52 Evaluation of Actual Aggregation and Conceptual Aggregation Rules in Terms of the Crime ... words, performing the act only once is not enough for the crime to occur, but the existence of more than one insistent action is required for the occurrence of the crime. The insistence is evaluated according to the characteristics of the concrete case. On the other hand, although crime is accepted as a general and complementary type of crime by some authors in the doctrine 11 it is not possible to agree with this view. Because, in the text of the article, there is no expression stating this nature of the crime, and it is not mentioned in the justification of the article that the crime is of a general and complementary nature. 12 In the light of these facts, in our opinion, it is not appropriate to accept an issue that is not mentioned in the text and justification of the article as a quality-element of the crime, and to create a case-law and opinion with the justification that “the act should not constitute another crime”, in a way that will harm the principle of legality, especially in terms of aggregation practices. Because, as explained in detail below, such a presupposition regarding the crime may lead to the fact that the perpetrator cannot be punished for some of his/her actions and this is not appropriate in terms of criminal justice. On the other hand, if an evaluation is to be made in terms of the moral element of the crime, first of all, it should be stated that the crime cannot be committed by negligence. 13 In this context, although the moral element of the crime is the intent, general intent is not sufficient. In order for the crime to occur, the perpetrator must be acting with the Fakültesi Dergisi, 2019, p. 484-485) 11 Kocasakal, p. 131.; In some of its decisions, the Court of Cassation considered the crime of disturbing individuals’ peace and harmony as a general and complementary crime and pointed out that the act should not constitute another crime for the proof of the crime. “The crime of disturbing individuals’ peace and harmony defined in Article 123 of the TCC is a general and complementary crime, and for any act to be defined within the scope of this crime, the act must not have been defined as a separate crime in the Law.” (18th Criminal Chamber of Court of Cassation, 2017/1471, 2019/4815, 03/12/2019, www.kazanci.com) 12 For example, this issue is clearly stated both in the text of the article and in the justification of the article of the crime of “misuse of public duty”. It is agreed upon in the doctrine and the practice of the Court of Cassation, that this crime is regulated as a general, secondary and complementary crime. However, it is not possible to see the presence of the same clear attitude regarding the crime of disturbing individuals’ peace and harmony. 13 Murat Yılmaz, Kişilerin Huzur ve Sükununu Bozma [Disturbing Individuals’ Peace and Harmony], Legal Yayıncılık, 2017, p. 29.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTQ3OTE1