61 Union of Turkish Bar Associations Review 2022 Bahar TOPSAKAL actions should be common for all types of crimes.42 In this context, just intersection, in other words, partial sameness, is not sufficient for the application of the rules of aggregation. 43 Because in the case of partial sameness, it is not possible to apply the rules of conceptual aggregation, since it is not possible to accept the singleness of the act. In our opinion, in case of partial sameness, each act should be evaluated as separate act, and a separate penalty should be sentenced for each crime by applying the real actual aggregation. To give an example about the sameness (full-partial) of the acts; assume that the perpetrator sent a message to a person five times at intervals of one hour, and all of these messages also contained insulting expressions. In such a case, it is clear that all of the acts are exactly the same. Because although there is more than one act in the natural sense, due to the legal reasons, these acts form the singleness in the evaluation, and all of the acts meet definitions of both crimes at the same time. In other words, in terms of the crimes that are committed, there is no action that is not taken into consideration, so to speak. In this case, since there is an act that can be considered as a single act in the legal sense and more than one crime were committed by this single act, the provisions of the conceptual aggregation will be applied and the perpetrator will be penalized only for the crime of insult and also the provisions of the successive crime will be applied. In our opinion, since the act can be accepted as one a single act in the case of complete sameness, the application of conceptual aggregation does not create an unfairness. However, this is not the case in the case of partial sameness. For example, assume that the perpetrator sent a message to a person five times at one-hour intervals, but only two of these messages contain insulting expressions. In the presence of such a situation, since it cannot be argued that the crime of insult has been committed in terms of the other three messages, it cannot be stated that the crime types are common in terms of all acts. 44 In other words, it is not possible to accept 42 Göktürk, p. 46. 43 Kayıhan İçel/Füsun Sokullu Akıncı/İzzet Özgenç/Adem Sözüer/Fatih Selami Mahmutoğlu/Yener Ünver, Suç Teorisi [Crime Theory], Beta Yayınevi, İstanbul 2000, p. 423. 44 “In order for the conceptual aggregation to take place, for each crime, the act must match the type, be unlawful and faulty. If there is an act with these characteristics for only one of the crimes, it means the conditions of conceptual aggregation have not been met, and the provisions of actual aggregation should be applied. (Assem-
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTQ3OTE1