Objecting to a Non-Prosecution Decision in Turkey: CMK Article 173 and the Current 2-Week Deadline

1. A KYOK means the prosecutor has decided not to file an indictment

After investigating a complaint or offence report, the public prosecutor decides whether sufficient suspicion exists to justify prosecution. If the available evidence does not create sufficient suspicion or a legal obstacle prevents prosecution, the prosecutor can issue a non-prosecution decision.

The decision should identify the allegation, evidence and legal reason. It is not enough for the victim to know informally that “the file was closed.” The written and reasoned KYOK should be obtained.

The objection mechanism reviews that prosecutorial conclusion before the competent criminal judgeship of peace.

2. The current objection period is two weeks

CMK Article 173 now provides a two-week objection period from notification. This is a current procedural rule and should not be replaced with the older fifteen-day period found in pre-2024 articles.

Because the period is short, the complainant should request the file and counsel review immediately after receiving the decision.

Negotiations with the suspect or informal requests to the prosecutor do not automatically suspend the statutory objection period.

3. The clock begins with legally relevant notification

The file should preserve the e-notification receipt, postal delivery record or other official service document. The date written on the KYOK itself is not necessarily the first day of the objection calculation.

If service was made to counsel, the effect should be assessed under the representation and notification rules.

A foreign complainant who has moved abroad should ensure the Turkish file contains a reliable notification address or valid lawyer mandate.

4. The person harmed by the offence can use Article 173

The objection belongs to the person whose legal interests were harmed by the alleged offence within the statutory framework. A person with only a general public concern does not automatically acquire standing.

Companies can be harmed persons in fraud, embezzlement, trade-secret, forgery and other cases. The authorised representative must prove authority.

Foreign nationality does not reduce standing.

5. The competent criminal judgeship of peace is determined through the heavy-criminal-court connection

Article 173 identifies the judgeship at the place of the heavy criminal court with jurisdiction over the prosecutor’s office. Filing to the wrong authority can cause delay.

The objection petition can be submitted through procedural channels that transmit it to the competent judgeship, but the addressee should be stated correctly.

The original investigation number and KYOK number should be included.

6. A persuasive objection attacks the reason for non-prosecution

If the prosecutor concluded that there was no deception in a fraud case, the objection should explain the specific false representation, reliance and financial transfer. If the reason was lack of evidence, identify the evidence that was ignored or never collected.

Copying the original complaint without addressing the KYOK reasoning wastes the review opportunity.

Use headings that correspond to the prosecutor’s stated conclusions.

7. Omitted investigative acts can be the strongest objection ground

Bank records, CCTV, HTS/location data, IP logs, handwriting examination, company books or witness interviews can materially affect the investigation. If a clearly relevant act was never performed, explain what it would establish.

The judgeship can assess whether the investigation was sufficient and can require further investigation through the statutory mechanism.

Evidence requests should be specific and realistically obtainable.

8. A legal classification error can lead to premature closure

The prosecutor can describe conduct under the wrong offence provision or conclude that the dispute is “civil” without analysing criminal elements. Not every contract dispute is fraud, but a contract also does not immunise intentional deception.

The objection should distinguish breach of contract from the criminal conduct alleged and cite the correct elements.

Do not add unsupported offences simply to make the case appear more serious.

9. Contradictory statements should be compared with objective records

A KYOK can rely heavily on the suspect’s denial. The objection should show where that denial conflicts with messages, payments, camera records or third-party statements.

Likewise, contradictions in the complainant’s statement should be explained honestly rather than hidden.

A timeline often makes inconsistencies visible.

10. Preserve digital evidence in a technically credible form

Screenshots are useful but can omit metadata and context. Exported message histories, original email headers, device records and platform data can be stronger.

Where a digital account belongs to the suspect, the prosecutor can use lawful investigative powers to obtain records unavailable to the victim.

The objection should explain why the requested digital source matters before data retention periods expire.

11. Expert evidence can be necessary in financial and technical files

Accounting fraud, signature disputes, software logs, valuation and medical causation can require expert review. A prosecutor’s conclusion without necessary technical analysis can be challenged.

A private expert opinion can guide the objection, but official expert examination may still be required.

The petition should define the technical question clearly.

12. Complaint-dependent offences require separate deadline analysis

If prosecution legally depends on complaint, the prosecutor can issue KYOK where a valid complaint was not made within the applicable period. TCK Article 73 generally uses six months from learning the act and perpetrator for complaint-dependent offences.

The objection should prove when knowledge occurred and whether a valid complaint was made.

For ex officio offences, withdrawal of complaint does not necessarily end prosecution.

13. Foreign complainants can object from abroad

A foreign victim can appoint Turkish counsel and submit the objection without returning merely to file the petition, subject to mandate and any personal evidence needs.

Foreign documents should be translated and authenticated where relevant.

Address and e-notification arrangements should be kept current.

14. The judgeship can reject the objection or require prosecution/investigative action within the statutory framework

The exact consequence depends on the judgeship’s assessment and the current CMK procedure. The decision should be obtained and read together with the investigation file.

A successful objection does not mean the suspect is guilty. It means the non-prosecution conclusion cannot stand in its existing form.

The later prosecution still follows ordinary presumption-of-innocence rules.

15. New evidence after a final KYOK raises a different legal question

Once a KYOK becomes final, reopening the same matter is subject to the statutory restrictions on new evidence and judicial approval in the current CMK framework.

The complainant should identify genuinely new material rather than repackage old evidence.

This is another reason to use the initial two-week objection period effectively.

16. A KYOK does not automatically eliminate civil claims

Criminal and civil liability use different standards and causes of action. A contract, tort, unjust enrichment or enforcement claim can remain even where the prosecutor declines criminal prosecution.

Limitation periods for civil claims should be monitored independently.

The foreign victim should not wait for the criminal process if an urgent asset-preservation or civil deadline exists.

17. Maintain a compact objection file

The essential file includes the complaint, statements, submitted exhibits, investigation requests, KYOK, notification receipt and a list of omitted or mis-evaluated evidence.

For foreign clients, add passport/authority documents and certified translations only where necessary.

Bakırcı & Keskin Hukuk Bürosu has one physical office in Mersin. Criminal matters throughout Türkiye can be coordinated from Mersin subject to competent authority and procedure.

Conclusion

A CMK Article 173 objection should be filed within the current two-week period and should answer the prosecutor’s actual reason for closing the case. The strongest petitions identify a concrete evidentiary or legal error, preserve notification proof and distinguish criminal remedies from parallel civil recovery.