Attempted Exportation of Narcotic or Psychotropic Substances (Turkish Criminal Code Articles 188/1-3 and 35) – Judgment of Acquittal

The court decisions published in this section were obtained in cases in which Attorney Mert Sönmez personally acted as counsel and defense counsel.

REPUBLIC OF TÜRKİYE

*** COURT

CASE NO: ***

DECISION NO: ***

REASONING

Although a public prosecution was brought against the accused *** seeking punishment for "attempted exportation of narcotic or psychotropic substances," the accused stated in summary throughout the proceedings that the branch of the courier company named Quick Shipper referred to in the indictment had recently opened; that, upon a friend's referral, the accused went there at certain times of the day to provide support; that the accused absolutely did not deliver the parcel forming the subject of the indictment; and that the accused did not accept the charge. The footage alleged to relate to the incident contained no determination that the accused delivered the parcel, and the accused was not seen carrying a parcel in the footage. The sender section of the parcel bore the wording *** and the recipient section bore the wording ***, but no connection could be established between those entries and the accused. QS Micro Dağıtım AŞ submitted to our court all documents relating to the shipment forming the subject of the offense, and examination of those documents yielded no determination that the shipment had been sent by the accused. In its reply dated 21/03/2025, the Istanbul Airport Customs Enforcement, Anti-Smuggling and Intelligence Directorate stated that two of the three body traces obtained from the parcel lacked sufficient characteristic features and that the remaining trace had no match in the system. Thus, no body trace belonging to the accused was identified on the parcel. The statements of the witnesses heard by our court likewise did not produce a definite conviction beyond all doubt that the shipment described in the indictment specifically belonged to the accused. Accordingly, the defense that the parcel did not belong to the accused could not be disproved. Since no persuasive, definitive evidence beyond all doubt and sufficient for conviction was obtained showing that the accused committed the charged offense, the court reached the conscientious conclusion that the accused had to be acquitted pursuant to Article 223/2-e of the Code of Criminal Procedure because commission of the charged offense was not established, also having regard to the principle that the accused benefits from doubt. Judgment was entered as follows.

JUDGMENT

Although a public prosecution was brought against the accused *** seeking punishment for "attempted exportation of narcotic or psychotropic substances," since no persuasive, definitive evidence beyond all doubt and sufficient for conviction was obtained showing that the accused committed the charged offense, and having regard to the principle that the accused benefits from doubt, THE ACCUSED SHALL BE ACQUITTED pursuant to Article 223/2-e of the Code of Criminal Procedure because commission of the charged offense was not established.