When a Turkish public prosecutor closes an investigation without filing a public prosecution, the file ends with a decision of non-prosecution (kovuşturmaya yer olmadığına dair karar), usually abbreviated KYOK. A complainant abroad may need it to decide whether to object; a person who was investigated may be asked by an authority in another country how the matter ended. The document is short and largely formulaic, but it carries a time limit that starts on service, and its reasoning rests on one of two grounds that the Code keeps apart.
A prosecutor’s decision, not a court’s
The decision is taken by the public prosecutor at the end of the investigation stage (soruşturma), under the heading of the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office, before any case reaches a court. No court has examined guilt. The Code of Criminal Procedure (CMK) lists acquittal and dismissal of the case among the judgments a court gives (Article 223(1)), so those English words do not belong in this document. “Decision of non-prosecution” is the suggested rendering, and KYOK is spelled out at its first mention. The heading carries an investigation number and a decision number; they are different entries and both are kept.
The persons named
Next come the complainant, the injured party (suçtan zarar gören), the suspect and their counsel. The suspect stays a suspect (şüpheli): the accused (sanık) appears only once a public prosecution has been filed, and none has been. Where the complainant and the injured party are listed separately they stay separate, because the decision is notified to the injured party and to a suspect who has already made a statement or been questioned (Article 172(1)).
Offence, date and place
The offence investigated is named, usually with the article of the Turkish Criminal Code (TCK), followed by the date and place. Where one decision covers several suspects or several offences, each has its own line or its own operative sentence. The translation keeps those lines apart so that the reader can see which finding concerns whom.
Two grounds with different meanings
Article 172(1) gives two reasons for the decision: the evidence gathered does not create sufficient suspicion to file a public prosecution, or prosecution is not possible. The first concerns the strength of the evidence; the second concerns whether a prosecution can proceed at all. Rendering both as “insufficient grounds” erases the distinction the prosecutor drew. The reasoning, often introduced by SORUŞTURMA EVRAKI İNCELENDİ (the investigation file having been examined), follows the general rule that decisions give reasons (Article 34(1)); references to statements, expert reports and official letters keep their dates and numbers.
Costs and items held
After the operative sentence, the decision may deal with costs and with items held in safekeeping (emanet), listed under their register numbers. Each item keeps its number, and the English text keeps clear which item is to be returned and which, if the decision so orders, is to be confiscated.
The objection notice
The closing paragraph is the one Article 172(1) specifically requires: the right to object, the time limit and the authority, in line with the general rule on remedies in Article 34(2). The injured party objects within two weeks of service to the criminal judgeship of peace at the seat of the assize court, setting out the events and evidence that could justify a public prosecution (Article 173(1) and 173(2)). Law No. 7499 of 2024 replaced the former fifteen days with two weeks, so older decisions may still print fifteen days; the translation reproduces the period on the document and does not update it.
Reopening, copies and neighbouring decisions
A public prosecution for the same act can follow only on new evidence and a decision of the criminal judgeship of peace (Article 172(2)), and the investigation is reopened on request where a final judgment of the European Court of Human Rights finds that no effective investigation took place (Article 172(3)). A paper copy of an electronically signed decision is certified as identical to the original, signed and sealed by the public prosecutor or an authorised person (Article 38/A(8)); that certification is translated with the decision. A deferral of public prosecution under Article 171(2) is a different document with a different English name. Acte Tercüme translates decisions of non-prosecution into English, together with any objection and the decision on it.