Criminal Complaint to the Prosecutor’s Office – 2025

Criminal Complaint to the Prosecutor’s Office – 2025. A criminal complaint constitutes the starting point of Turkish Criminal Procedure Law (CCP) and is the process of notifying the competent judicial authorities of the impression of a crime. This legal mechanism aims to initiate a criminal investigation for the purpose of punishing the perpetrator. The procedure and principles of criminal complaints are strictly framed by relevant legal regulations, primarily the Code of Criminal Procedure No. 5271.

1. The Concept of Criminal Complaint, its Legal Basis (CCP Art. 158), and Competent Authorities

A criminal complaint essentially conveys information to the competent authorities that a legally prohibited act has been committed. The main legal basis of a criminal complaint is Article 158 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which regulates the procedure for notice and complaint (ihbar and şikâyet). This article defines the scope of duties and powers of the investigation authorities.

The competent authority is generally the Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor or the Public Prosecutor’s Office where the incident took place. The complaint petition can be delivered in person to the Application Desk (Müracaat Bürosu) at the courthouse or sent via post. In practice, verbal or written criminal complaints made by citizens can also be filed through law enforcement units (police or gendarmerie). Law enforcement units are obliged to immediately forward these complaints to the prosecutor’s office.

The determination of jurisdiction (CCP Art. 14) is critical for deciding which prosecutor’s office will conduct the investigation. The rule is that the court of the place where the crime was committed has jurisdiction. If the place where the crime was committed cannot be determined, the court of the place where the suspect or defendant was apprehended or their domicile is deemed competent. If the suspect or defendant does not have a domicile in Turkey, the court of their last address in Turkey; if this cannot be determined either, the court of the place where the first procedural action was taken will have jurisdiction.

2. Distinction Between the Concepts of Notice and Complaint and the Method of Prosecution by Crime Type

In the context of criminal procedure law, ihbar (notice/reporting) and şikâyet (complaint) lead to different legal consequences. Notice is the act of informing the prosecutor’s office that an ex officio prosecuted crime has been committed, and the person making the notice does not necessarily have to be harmed by the crime. Complaint, however, means the person directly harmed or victimized by the crime requests the initiation of the investigation.

Complaint is a condition for prosecution (kovuşturma şartı) especially for crimes dependent on a complaint. For such crimes, the investigation or prosecution depends on the explicit complaint of the victim (e.g., Simple intentional injury TCK Art. 86/2, Violation of the immunity of the dwelling TCK Art. 116/1-2, Insult TCK Art. 125/1).

Time Limit and Effect of Waiver in Crimes Dependent on Complaint

For crimes whose investigation and prosecution are dependent on a complaint, the authorized person must file the complaint within six months from the day they knew or learned about the act and the identity of the perpetrator. This period is a statute of limitations (hak düşürücü süre), provided it does not exceed the general statute of limitation period. If there is more than one person entitled to complain and one of them misses the 6-month period, the right of the others to complain is not forfeited.

At this point, the importance of the legal qualification of the crime emerges. It is not enough to merely narrate the incident in the criminal complaint petition; the incident must be correctly qualified as a crime under the Turkish Penal Code (TPC). Especially in crimes dependent on a complaint, this qualification is vital for the correct management of the statute of limitations periods. A complainant mistakenly qualifying a crime dependent on a complaint as an ex officio prosecuted crime may risk missing the six-month period and having the file later closed by the prosecutor’s office with a Decision of Non-Prosecution (KYOK). High-quality legal representation at the initial stage is critical to prevent such procedural errors and loss of rights.

Waiver of the complaint immediately affects the legal process. In case of waiver, a decision of non-prosecution (KYOK) is issued during the investigation phase, and a decision of dismissal (düşme kararı) of the public case is issued during the prosecution phase.

