defenses, the statements of officials and witnesses, the police records, the disciplinary investigation and the other documents in the file together, and found the conclusion that the intent to make false accusation could not be established to be lawful. The judgment was upheld, with a correction in favor of the defendant concerning the attorney fee award (vekâlet ücreti). The practical lesson of the decision is clear: the failure of a complainant to prove their allegation is not proof that they knowingly lied.
How is false accusation assessed in CİMER, institutional and disciplinary complaints?
Applications made to the Presidential Communication Center (CİMER) do not enjoy immunity from examination by reason of their content alone. The forwarding of the application to the competent authorities, the concrete act attributed to a specific person and the applicant's purpose are assessed. Knowingly false attributions aimed at the imposition of a disciplinary sanction on a public official may be examined under TCK Article 267. [1; 5]
However, every notice sent to the human resources unit of a private workplace cannot be placed directly under the heading of "administrative sanction". The employer's contractual disciplinary process and an administrative sanction imposed by the use of public authority are not the same. Whether the notice reached the prosecutor's office, its press or broadcast character, or whether it contains the elements of another offense, requires a separate assessment.
A decision upholding a conviction for an attribution made through BİMER
In its decision of October 16, 2024, E.2024/19973, K.2024/7737, the Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 8. Ceza Dairesi) examined accusations made through BİMER against a district governor (kaymakam) after a sanction of transferring a child to another school was imposed. Although the application had been decided not to be processed, the Chamber upheld the judgment of conviction for false accusation on the basis of the defendant's defense and the facts in the file. [5]
It cannot be concluded from this decision that harsh criticism of the administration, or every angry application, is a crime. What is decisive is the concrete attribution of an act and how the legal elements were established in the file. The amount of the judicial fine in the earlier case is also not a tariff that can be applied to all current files.
Making several complaints is not, by itself, an abuse
In the decision of the Constitutional Court (AYM), Gökben Şahin, B.2021/39404, December 11, 2024, the Court examined five applications to BİMER concerning a private hospital and its staff. Although the applications related to different events and to the answers given, the acceptance of bad faith merely on the basis of their number, without assessment of their content and the language used, together with an award of non-pecuniary damages, was held to violate freedom of expression. The Court ordered a retrial and awarded non-pecuniary damages. [6, §§17–26]
This is not an acquittal for false accusation; it is a constitutional review of a private law sanction applied because of the right to complain. Nevertheless, it shows that the number of applications, the institution's discomfort or the applicant's dissatisfaction with a previous answer cannot alone be the basis for liability.
Do the right of defense and immunity for allegations remove liability for false accusation?
A suspect or accused person who denies the accusation, remains silent or makes statements in their favor acts within the scope of the right of defense. However, the attribution to a person of an independent act that is known not to have been committed by that person does not gain unlimited protection merely because it was said during a defense. The context of the statement, its connection with the subject of the defense and the elements of TCK Article 267 must be examined. [1] On this topic, the article statements and interrogation in a criminal investigation may also be read.
The immunity for allegations and defense under TCK Article 128 is also regulated in connection with the provisions on insult. Allegations and assessments made before judicial bodies or administrative authorities must be based on real and concrete events and be related to the dispute. This provision is not a regulation that makes the fabrication of evidence, or the knowing attribution of an act to an innocent person, lawful in general.
The making of a counter-complaint is also not, in itself, an indication of false accusation. In the same event, both parties may have suffered from different acts. For this reason, it cannot be accepted that the other application is retaliation merely because one party applied first. Each allegation must be assessed on its own facts and on the information available at the time of the application.
Which evidence is important in the crime of false accusation?
