Alman Hukukuyla Karşılaştırmalı Yardım Etme Hareketleri
Muhammed DemirelTürk Ceza Kanunu (TCK)’nda “Suça İştirak” başlığı altında düzenlenen yardım etme, kanunun 39’uncu maddesinde hüküm altına alınmış, bu kapsamda nelerin yardım etme olduğu açıkça ve sınırlı bir şekilde belirlenmiştir. Bunlar; suç işlemeye teşvik etmek veya suç işleme kararını kuvvetlendirmek veya fiilin işlenmesinden sonra yardımda bulunacağını vaat etmek, suçun nasıl işleneceği hususunda yol göstermek veya fiilin işlenmesinde kullanılan araçları sağlamak, suçun işlenmesinden önce veya işlenmesi sırasında yardımda bulunarak icrasını kolaylaştırmaktır. Bunların dışında, gerek maddede gerekse madde gerekçesinde bu yardım türlerinden ne anlaşılması gerektiğine yer verilmemiştir. Bu hareketler ve durumlar, genel olarak gayet açık ve anlaşılır gibi görünse de gerek birbirleri arasındaki ince ayrımlar, gerekse azmettirme hareketi ve müşterek faillik kapsamında gerçekleştirilen hareketlerle ayrımları noktasında özel bir incelemenin yapılmasını zaruri hale getirmektedir. Buna göre müşterek faillikle yardım etme ve keza azmettirmeyle yardım etme arasındaki ayrımın hangi ölçütlere göre yapılacağı, nitekim olay yerinde gözcülük yapan kişinin müşterek fail mi yoksa yardım eden mi olduğu bu sorunlara verilebilecek örneklerden birkaçıdır. İşte bu sorunlar nedeniyle konu, detaylı bir şekilde irdelenmelidir. Bu çerçevede Alman Ceza Kanunu’ndaki yardım etmeye ilişkin düzenleme de (§ 27) dikkate alınmalıdır. Zira Alman Ceza Kanunu’nda yardım etme durumları açıkça düzenlenmiş olmasa ve bu konu doktrine bırakılmış olsa da doktrindeki görüş ve tartışmalar, Türk hukukuna yol gösterecek niteliktedir. İşte bu makalede, Alman hukuku ile karşılaştırmalı olarak bu yardım etme hareketleri özel olarak irdelenmekte, bununla birlikte Türk mahkeme kararları üzerinden de bir inceleme yapılmaktadır.
The Acts of Aiding in Compare with German Law
Muhammed DemirelA crime can only be committed by the perpetrator. But besides the perpetrator can participate in a crime and also be found criminally responsible. Participation can include acts such as making the decision to commit the crime, giving a pistol to another person for the commission of a crime, and keeping watch while a crime takes place. Someone who provides support during or for the commission of a crime is not responsible as a perpetrator, but is responsible as a solicitor, aider, or inciter, depending on the actions of the perpetrator. Criminal liability for aiders and inciters is regulated under the title “Participation in Crime” in the Turkish Criminal Code. The regulation for aiders is formulated in Article 39, under the title of “Aiding.” This regulation determines the acts that can be considered aiding. This regulation identifies the acts of aiding as limited and serial. These acts include the following: soliciting a person for commission of a crime, supporting a person’s decision to commit a crime, guaranteeing help to someone after commission of a crime, providing ideas about how the crime should be committed, supplying the necessary tools to be used during commission of a crime, or rendering support before and during the commission of a crime in order to simplify the intended act. In this essay, we analyse only the acts of aiding in a crime.
In the criminal code, a crimes is defined such that it can only be committed by a perpetrator. Punishing those who provide support for the commission of a crime but do not fulfil certain typical acts stipulated in the code requires an additional condition: this is called the accessory principle. In this context, the criminal liability of solicitors, aiders, or inciters to a crime depends on that of the perpetrator. Criminal liability for aiders and inciters is regulated under the title “Participation in Crime” in the Turkish Criminal Code. The regulation for aiders is formulated in Article 39, under the title of “Aiding.” This regulation determines which acts are considered aiding. According to this regulation, a person aiding another person in the commission of an offense can be sentenced to heavy life imprisonment, from 15 to 20 years, or to imprisonment from 10 to 15 years, if the perpetrator is subject to life imprisonment. Finally, this regulation defines the acts of aiding as limited and serial. These acts read as follows: to solicit a person for commission of a crime, to support a person’s decision to commit crime, to provide a guarantee of help after commission of crime, to provide ideas about how the crime should be committed, to supply the necessary tools to be used during commission of crime, or to render support before and during the commission of a crime in order to simplify the intended act. The legislative reasoning for this article does not define the scope of the aiding act. The definition of this condition is largely open to what it means to behave as an aider. There is also a similar influencing regulation in the 765 numbered Turkish Criminal Code (the former Code). In spite of the new Code’s explicitness, some problems arise under this article. Some of these read as follows: What are the differences between inciter and aider or accomplice and aider? Is someone who keeps watch during a crime considered an aider or an accomplice? This issue is important and must be handled carefully and in detail. In addition, the aiding regulation of the German Criminal Code (paragraph 27) must be taken into consideration, because this regulation (§27) differs from Article 39. The difference is that Article 39 clarifies the acts, whereas §27 does not. In German law, aiding acts are not defined clearly; this subject has been dealt with in doctrine. Comparing Turkish with German law on this subject is important in order to bring light to Turkish law. In particular, we emphasize how we deal with this subject in the following table, which contains the special systematic steps of aiding. Finally, in this essay, we analyse only aiding acts (Number 2 in table).