The table below summarizes the fundamental differences between ex officio prosecuted crimes and crimes dependent on a complaint:

Feature	Ex Officio Prosecuted Crimes (General Rule)	Crimes Dependent on Complaint (Exceptions)
Initiation of Investigation	Learning of any situation that gives the impression of a crime being committed (Notice or Ex Officio).	Upon the explicit complaint of the victim or person harmed by the crime.
Example TPC Articles	Fraud (TCK 157) (Simple), Intentional Homicide.	Simple Intentional Injury (TCK 86/2), Violation of the Immunity of the Dwelling (TCK 116/1-2), Insult (TCK 125/1).
Complaint Period	None (General statute of limitations periods apply).	6 months from the day the act and the perpetrator are known or learned (Statute of limitations).
Waiver of Complaint	Ineffective, the trial continues.	Results in DNP (KYOK) during the investigation phase, and a dismissal decision during the prosecution phase.

II. How to File a Criminal Complaint to the Public Prosecutor’s Office (Procedural and Formal Requirements)

Compliance with procedural and formal requirements is mandatory for the acceptance of a criminal complaint and the effective initiation of an investigation. Legally, a criminal complaint can be made verbally or in writing. However, in practical application, making the criminal complaint in writing with a petition is strongly recommended for the process to proceed clearly and documented.

1. Methods of Criminal Complaint: The Superiority of Filing with a Petition

When a criminal complaint is filed with a petition, submitting the existing evidence related to the incident along with the petition significantly contributes to the effective and efficient conduct of the investigation. After the petition is delivered to the competent Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor (to the Application Desk), the complainant is given a preparation number (hazırlık numarası). This number is a fundamental reference point for the person to check the status of their complaint.

A criminal complaint can be filed even if the identity of the person who committed the crime is unknown (unknown perpetrator/faili meçhul). Even in this case, the Public Prosecutor’s Office is obliged to investigate when, by whom, where, and how the crime was committed, and to collect evidence. However, if the suspect’s identity cannot be determined, the prosecutor’s office continues the investigation by issuing a permanent search warrant (daimi arama kararı), because a public case cannot be filed with an indictment until the suspect’s identity is determined.

2. Mandatory Elements of the Criminal Complaint Petition (Legal Validity)

Since the preparation of the criminal complaint petition forms the basis of the indictment to be drafted later, it must be prepared in compliance with the relevant articles of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CCP) and without omissions.

The petition must be addressed to the competent Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor in the place where the crime was committed. The petition must include the T.R. Identity Number, Address, and Phone information of the Complainant (Müşteki/Victim) and the Suspect(s) (if any) without omission. Specifying the crime subject to the complaint along with its relevant article in the TPC (Crime Qualification) sets the legal framework.

The incidents must be narrated in the explanations section in a detailed and plain language, without adding personal comments. This narration must include the place, date, and time frame when the crime was committed.

The quality and clarity of the petition are factors that directly affect the speed and legal outcome of the investigation process. Submitting a complete, clear, and evidence-supported petition facilitates the Public Prosecutor’s obligation, stated in CCP Art. 170/4, to relate the events constituting the alleged crime to the existing evidence. Otherwise, general and abstract notices or complaints that do not constitute a crime may be terminated without initiating an investigation by issuing a Decision Not to Initiate Investigation (SYOK) pursuant to CCP Art. 158/6. Therefore, a quality petition ensures that the application successfully passes the SYOK filter and allows the prosecutor to quickly proceed to the evidence collection phase.

In the conclusion section, it must be explicitly requested that a decision to file a public case be made for the investigation and punishment of the suspects, reserving the rights to compensation and other private law claims.

III. Criminal Complaint via E-Government and Tracking Mechanisms

With technological advancements, the digitalization of judicial processes has accelerated. However, criminal complaint processes and investigation tracking are subject to certain limitations, especially due to criminal procedure principles.

1. Filing a Criminal Complaint via E-Government and its Limitations

The E-Government Gateway provides access to the Ministry of Justice’s UYAP Citizen Portal service, allowing citizens to track judicial processes. Through this portal, file viewing, document verification, and case status (safahat) inquiries can be performed. For filing a criminal complaint directly, the UYAP system usually requires the use of secure identity verification methods such as Electronic Signature (E-signature) or Mobile Signature.

Although applications can also be made online through CİMER (Presidential Communication Center), criminal complaints made to CİMER are only forwarded to the relevant prosecutor’s office , and the use of CİMER is not recommended over direct written petitions or official UYAP channels in terms of legal effectiveness and reliability.