Falsity and knowing attribution must be shown under separate headings
The document showing that the attribution is wrong and the document showing that the applicant knew it was wrong may not be the same. A camera recording may show that the person was not at the scene; however, it does not by itself prove that the complainant knew of the recording. On the other hand, a correspondence sent to the complainant before the application, or a document drawn up by the complainant, has separate importance in assessing the element of knowledge.
| Matter to be examined | Principal evidence or record | Point to watch in the assessment |
|---|---|---|
| What exactly was attributed? | First application, annexes, witness statements, later explanations | The whole of the first account is examined, not a later summary. |
| Did the event actually occur? | Camera, transaction and entry records, documents, witnesses | The period covered by the recording and the part of the event it shows are determined. |
| Did the applicant know the truth? | Earlier correspondence, notifications, signed documents, the applicant's own statements | It is shown whether the information was obtained before the application. |
| Was evidence fabricated? | Original file, technical examination, information on changes and creation | A forgery conclusion is not drawn merely by looking at a screenshot. |
| What damage arose? | Procedural decisions, expense and income records, witness statements | A concrete link between the damage and the attribution is sought. |
Hostility and contradictions are not sufficient on their own
The existence of a dispute between the parties concerning divorce, inheritance, employment, lease or commercial matters may explain the reason for an application. However, hostile persons may also be victims of genuine crimes. Hostility is assessed together with documents and other facts; it is not used as a substitute for intent.
The importance of a difference between statements depends on its effect on the substance of the event. A small mistake about a date and entirely different accounts of whether the event occurred at all do not carry the same weight. In assessing differences in the statements of a child, of a person who has suffered trauma, or of a person giving evidence through an interpreter, the conditions of communication must be taken into account. The absence of a witness, or the absence of a particular finding in a medical report, does not by itself prove that a false accusation was knowingly made. On this subject, the article witness statements and cross-examination in a criminal case may also be read.
The whole of digital records and the manner of their acquisition must be preserved
Rather than selecting only the sentences of messages that appear to be harmful, the conversation before and after the relevant exchange must be preserved. Alongside screenshots, where available, the original file, account information, time records and the context of the messages are important. Processing a record in a way that changes its content impairs the reliability of the evidence and may also create liability.
Entering another person's account without permission, or making an unlawful recording in order to prove a false accusation, cannot generally be regarded as legitimate. The manner in which concrete evidence was obtained, criminal liability and whether it may be relied on in the judgment must be examined separately. The competent authority may be asked to preserve existing records and to obtain them from the relevant institution. [1; 2]
What steps can a person who is the subject of an unfounded complaint take?
The defense in the ongoing file must be built first
It is necessary to obtain the original of the application made against you and its annexes, to determine the date and content of the act, and to submit the evidence that responds to the allegation. A person should not limit themselves to saying "I am being falsely accused"; they must explain which claim is refuted by which record. Different accusations should not be left under a single general denial.
A false accusation claim may also be reported to the Chief Public Prosecutor's Office or to law enforcement. TCK Article 267(1) does not make a final acquittal or a non-prosecution decision in every case a mandatory precondition. However, the outcome of the earlier file, the truth of the attribution and certain aggravating provisions are relevant. For this reason, when the two processes are assessed together, evidence that may be lost must be preserved and should not be postponed pending the outcome. [1; 2]
The attribution, information and evidence must be linked in the application
In an effective criminal complaint, the date of the application and the authority to which it is made are stated, together with the full content of the attribution, the reasons why it is untrue, and the facts showing that the applicant knew the truth. The relevant investigation, lawsuit or disciplinary file is identified. The record that is requested to be obtained is shown together with the issue it would clarify.
Evidence submitted by the victim helps to direct the investigation; however, this does not mean that the burden of proof in criminal proceedings rests entirely on the victim. Under CMK Article 160(2), evidence both in favor of and against must be investigated together. The statements of a person suspected of false accusation and the facts that could justify the application cannot be excluded from the assessment. For detailed information, the article digital evidence in criminal proceedings may be consulted.
How to object to a non-prosecution decision in a false accusation investigation
Under CMK Article 173, a person harmed by the offense may object to a decision not to prosecute before the competent criminal judgeship of peace (sulh ceza hâkimliği) within two weeks of the notification of the decision. Transitional arrangements for decisions made before June 1, 2024 must be examined separately. The outdated expression "fifteen days for every file" should not be used for current proceedings. [2]
In an objection, it is not enough to say only that one does not agree with the decision. The event that was not investigated, the record that was not collected, the document that was not assessed and their importance for sufficient suspicion should be explained. The points on which the investigation should be extended may be made specific. Sufficient suspicion for an indictment and the level of proof required for a conviction must not be confused. On a related subject, the article return of the indictment may be considered.
