A Turkish criminal judgment can reach a lawyer abroad through the transfer of a sentenced person, an extradition file, a foreign court considering an earlier conviction or a client who was tried in Türkiye. Whatever the use, the document follows the Code of Criminal Procedure (CMK, Law No. 5271), and its most technical part, the sentence calculation, is also where a translation mistake does the most damage.
Six kinds of judgment
Article 223(1) lists the decisions that count as a judgment (hüküm): acquittal, no penalty imposed, conviction, imposition of a security measure, dismissal of the case and discontinuance. Each has its own sub-paragraphs and its own consequences, so the English names stay distinct. “No penalty imposed” (ceza verilmesine yer olmadığı) is not an acquittal and is not rendered as one, and “dismissal” and “discontinuance” are not interchangeable. Suggested renderings are a starting point; where the reader’s system has no close counterpart, a translator’s note naming the sub-paragraph of Article 223 gives the reader something precise to check.
The formula and the heading
Article 232(1) requires the head of the judgment to state that it is given in the name of the Turkish Nation, the same formula as in civil judgments. Article 232(2) then lists the heading: the court; the presiding judge and members or the judge, the public prosecutor, the clerk, the intervening party, the victim, their representatives and defence counsel; the full identity of the accused; except in an acquittal, the place, date and time period of the offence; and the dates and length of any custody or detention, and whether the accused is still detained. The identity block, with parents’ names, place and date of birth and identity number, is translated field by field.
The reasoning
For a conviction, Article 230(1) requires the reasoning to cover the views advanced by the prosecution and the defence, the discussion of the evidence, the evidence relied on and rejected, the act found proven, its legal qualification and the determination of the penalty, with any suspension, conversion or additional measure. Evidence obtained by unlawful methods is shown separately and expressly, and that passage is translated in full, never summarised. In an acquittal, the reasoning names the sub-paragraph of Article 223(2) relied on (Article 230(2)).
The sentence calculation
The operative part sets out the penalty step by step: a basic term, then increases or reductions under named articles of the Turkish Criminal Code by stated fractions, each step producing an intermediate result, and finally the resulting term. Every step stays a separate sentence, every fraction and intermediate result stays as written, and years, months and days are never converted into one another. Merging two steps into one smooth sentence would hide which provision produced which change.
What the operative part must show
Article 232(6) requires the operative part to state, leaving no room for doubt, which decision under Article 223 was given, the provisions applied, the penalty, and whether a legal remedy and a claim for compensation are available, with the time limit and the authority where they are. Automatic consequences, such as the deprivation of certain rights under Article 53 of the Turkish Criminal Code, appear as separate numbered items and are translated one by one. The time limit for a remedy is translated as written, not recalculated.
Two texts and their copies
If the reasoning and any dissent were not entered in the minutes at pronouncement, they are placed in the file within fifteen days at the latest (Article 232(3)). A lawyer may therefore hold two texts: the result read out at the hearing and recorded in the minutes, and the reasoned judgment written later. The translation states which of the two it renders. Copies and summaries of judgments are signed by the presiding judge or the judge and the clerk and sealed (Article 232(7)); for an electronically signed judgment, sealing does not apply (Article 38/A(6)).
Finality and deferred pronouncement
A conviction is not executed until it is final (Law No. 5275, Article 4(1)), and finality is recorded in an annotation that is translated with the judgment. A judgment deferring the pronouncement (hükmün açıklanmasının geri bırakılması, CMK Article 231) is a different case: the penalty is calculated in the judgment but its pronouncement is held back, and the provisions of Article 231 were rewritten in 2026. This page does not describe that regime. Acte Tercüme translates Turkish criminal judgments into English with the heading, the reasoning and every step of the sentence calculation as they stand.