2. How to Track a Criminal Complaint (Investigation Secrecy)

Criminal investigations initiated after a criminal complaint is filed are, as a rule, secret (gizli) pursuant to the Code of Criminal Procedure (CCP) Art. 157. The secrecy of the investigation is a fundamental principle established to prevent the spoliation of evidence and ensure the healthy conduct of the investigation.

Due to this secrecy principle, unlike case files, investigation files (preparation files) do not appear on E-Government.This situation creates a significant information asymmetry for the complainant (müşteki). The complainant can use the preparation number they received from the application desk to follow the process. Only limited information, such as status inquiry (safahat sorgulama), is available through the UYAP Citizen Portal.

The restricted full access via E-Government due to secrecy makes the role of legal representation vital. Access to the file content and active intervention in the investigation can be provided through the complainant’s representative (attorney). For example, when new evidence emerges or when the suspect’s additional statement needs to be taken, law enforcement officers cannot perform this action; the suspect’s statement regarding the same incident can only be taken again by the Public Prosecutor. In this case, the representative’s swift application to the prosecutor’s office and ensuring the necessary investigation measures are taken is mandatory for the investigation to proceed.

IV. Criminal Complaint to the Public Prosecutor’s Office for Fraud (TCK Art. 157)

The crime of fraud (TCK Art. 157) is one of the most frequently encountered crime types, especially with the proliferation of digital commerce. This crime occurs when fraudulent behavior deceives the victim, resulting in an unjust gain for the perpetrator and harm to the victim. Simple fraud is an ex officio prosecuted crime and is not subject to the 6-month complaint period.

1. Legal Elements and Qualification of the Crime of Fraud

The existence of fundamental elements, as determined in Supreme Court (Yargıtay) decisions, is sought for the crime of fraud to occur :

The Perpetrator Engaging in Fraudulent Behavior: These behaviors must be capable of misleading and deceiving the victim. Fraudulent behavior can constitute the crime of fraud even if it is aimed at temporarily securing the delivery of possession.
The Victim Being Deceived as a Result of the Fraudulent Behavior: The victim acting with their will impaired as a result of the perpetrator’s trick.
The Perpetrator Obtaining Unjust Gain for Themselves or Another Person: The perpetrator must gain a benefit at the expense of the victim or another person.

Due to the nature of this crime, the victim’s voluntary surrender of goods or money is required, but it must be a consequence of the trick. The criminal complaint petition must demonstrate with concrete evidence how the victim’s will was impaired (deceived). It is critical to prove that the victimization is not merely a breach of contract or a simple legal dispute, but rather the result of a fraudulent act. Otherwise, the risk of the file being removed from the scope of criminal law and a decision of non-prosecution being issued increases.

2. Evidence Collection Strategies in Digital Fraud

Situations like the failure to send a product, sending an incomplete or wrong product (e.g., sending a model car instead of a phone) in purchases made via the internet constitute the crime of fraud. In fraud crimes committed in the digital environment, due to the high risk of evidence quickly disappearing or being altered, the victim must act proactively to collect concrete and legally valid evidence:

Communication Records: Screenshots of the web site, social media accounts, e-mail, SMS, and instant messaging (like WhatsApp) content where the crime was committed should be taken and the integrity of this evidence preserved when presented.
Financial Evidence: Bank receipts, wire transfer/EFT receipts showing money transfers, and recipient account/IBAN information.
Proof via Notice: Especially in victimizations arising from e-commerce, it is recommended to send a certified letter (iadeli taahhütlü posta) or cargo notice to the fraudster to prove the trick and document the perpetrator’s bad faith. Even the envelope of these notices should have a clear title indicating the subject of the victimization and a clear refund request (e.g., “Notice for the return of the model car sent instead of the phone purchased for xxx TL and the refund of the price”) and this title should be registered on the service document as well, which facilitates the burden of proof during the trial phase.

V. What Happens After Filing a Criminal Complaint to the Public Prosecutor’s Office? (Investigation Phase)

After the criminal complaint reaches the competent Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor, the investigation phase (preparation/hazırlık) begins. This phase concludes with one of the decisions to either file a public case against the perpetrator or close the file.

