55 Union of Turkish Bar Associations Review 2022 Bahar TOPSAKAL doctrine, on the other hand, İçel gives the following definition of “the problem of how the responsibility will be determined in the crimes committed whether there is a final conviction or not” in terms of the combination of crimes (competition, aggregation). 24 The basic principle that dominates the Turkish Criminal Law is the actual aggregation, and according to this principle, “the number of crimes should be equal to the number of acts, and the number of punishments should be equal to the number of crimes”. 25 According to this principle, in case of violation of more than one norm by the same person, the perpetrator shall be held separately responsible for each violation, in other words, the criminal responsibility of the perpetrator shall be determined according to the number of crimes committed. 26 The “aggregation of crimes” defined in Articles 42, 43 and 44 of the Turkish Criminal Code No. 5237 is an exception to the principle in question, and apart from these exceptions, a separate sentence should be imposed for each crime committed. In this context, it is not legally possible to implement principles of actual aggregation, and aggregation of crimes at the same time. Because in the presence of actual aggregation, there are more than one act, more than one crime and more than one punishment. 27 As referenced in the paragraph above, “conceptual aggregation of different kinds”,28 which is one of the exceptions to the principle of actual congregation and defined with the compound offenses and successive offenses in the fifth chapter titled “Aggregation of Crimes” of the second part titled “Principles of Criminal Liability” of the first www.kazanci.com. 24 Kayıhan İçel, Ceza Hukuku Genel Hükümler[Criminal Law General Provisions], Beta Yayıncılık, 2021, p. 579. 25 Mahmut Koca, “Fikri İçtima [Conceptual Aggregation]”, Ceza Hukuku Dergisi, 2007, p. 197-198) 26 Fatih Birtek, Ceza Hukuku Genel Hükümler [“Criminal Law General Provisions], Adalet Yayınevi, Ankara 2018, p. 23-24) 27 Berrin Akbulut, Ceza Hukuku Genel Hükümler [Criminal Law General Provisions], Adalet Yayınevi, Ankara 2021, p. 757. 28 In the doctrine, the use of the concept in question by some authors as in the abolished Penal Code period is considered problematic in terms of the principle of choosing a plain language. “The same principle could have been used by using the term ‘formal aggregation’ instead of conceptual aggregation.” (Mustafa Özen, “Ceza Hukukunda Fikri İçtima [Conceptual Aggregation in Criminal Law]”, Türkiye Barolar Birliği Dergisi, 2007, p. 133) 29 https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTQ3OTE1