In its decision of October 27, 2025, E.2025/1956, K.2025/8071, the Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 8. Ceza Dairesi) found that, in a false accusation investigation, the documents of a different disciplinary investigation were relied on instead of the disciplinary file that was the subject of the complaint. The rejection of the objection to the non-prosecution decision, made without obtaining the relevant documents, was reversed in the interest of the law. [8]
The decision does not establish with certainty that false accusation was committed; it is not a conviction. It requires that the error of examining the wrong file be remedied. Furthermore, the fact that the decision was made under CMK Article 309 does not mean that an ordinary objection to a non-prosecution decision is made under the same article; the ordinary route is CMK Article 173. For details, the article objection to a non-prosecution (KYOK) decision may be consulted.
A decision that there is no ground for investigation differs from a non-prosecution decision
CMK Article 158(6) provides for a decision that there is no ground for an investigation, where the notice clearly shows, without any inquiry, that no offense has been committed, or where it is abstract and of a general nature. In that case, the person against whom the notice was made is not given the status of suspect. A decision not to prosecute, on the other hand, relates to the outcome of an investigation that has been conducted. The possibilities of objection and the content of the decision are assessed according to their own provisions. [2]
What is the penalty for false accusation, and what are the position on limitation and conciliation?
The basic penalty and aggravated consequences are regulated separately
Under TCK Article 267(1), the basic penalty is imprisonment of one to four years. Fabricating the material traces and evidence of the act, the imposition of a protective measure on the victim, and the conviction of the victim to certain penalties are subject to different provisions. [1]
| Situation | Legal provision | Principal consequence |
|---|---|---|
| Basic false accusation | TCK Article 267(1) | Imprisonment of one to four years |
| Fabrication of material traces and evidence | TCK Article 267(2) | Increase of the penalty by one half |
| Protective measure other than detention and arrest | TCK Article 267(3) | Increase by one half where the file ends in an acquittal or non-prosecution because the victim did not commit the act, and other conditions are met |
| Detention or arrest | TCK Article 267(4) | Indirect perpetrator liability without depriving the person of liberty, under the same conditions as the same paragraph |
| Conviction of the victim to aggravated life imprisonment or life imprisonment | TCK Article 267(5)–(6) | Imprisonment of twenty to thirty years; the relevant increase where enforcement has begun |
TCK Article 267(7) has been annulled. Because the former part of the fifth paragraph concerning a term of imprisonment has also been annulled, it is not correct to say that every term of imprisonment given to the victim is applied to the false accuser in the amount of two-thirds. Nor does Article 267 contain a general increase of one half merely because the offense was committed through the press or broadcast; Article 267(9) regulates the publication of the judgment of conviction. [1]
A judicial fine conversion, a deferment or the postponement of the announcement of the judgment does not apply automatically in every file. The resulting penalty is determined by reference to the person's circumstances and the provisions in force on the date of the decision. The amount of a sanction in an earlier decision is not a guarantee of outcome for a current file.
The six-month complaint period does not apply to false accusation
The crime of false accusation is not subject to a complaint requirement. The victim's withdrawal does not by itself end the criminal case; and false accusation is not covered by victim–offender mediation (uzlaştırma) under CMK Article 253. An agreement between the parties on compensation is not the same process as criminal mediation, which ends the public action. [1; 2]
For the basic offense, the general statute of limitations for prosecution under TCK Article 66 is eight years. However, under TCK Article 267(8), the starting point is the date on which it is established that the victim did not commit the act. Aggravated forms, the penalty's severity, the grounds for suspension and interruption and other special conditions may change the calculation. For this reason, it is not correct to add eight years to the date of the notice in every case. [1]
Does withdrawing a complaint or retracting a false accusation remove the penalty?