1. Initiation, Conduct of the Investigation, and Taking Statements

As soon as the Public Prosecutor learns of the notice or complaint, they are deemed to have learned of a situation suggesting a crime has been committed and are obliged to open an investigation. The investigation is conducted under the guidance and direction of the Public Prosecutor. The Prosecutor instructs the law enforcement forces under their command (police or gendarmerie) to conduct the necessary research and collect evidence. It is essential for the prosecutor’s office to fully collect the evidence that has a direct impact on the proof of the crime.

Within the scope of the investigation, the statement of the suspect or the complainant (müşteki) is taken. When necessary, an order of forcible appearance (zorla getirme kararı) may be issued by the judge or prosecutor for witnesses, suspects, or complainants, which continues until their statement is taken.

2. Final Decisions of the Investigation and Their Legal Effects

At the end of the investigation phase, the Public Prosecutor evaluates the collected evidence and issues one of the following three decisions:

A. Drafting an Indictment (Filing of a Public Case)

The drafting of an indictment means the conversion of the investigation phase into prosecution (kovuşturma/trial). The main condition for this is that the collected evidence constitutes sufficient suspicion (yeterli şüphe) regarding the commission of the crime (CCP Art. 170/2). As stated in Supreme Court case law, sufficient suspicion refers to the degree where the probability of the defendant being convicted as a result of the trial is higher than the probability of acquittal.

The indictment is prepared by the Public Prosecutor, who has the duty to file a public case, and is submitted to the competent court (Criminal Court of First Instance or High Criminal Court) according to the nature of the crime. The determination of the suspect’s identity is a prerequisite for drafting the indictment.

The court examines the indictment submitted to it. If the indictment was drafted without a proper investigation, if an existing piece of evidence that directly affects the proof of the crime was not collected (CCP Art. 174/1-b), or if it does not meet the other conditions required by law, the indictment is returned to the prosecutor’s office by the court. The return of the indictment is a critical stage where the Public Prosecutor’s discretionary power is subject to judicial review.

B. Decision of Non-Prosecution (KYOK / Takipsizlik)

KYOK is the Public Prosecutor’s decision to conclude the investigation in cases where sufficient evidence could not be obtained during the investigation phase (insufficient evidence) or when prosecution is impossible (such as statute of limitations, waiver of complaint, lack of criminal capacity of the perpetrator).

The KYOK decision is served to the person harmed by the crime, and there is a right to object within a 15-day period against the decision. The appellate authority for objection is the Penal Judgeship of Peace (Sulh Ceza Hâkimliği) closest to the prosecutor’s office that issued the KYOK decision. In the objection petition, new events and evidence that might necessitate the filing of a public case must be specified.

Although KYOK does not constitute a final judgment (kesin hüküm), investigation procedures cannot be reopened and a public case cannot be filed against the perpetrator for the same act unless new evidence emerges. If the Penal Judgeship of Peace rejects the objection to KYOK, the prosecutor’s ability to file a case again depends not only on the emergence of new evidence but also on the judgeship making a new decision on this matter. This indicates that the KYOK objection process constitutes a condition of criminal procedure for the investigation to be reopened.

C. Decision Not to Initiate Investigation (SYOK)

SYOK is a mechanism introduced into Turkish law by CCP Art. 158/6. This decision is issued when notices or complaints are general, abstract, or baseless, and clearly do not constitute a crime, meaning the Public Prosecutor does not even deem it necessary to initiate investigation procedures. SYOK functions as a “pre-screening” decision before the evidence collection phase. The persons who filed the notice or complaint also have the right to apply to the Penal Judgeship of Peace against the SYOK decision, aiming to prevent arbitrary behavior.

