Sonucu nedeniyle ağırlaşmış suçlar
Küçük Resim Yok
Tarih
2020
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
Ceza hukukunda kusursuz ceza olmaz ilkesi mevcut olup esas itibariyle sorumluluk kusura dayanır. Günümüzde objektif sorumluluk anlayışı terk edilmiş ve kusur sorumluluğu kabul edilmiştir. Buna göre kusursuz kişinin cezalandırılması mümkün değildir ve fail ancak kusuru oranında sorumludur. Hem Türk Hukukunda hem de Mukayeseli hukukta objektif sorumluluk hipotezlerinin ortadan kaldırılmasına yönelik çalışmaların olduğu görülmektedir. Kasten işlenen bir suçun sonucu olarak meydana gelen başka ya da ağır neticeden failin ancak taksir seviyesinde bir kusurunun varlığı halinde sorumlu tutulabildiği ve temel suça göre daha ağır cezanın verilmesini gerektiren suçlar sonucu nedeniyle ağırlaşmış suçlar olarak adlandırılır.765 sayılı Eski Türk Ceza Kanunu'nda bu suçlara ilişkin genel bir hüküm yer almamaktaydı ve Doktrinde bu suçların birer objektif sorumluluk şekli olduğu kabul edilmekteydi. 2005 yılında yürürlüğe giren 5237 sayılı Türk Ceza Kanunun 23.maddesiyle bu hususta genel bir hükme yer verilmiştir. Çalışmamızda istenmeyen neticeden sorumlulukla ilgili kusur ilkesi kapsamında meydana gelebilecek sorunlar ve çözümleri tartışılmış, söz konusu suçlarda sorumluluk kriterlerinin ortaya koyulması amaçlanmıştır. Anahtar Kelimeler:Ceza hukuku, Suç, Objektif sorumluluk, İstenmeyen netice, Kast, Taksir
In modern criminal law, there exits the principle that there is no crime and punishment without fault and the liability depends essentially on fault.The conception of objective liability has been abandoned at the present time and defect liability has been adopted. According to this, it is not possible to punish the person who does not have fault and the perpetrator is responsible for his action only at the rate of his fault. It is seen that there are studies to extinguish the hypotheses of objective liability in Turkish Law and Comparative Law. Crimes that occur as a result of a crime committed intentionally and for which the perpetrator can be held accountable on condition that there is a fault at a level of negligence for another or an aggravated form and crimes that necessitate a more severe punishment compared to the base offence are called as aggravated crimes by their result. In the former Turkish Penal Code numbered 765, there was not any blanket clause about these crimes and it was accepted in the doctrine that these types of crimes were objective liability forms. The idea of removing the regulations from the code, which would lead to objective liability, is also reflected on Turkish Penal Code. A general provision was included with the 23rd article in the Turkish Penal Code numbered 5237 that came into effect in 2005.In our research, it was examined whether this regulation, which necessitates at least looking for fault in negligence about the aggravated crimes by their result, is sufficient about solving all the problems that came out in relation to objective liability; the problems that would occur within the context of fault principle about the liability of unintended consequence and their solutions were discussed; and it was aimed to assert the liability criteria for these crimes. Key Words: Criminal Law, crime, objective liability, unintended consequence, intent, negligence
In modern criminal law, there exits the principle that there is no crime and punishment without fault and the liability depends essentially on fault.The conception of objective liability has been abandoned at the present time and defect liability has been adopted. According to this, it is not possible to punish the person who does not have fault and the perpetrator is responsible for his action only at the rate of his fault. It is seen that there are studies to extinguish the hypotheses of objective liability in Turkish Law and Comparative Law. Crimes that occur as a result of a crime committed intentionally and for which the perpetrator can be held accountable on condition that there is a fault at a level of negligence for another or an aggravated form and crimes that necessitate a more severe punishment compared to the base offence are called as aggravated crimes by their result. In the former Turkish Penal Code numbered 765, there was not any blanket clause about these crimes and it was accepted in the doctrine that these types of crimes were objective liability forms. The idea of removing the regulations from the code, which would lead to objective liability, is also reflected on Turkish Penal Code. A general provision was included with the 23rd article in the Turkish Penal Code numbered 5237 that came into effect in 2005.In our research, it was examined whether this regulation, which necessitates at least looking for fault in negligence about the aggravated crimes by their result, is sufficient about solving all the problems that came out in relation to objective liability; the problems that would occur within the context of fault principle about the liability of unintended consequence and their solutions were discussed; and it was aimed to assert the liability criteria for these crimes. Key Words: Criminal Law, crime, objective liability, unintended consequence, intent, negligence
Açıklama
Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Kamu Hukuku Bilim Dalı
Anahtar Kelimeler
Hukuk, Law