Withdrawing a complaint, accepting that the attribution was false and retracting a false accusation within the meaning of TCK Article 269 are not the same thing. A person may withdraw a complaint made because of a real event, whether through reconciliation or for some other reason. Such conduct cannot automatically be taken as an admission that the earlier account was a lie. In the retraction of a false accusation, however, the content and timing of the withdrawal of the untrue attribution are important. [1]
| Stage at which the retraction takes place | Result under TCK Article 269 |
|---|---|
| Before an administrative or judicial investigation is started against the victim | Four-fifths of the penalty is deducted. |
| Before a prosecution is started against the victim | Three-quarters of the penalty is deducted. |
| Before judgment against the victim | Two-thirds of the penalty may be deducted. |
| After the victim is convicted | Half of the penalty may be deducted. |
| After the enforcement of the imposed penalty has begun | One-third of the penalty may be deducted. |
The timing in the table relates to the process against the victim, not to the file against the person who made the false accusation. The "deducted" wording of the first two paragraphs and the "may be deducted" wording of the third paragraph are not the same. Specifically in relation to acts requiring only an administrative sanction, Article 269(4) separately provides for a deduction of one half before the sanction is decided and one third after it is applied. The paragraph applicable to the relevant stage is determined by the concrete facts. [1]
In a false accusation committed through the press or broadcast, to benefit from effective repentance the retraction must be published by the same method. Merely sending a private apology message, or the other party's withdrawal of their own complaint, does not show that all the conditions of the law have been met.
Can pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages be claimed because of an unfounded complaint?
The conditions for criminal liability and for damages are not the same
Pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages (maddi ve manevi tazminat) for unlawful act and infringement of personality rights may be claimed under the relevant provisions, in particular Articles 49 and 58 of the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098 (TBK). For this, the unlawfulness of the complaint, the appropriate ground of liability, the damage and the causal link are assessed. Not every decision not to prosecute or acquittal gives rise to a right to damages; the limits of the constitutional right to complain are also taken into account. [3; 7]
Under TBK Article 74, the civil judge is not bound in every respect by the liability provisions of criminal law and by an acquittal. Nevertheless, the effect of the factual findings in a criminal judgment must be examined separately. The two generalizations "no damages can be claimed because no penalty was imposed" and "damages are certainly recoverable once the criminal file is closed" are both inaccurate.
The basis of one attribution cannot automatically be carried over to other accusations
In its decision of October 4, 2022, E.2021/804, K.2022/1235, the Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay Hukuk Genel Kurulu) assessed the extension of a complaint based on certain indications to other persons and events for which there were no indications. The Assembly, while stating that a complaint does not require sufficient evidence for a conviction, reached a conclusion of violation of personality rights in relation to the additional unsupported accusations in the concrete file, and reversed the decision of resistance. [7, §§25–30, 42–46]
The outcome of this decision is not a conviction for false accusation. It shows that, for private law liability, the basis of each attribution must be examined separately. A record that justifies investigating one claim in a petition does not make lawful all the unrelated serious accusations directed at the same person.
How are the scope of damage and the time limits determined?
Loss of income, documented expenses or other pecuniary losses may be claimed, showing their connection with the attribution. It cannot be assumed that all attorney fees and every expense incurred will be charged to the other party in full; the legal nature, necessity and causation of each expense are assessed separately. For non-pecuniary damages, the gravity of the attribution, its effect, its spread, the consequences for the person's life and the circumstances of the event are important. There is no fixed "false accusation damages tariff".
Under TBK Article 72, the general provision sets a period of two years from the date on which the injured party and the person liable for damages learn of the damage, and ten years from the act. Where a longer criminal limitation period has been provided for an act requiring punishment, the relevant provision may apply. The continuation of a criminal file does not mean that the damages periods are automatically suspended in every case. The starting point and the applicable period must be determined according to the file. [3]
Claims against the State for damages because of unjustified protective measures are different from a private law action against the person who made the false accusation. The conditions, the competent authority and the time limits under CMK Article 141 et seq. are assessed separately. The State's right of recourse against the false accuser under CMK Article 143(3) must also be treated within this distinction. [2]
How are false accusation, insult, fabrication of a crime and false testimony distinguished?