The table below compares the final decisions of the investigation phase and their legal consequences:

Final Decision	Legal Basis	Legal Threshold/Justification	Appellate Authority and Period	Effect
Drafting of Indictment	CCP Art. 170/2	Existence of Sufficient Suspicionregarding the commission of the crime.	Court Return (CCP 174).	Public case is filed, and the prosecution phase begins.
KYOK (Non-Prosecution)	CCP Art. 172	Insufficient suspicion (Lack of Evidence) or impossibility of Prosecution.	Penal Judgeship of Peace, 15 days.	Investigation file is closed. Cannot be reopened without new evidence.
SYOK (Not to Initiate Investigation)	CMK m. 158/6	Notice or complaint clearly does not constitute a crime.	Penal Judgeship of Peace.	Investigation is not initiated. The file is not even registered.

VI. Criminal Complaint Petition Sample to the Public Prosecutor’s Office and Application Notes

An effective criminal complaint petition must be in a format that meets the investigation requirements set forth by the CCP. The petitioner must remember that the incidents narrated in the petition must be accurate and true, in compliance with the duty of honesty when initiating the legal process; otherwise, the risk of the crime of defamation (iftira) arises.The criminal complaint petition is not subject to any legal fees.

1. Criminal Complaint Petition Sample Format

The criminal complaint petition must establish the procedural foundation necessary for filing a public case:

Petition Element	Legal Requirement	Explanation/CCP Basis
Addressed Authority	The Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office where the crime was committed.	Correct determination of the local competent prosecutor’s office.
Complainant Information	Name Surname, T.R. Identity No, Address, Phone.	Full and official identity information of the Complainant/Victim.
Suspect Information	If identity is not determined, specifying “Unknown Perpetrator” (Faili Meçhul).	Suspect’s identity determination is mandatory for the indictment.
Legal Nature of the Crime	Specifying the crime’s TPC equivalent and article (e.g., TCK 157).	Determines the legal framework of the investigation.
Description of Incidents	Narrating the incidents plainly, detailed, and without personal commentary.	Relating the events constituting the alleged crime to the evidence (CCP Art. 170/4).
Evidence	Witness names, documents, digital evidence (List of Attachments).	Requirement for collecting evidence for proof of crime and sufficient suspicion.
Request and Conclusion	Requesting the filing of a public case after conducting an investigation against the suspect.	The complainant’s explicit request for the initiation of the judicial process.

2. Application Notes and Effect on the Indictment

The manner in which the petition is prepared directly forms the basis of the mandatory elements of the indictment in CCP Art. 170 (place/date of the alleged crime, relating the events to the evidence). The Prosecutor is obliged to either draft an indictment or issue a KYOK as a result of the investigation.

If the complainant fails to relate the events to clear evidence in their petition, the prosecutor’s office faces the risk of an incomplete investigation. This makes it difficult for the prosecutor to reach sufficient suspicion, increasing the likelihood of issuing a KYOK. Furthermore, an indictment prepared as a result of an incomplete or non-procedural investigation may be returned by the court. Therefore, the quality of the petition at the very beginning of the process is a critical factor that directly determines the legal acceptability of the indictment and whether the prosecution phase will commence at the end of the process. This shows that the petition should be regarded not just as a means of notification, but also as a document that forms the procedural foundation of the criminal trial.

Conclusion and Evaluation

The criminal complaint process to the Public Prosecutor’s Office is a technical and multi-stage legal process subject to the strict procedural rules of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The successful management of the process depends on the quality of the legal qualification made at the initial stage and the evidence collected. Correct calculation of the 6-month statute of limitations period, especially in crimes dependent on a complaint, and the preservation of the integrity of digital evidence in fraudulent acts such as fraud, constitute the key points of the process.

The secrecy of the investigation phase pursuant to CCP Art. 157 and the resulting restriction of file tracking via E-Government increases the importance of legal representation. This is because secrecy creates an information asymmetry for the complainant, making it mandatory for the rights to actively submit evidence and request investigation to be used effectively only through legal representation.

Ultimately, the investigation phase concludes with either an Indictment, a KYOK, or an SYOK decision. There is a right to object to the KYOK and SYOK decisions before the Penal Judgeship of Peace. However, if the objection is rejected, the filing of a public case requires not only the discovery of new evidence but also the appellate authority to make a new decision on this matter. This indicates that the objection phase is not just a legal review, but also a procedural action with the potential to establish a condition for prosecution.

Our Latest Articles

« Previous Post