In short
Embezzlement, bribery and extortion committed by public officials in connection with their duties fall within the jurisdiction of the assize court. Embezzlement carries five to twelve years, bribery four to twelve years, and extortion by compulsion five to ten years’ imprisonment.
When does embezzlement arise?
Embezzlement is committed by a public official who appropriates, for themselves or another, property entrusted to their possession by reason of their duty or which they are obliged to safeguard. The sentence is five to twelve years’ imprisonment.
Where the offence is committed by deceptive conduct designed to prevent the embezzlement from coming to light, the sentence is increased by one half. In practice this arises where false documents are created, records altered, or transactions carried out so as to mislead an audit.
Where property is appropriated for temporary use with the intention of returning it, the offence is treated as embezzlement by use and the sentence is reduced by up to one half. The distinction turns on whether the intention to return existed from the outset, and is assessed from the records and the date of return.
| Offence | Provision | Sentence |
|---|---|---|
| Embezzlement | Art. 247/1 | Five to twelve years |
| Embezzlement by deceptive conduct | Art. 247/2 | Increased by one half |
| Embezzlement by use | Art. 247/3 | Reduced by up to one half |
| Extortion by compulsion | Art. 250/1 | Five to ten years |
| Extortion by persuasion | Art. 250/2 | Three to five years |
| Exploiting the victim’s mistake | Art. 250/3 | One to three years |
| Bribery | Art. 252 | Four to twelve years |
| Misconduct in office | Art. 257 | Six months to two years |
What are the elements of bribery?
Bribery consists of providing a benefit to a public official, directly or through intermediaries, so that they perform or refrain from performing an act connected with their duties. The law treats the official who receives and the person who gives alike: both face four to twelve years’ imprisonment.
The offence does not require the benefit actually to have been provided. Reaching an agreement on a bribe is itself treated as a completed offence. Where an offer is not accepted, the rules on attempt apply.
For the defence the decisive question is whether the benefit was genuinely connected with the official duty. A debt, a gift or a commercial payment unrelated to that duty does not constitute bribery. The flow of payments, the prior relationship between the parties and whether the act performed was itself lawful must each be established.
How does extortion by a public official differ from bribery?
Both concern a public official obtaining a benefit by reason of their duty; the difference lies in how it is obtained. Bribery involves an agreement and a benefit conferred by consent. In extortion the victim’s will is overborne through the influence attaching to the office.
Extortion takes three forms. In extortion by compulsion the official abuses the influence of their office to compel a person to provide a benefit; here the victim acts under pressure and is a person harmed by the offence. In extortion by persuasion the person is induced to provide the benefit by deceptive conduct. In the third form the official exploits the person’s mistake.
The distinction has practical weight: in bribery the person providing the benefit is also a perpetrator, whereas in extortion by compulsion that person is a victim and is not punished. Which provision the accusation rests on is therefore the first line of defence enquiry.
Factors determining the classification
- Whether the benefit was obtained by agreement or by pressure
- Whether the official used the influence of the office
- Whether the person providing the benefit acted freely
- Whether the act performed was lawful
- Whether a relationship independent of the office existed
- The timing, form and documentation of the payment
Where is the boundary with misconduct in office?
Misconduct in office covers acting contrary to the requirements of a public duty, by conduct not otherwise defined as an offence, and thereby causing harm to individuals or to the public or conferring an unjust advantage. The sentence is six months to two years; a lower sentence applies where it is committed by omission.
The offence is subsidiary: where the conduct constitutes a specifically defined offence such as embezzlement, bribery or extortion, the misconduct provisions do not apply. For the defence this is a decisive classification question that can take the case below the assize court threshold.
In practice, whether public loss actually arose is examined separately. The offence requires not only a breach of duty but a concrete consequence — harm, public loss or unjust advantage — which must be established by expert examination.
How do effective remorse and investigation permission work?
For embezzlement, effective remorse is graduated by the stage at which repayment is made. Full restitution or compensation before the investigation begins reduces the sentence by two thirds; before the prosecution begins, by one half; before judgment, by one third.
A comparable provision applies to bribery: a person who reports the matter to the authorities before an investigation begins may, where the conditions are met, escape sentence entirely. The timing of the application is decisive in both cases.
Investigation of public officials is as a rule subject to permission. Special provisions apply to serious duty-related offences such as embezzlement, bribery and extortion, and which regime governs depends on the official’s status and the offence charged. Whether the investigation was properly opened should therefore be checked separately.
Frequently asked questions
What is the sentence for embezzlement in Turkey?
Five to twelve years’ imprisonment. Where the offence is committed by deceptive conduct designed to prevent it coming to light, the sentence is increased by one half. For embezzlement by use, the sentence is reduced by up to one half.
Is the person who gives a bribe also punished?
Yes. The law treats the official who receives and the person who gives alike. By contrast, in extortion by compulsion the person providing the benefit is a victim and is not punished.
Does repayment reduce the sentence for embezzlement?
Yes. Full restitution or compensation before the investigation begins reduces the sentence by two thirds; before the prosecution begins, by one half; before judgment, by one third. The reduction depends directly on timing.
How is misconduct in office distinguished from embezzlement?
Misconduct in office is subsidiary and does not apply where the conduct constitutes a specifically defined offence. Where property has been appropriated, embezzlement applies; where the breach of duty caused some other harm, the misconduct provisions apply.
Does bribery arise if no money changed hands?
Yes. Reaching an agreement on a bribe is treated as a completed offence; the benefit need not actually have been provided. Where an offer is not accepted, the rules on attempt apply.
Relevant legislation
- Turkish Penal Code No. 5237 (arts. 247, 248, 250, 252, 254, 257)
- Criminal Procedure Code No. 5271 (arts. 128, 135, 161)
- Law No. 4483 on the Prosecution of Civil Servants and Other Public Officials
- Law No. 5235 (art. 12 — jurisdiction of the assize courts)
Legal notice
The information on this page is general in nature and is provided for informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and cannot replace an assessment of your specific circumstances. Legislation and case law may change over time.
This page was prepared by Erol Deli, Attorney at Law. · Last updated: August 21, 2026
Do you have a question about your case?
Every case must be assessed on its own facts. You can reach us to discuss your situation.
Contact