| Legal classification | Distinguishing issue |
|---|---|
| False accusation (iftira) — TCK Article 267 | Knowing attribution of an unlawful act to a specific or identifiable person; the legal method of application and the aim of sanction |
| Insult — TCK Article 125 | An attribution or statement that attacks a person's honor, dignity and reputation; other specific conditions |
| Fabrication of a crime — TCK Article 271 | Reporting a crime known not to have been committed as if it had been, or fabricating evidence and traces that would give rise to an investigation |
| False testimony — TCK Article 272 | A knowingly untrue statement made as a witness before a person or board authorized to hear witnesses |
| Use of another person's identity — TCK Article 268 | Using another person's identity or information to prevent proceedings against oneself for an offense one has committed |
These distinctions cannot be made by reference only to the words used. For example, the repetition of an application in a witness statement may, at the same time, require an examination of whether other offenses have been committed and of the rules on the assessment of multiple offenses together. Reporting oneself, rather than another person, falsely as the perpetrator or participant of an offense is separately regulated under TCK Article 270. [1]
Whether a false accusation, insult or another violation has occurred in a social media post is determined by the content of the post, the manner of its dissemination, its purpose and the statutory elements. A petition that may be submitted to the prosecutor's office does not necessarily fall under the same legal assessment when it is published online. The personal data in investigation documents and confidentiality obligations must also be observed.
What should be considered for foreign nationals and persons living abroad?
Being a foreigner in an ongoing investigation in Türkiye does not remove a person's right to defend themselves against a false accusation or to make a criminal complaint. In a translated application, it is important that suspicion does not turn into certain knowledge, and that a reported perception does not become personal observation. The original text, the translation and the annexes must be checked for consistency. Interpreter and defense safeguards apply under the relevant procedural provisions. [2]
For a person living abroad, the power of attorney, the address for notices, service and the method of submitting evidence to the file in Türkiye must be planned together. CMK Article 158(3) regulates applications through embassies and consulates for offenses committed abroad that must be pursued in Türkiye; this provision should not be presented as an unlimited consular route for every type of application.
Whether Turkish judicial jurisdiction exists over an attribution made before an authority abroad depends on the jurisdiction for the trial, the place where the act was committed and the other relevant conditions. The existence of a file in Türkiye does not create automatic Turkish criminal jurisdiction over statements made in all foreign countries. Preserving the originals of digital records in a foreign language and, where necessary, submitting a properly certified translation facilitates the examination.
Conclusion
The right to complain cannot be turned into an obligation to prove the claim with certainty before applying. Nor can liability for false accusation rest only on the fact that the complaint came to nothing. The focus of the examination must be the content of the attribution, its material basis, the information at the time of the application and the purpose stated in the law.
For a person who has been subjected to an attribution, the right approach is to build the defense in the ongoing file, to identify separately the falsity of the attribution and the evidence showing deliberate attribution, and to assess the criminal and compensation routes on their own conditions. For the applicant, it matters that observation, hearsay and interpretation are kept apart, that documents are presented in full, and that facts are conveyed without alteration.
In a concrete file to be examined within the scope of the activities that Güneş & Güneş Law Firm has carried on since 1999, the first complaint, the defenses, the reasoning of the decisions, the disciplinary documents, the digital records and the notices should be assessed together. This article is for general information only; the route to follow, the competent authority and the time limits are determined according to the circumstances of the relevant file.
Frequently Asked Questions
If my complaint ends in a non-prosecution decision, will I be sentenced for false accusation?
A non-prosecution decision alone is not sufficient. Whether the attribution was untrue, whether you knew this at the time of the application, and the other elements under TCK Article 267 are each examined separately. The fact that a claim could not be proved is not the same as its having been deliberately invented.
If I have no evidence, can I not be a complainant at all?
You are not required to gather all your evidence before applying. It is important that you describe accurately the events you know of, the source of your information and the matters you want investigated. However, producing facts or documents that are not true is not legally protected.
Does making a complaint to CİMER count as false accusation?
