Fraud is one of the most frequently prosecuted property offenses under Turkish criminal law. Unlike theft or robbery, which involve direct physical interference with another person’s belongings, fraud operates through deception — the offender manipulates the victim’s perception of reality to extract an unlawful benefit. The Turkish Penal Code (TPC), numbered 5237, addresses fraud under its tenth chapter on offenses against property, primarily through Articles 157 and 158. The protected legal interests extend beyond the victim’s financial assets to encompass freedom of will and the principle of good faith in legal relations.

Elements of the Offense

Three cumulative elements must be present for fraud to be established under Turkish law: deceptive conduct, the act of misleading the victim, and the resulting harm or unlawful gain.

Deceptive conduct is the foundational element. Turkish courts, including the Court of Cassation General Criminal Board, have consistently held that a mere lie does not constitute fraud. For conduct to qualify as deception in the legal sense, it must be sufficiently intense and convincing to neutralize the victim’s natural inclination to question or investigate. The perpetrator’s statements must carry a weight that makes their truthfulness appear self-evident to the victim. Where necessary, the verbal lie must be reinforced by external acts or fabricated circumstances that lend it credibility.

The misleading element requires that the deceptive conduct be objectively capable of deceiving the specific victim in their particular situation. Turkish courts do not apply a uniform standard here; the assessment is made on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the victim’s level of education, psychological state, and the circumstances in which the deception occurred. No fixed benchmark can be established in advance.

Regarding harm and unlawful gain, Turkish law does not require the victim’s underlying purpose to be lawful for fraud to be actionable. Even where the victim was pursuing an improper objective, the state’s interest in punishing those who use deception to damage another’s financial position remains intact. The law’s function is to sanction fraudulent interference with property, irrespective of the victim’s intentions.

Simple Fraud: Article 157 TPC

The basic form of fraud is defined in Article 157 of the Turkish Penal Code:

“A person who deceives someone through fraudulent acts and thereby provides a benefit for himself or another at the expense of the deceived person or a third party shall be sentenced to imprisonment from one year to five years and a judicial fine of up to five thousand days.”

Simple fraud is prosecuted ex officio. The public prosecutor initiates an investigation as soon as the offense comes to their attention, and the victim’s withdrawal of a complaint does not terminate the proceedings. However, Article 157 cases are subject to reconciliation procedures under Article 253 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. If the parties reach a settlement through the reconciliation mechanism, the public case is dismissed. The competent court for simple fraud is the Court of First Instance in Criminal Matters (Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi). Depending on the circumstances, a custodial sentence may be suspended.

Aggravated Fraud: Article 158 TPC

When fraud is committed under certain aggravating circumstances, it falls within the scope of Article 158, which prescribes significantly harsher penalties and a different procedural regime.

Article 158/1 of the Turkish Penal Code reads as follows:

“Where the offense of fraud is committed by exploiting religious beliefs and feelings, by taking advantage of a person’s dangerous situation or difficult circumstances, by taking advantage of a person’s weakness of perception, by using public institutions and organizations, public professional organizations, political parties, foundations or associations as instruments, to the detriment of public institutions and organizations, by using information systems, banks or credit institutions as instruments, by taking advantage of the opportunities provided by press and broadcasting outlets, by merchants or company directors acting in the course of commercial activities or on behalf of a company, by self-employed professionals exploiting their profession, through the seizure of bank accounts, or by representing oneself as a public official or as having a connection with a public institution, the offender shall be sentenced to imprisonment from four years to twelve years and a judicial fine of up to five thousand days. The amount of the judicial fine shall not be less than twice the benefit obtained from the offense.”

In practice, the most frequently encountered aggravating circumstances involve the use of information systems and the seizure or impersonation of banking credentials. When a perpetrator poses as a bank employee, insurance company representative, or public official, the victim’s propensity to scrutinize the situation is effectively neutralized from the outset. The legislator introduced these aggravated forms precisely to combat this exploitation of institutional trust, which makes the offense both easier to carry out and considerably more damaging to the victim.

Article 158/2 separately addresses influence peddling as an aggravated form of fraud:

“A person who deceives another by claiming to have a relationship with public officials or to be held in esteem by them, and promising to have a certain matter arranged, and who thereby obtains a benefit, shall be punished according to the provisions of the preceding paragraph.”

Aggravated fraud cases fall outside the scope of reconciliation and cannot be converted into a judicial fine. They are heard before the Heavy Criminal Court (Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi), and proceedings typically last between one and a half to three years depending on the complexity of the case and the volume of evidence.

Active Remorse and Sentence Reduction

Article 168 of the Turkish Penal Code provides for significant sentence reductions where the offender voluntarily remedies the harm caused. If the damage is fully compensated during the investigation phase, the court may reduce the sentence by up to two thirds. Compensation made after the commencement of prosecution also attracts a reduction, though at a lower rate than during investigation. The remedial act must be genuine, complete, and voluntary — partial compensation or arrangements that leave residual harm unaddressed do not satisfy the statutory requirement.

Statute of Limitations

Simple fraud under Article 157 carries a shorter limitation period, while aggravated fraud is subject to a longer one. In practice, the calculation of the limitation period is affected by grounds for interruption and suspension, meaning that the procedural history of each individual case must be examined carefully. Events such as the issuance of an arrest warrant, the filing of an indictment, or a court hearing can interrupt the running of the limitation period and effectively extend the time available for prosecution.

Options for the Victim

A fraud victim in Turkey may pursue parallel legal remedies. In addition to filing a criminal complaint, the victim is entitled to bring a civil claim for compensation before the civil courts. Both pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages may be sought. The amount of non-pecuniary damages is assessed with reference to factors such as the victim’s emotional distress, reputational harm, and the broader impact on their personal and professional life. In practical terms, the most effective course of action is to file the criminal complaint simultaneously with a request for precautionary attachment, thereby freezing the suspect’s assets before they can be dissipated and preserving the prospects of actual recovery.

Soylu Law Firm provides legal representation for both victims and defendants in fraud cases. To contact Attorney Ozan Soylu, please visit our contact page.