The channel of application is not decisive on its own. Concrete, knowingly untrue attributions forwarded to the competent authorities may constitute false accusation together with the other conditions. A complaint based on real events that comes to nothing is not, however, automatically a crime.
Is it a crime to complain about the same person more than once?
The number of applications alone is not sufficient. The subject matter of each application, its relationship with new information or with the answer given, its content and its purpose are examined. The Constitutional Court's decision in Gökben Şahin also did not regard an assessment of abuse based solely on the number of applications as sufficient.
Is there a six-month complaint period for the crime of false accusation?
No. False accusation is not subject to a complaint requirement. The general statute of limitations for prosecution applies; the special starting rule under TCK Article 267(8), the aggravated forms and the grounds for suspension and interruption must be calculated separately.
Is it necessary first to obtain a final acquittal for false accusation?
For the basic offense there is no such precondition in every case. The outcome and reasoning of the earlier file are important in proof; certain aggravating provisions require specific decisions and results. Preservation of evidence should not be postponed pending the outcome.
If I withdraw my complaint, does the false accusation case end?
Because false accusation is not subject to a complaint requirement, the victim's withdrawal does not by itself end the case. Retraction of a false accusation is a different institution, which may lead to a reduction of the penalty under the conditions and stages set out in TCK Article 269.
How much non-pecuniary damages can be obtained because of false accusation?
There is no fixed amount. The unlawfulness, the gravity of the attribution, its effect on the person's life, the circumstances of the event and the other conditions of liability are assessed. The outcome of the criminal file alone does not determine whether damages are awarded or refused.
What is the period for objecting to a non-prosecution decision in a false accusation investigation?
Under the current general provision, the period is two weeks from notification of the decision. The transitional provisions under CMK Article 173 and in respect of earlier decisions must be examined. The objection should identify the incomplete investigation and the events and evidence that could require a public action.
Is every attribution in a lawyer's petition covered by immunity?
No. Immunity for allegations and defense depends on the relevant statutory conditions. The connection with real and concrete facts, the relationship with the dispute and the nature of the attribution are examined. There is no general immunity for knowingly attributing an untrue act.
Sources and legal bases
- Turkish Penal Code No. 5237 (Türk Ceza Kanunu), in particular Articles 26, 66–67, 73, 125, 128 and 267–272, including the annulment notes to Article 267. Official consolidated text.
- Code of Criminal Procedure No. 5271 (Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu), in particular Articles 141–143, 147, 158, 160, 170–173, 202, 206, 217, 223, 253 and Provisional Article 6. Official consolidated text.
- Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098 (Türk Borçlar Kanunu), in particular Articles 49, 58, 72 and 74. Official consolidated text.
- Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 8. Ceza Dairesi), January 25, 2024, E.2023/1363, K.2024/792. Failure to establish intent to make false accusation; judgment upheld with a correction of the attorney fee award in favor of the acquitted defendant. Full text of the decision examined.
- Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 8. Ceza Dairesi), October 16, 2024, E.2024/19973, K.2024/7737. Attribution made through BİMER; upholding of the conviction. Full text of the decision examined.
- Constitutional Court (AYM), Gökben Şahin, December 11, 2024, B.2021/39404. In particular §§17–26; acceptance of abuse merely on the basis of the number of different complaints; violation of freedom of expression. Official decision record; full text examined.
- Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay Hukuk Genel Kurulu), October 4, 2022, E.2021/804, K.2022/1235. In particular §§25–30 and 42–46; private law liability in respect of additional accusations without a factual basis or support in the complaint. Full text of the decision examined.
- Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 8. Ceza Dairesi), October 27, 2025, E.2025/1956, K.2025/8071. Incomplete investigation based on the wrong disciplinary file; rejection of the objection to the non-prosecution decision reversed in the interest of the law. Full text of the decision examined.
- Att. Özer Alişan Ekren, June 19, 2026, "When Does the Right to Complain Become the Crime of False Accusation?" Starting source for the choice of topic and the case-law research. Legal News.
- Att. Özer Alişan Ekren, June 21, 2026, "When Does the Right to Complain Become the Crime of False Accusation? – II". Starting source for the choice of topic and the case-law research. Legal News.