Menu
En iyi Manavgat Avukatı
  • Anasayfa
  • Biz
  • İletişim
  • Blog
Close Menu
14/05/2022

What Does It Mean to Refusal to Testify

Rabia Ekşi Uncategorized @tr alanya, antalya, law, lawyer, mahmutlar

Persons Who May Be Afraid of Testifying and Who May Be Afraid of Testifying

1-) The following persons may be afraid of testifying:

a) The suspect or the defendant’s fiancée,

b) The spouse of the suspect or accused, even if there is no marital bond left,

c) The suspect or the accused’s blood or beech blood is superior or inferior,

d) Blood of the suspect or accused, including the third degree, or his in-laws, including the second degree,

e) Those who have adopted ties between them and the suspect or the accused. Dec.

2-) Those who are not able to understand the importance of abstaining from testifying due to their age, mental illness or mental weakness can be heard as witnesses with the consent of their legal representatives. If the legal representative is a suspect or a defendant, he cannot make a decision about whether these people should be afraid.

3-) Those who may be afraid of testifying are informed that they may be afraid of testifying before being listened to. These people can always refrain from testifying while they are resting.”

The right to abstain from testimony can be exercised both at the stage of investigation and at the stage of prosecution.
A witness who has the right to abstain from testifying has the right to demand a sworn-sworn hearing.
The existence of an engagement can be understood by the facts that indicate that there is an intention to marry on the parties.
If the provision is based on the statements of the witness who has the right to abstain from testifying alone, the failure to remind of the right to abstain is considered a procedural error if it is effective in the outcome.
Do Not Be Shy About Your Profession and Your Endeavors

Even with the consent of the person concerned, the right of lawyers to abstain from testifying due to the specifics of their professional activities is an absolute right. If the person concerned has the consent, members of professions other than the legal profession have no right to hesitate to testify.
The benefit that the emergence of material truth will bring from the point of view of society, as well as the relationship of trust between the persons to whom the professional will testify and the persons to whom the trust will not be damaged, were discussed, and it was found more beneficial from the point of view of the social fabric.
Professional secrets are not accepted for journalists. For example, if a person is killed while he is busy shooting news, the journalist has to testify, he has no right to hesitate. A journalist is obliged to describe the incident he witnessed as a witness. However, there is no obligation for the journalist to disclose the news sources he has learned because of the news he has done.
Notification of the Reason for Abstention from Testimony

Those who have the right to abstain from testifying should report the facts that cause them to abstain from testifying at the request of the relevant judicial authority.
Participating or accused subjects have not been granted the right to request the witness to report to the court any facts that cause hesitation.
A witness may be sworn in by the judge for the reason of abstaining from testifying.
Do Not Hesitate to Testify Against Him Or His Relatives

Even if the witness testifies, CMK 45. he may hesitate to answer questions that may lead to criminal prosecution of relatives specified in the article.
The purpose of the article is to prevent the witness from lying to protect himself or his relatives from criminal prosecution.
When asking a witness a question, it should be reminded that he has the right to hesitate to answer questions that will lead to the opening of a criminal prosecution against his relatives.

You can read our articles and petition examples by clicking here.

What Does a Witness Mean – Is It Mandatory to Testify Guardianship and Appointment of Guardians

Related Posts

Uncategorized @tr

Anayasa Mahkemesi 4 sözleşmeli personel alacak

Anayasa Mahkemesi Başkanlığı (Başkanlık) merkez teşkilatında istihdam edilmek üzere, yapılacak sözlü sınav esas alınmak suretiyle, Destek Personeli (Temizlik Görevlisi) pozisyonu için toplam 4 (dört) sözleşmeli personel alınacak. Anayasa Mahkemesi Başkanlığından: 4 (DÖRT) SÖZLEŞMELİ PERSONEL ALIMI HAKKINDA DUYURU Anayasa Mahkemesi Başkanlığı (Başkanlık) merkez teşkilatında 657 sayılı Devlet Memurları Kanunu’nun 4 üncü maddesinin (B) fıkrasına göre istihdam […]

Uncategorized @tr

TBB BAŞKANI SAĞKAN 5 NİSAN AVUKATLAR GÜNÜNDE KONUŞMA YAPTI

Avukatlar, Türkiye Barolar Birliği’nin öncülüğünde 5 Nisan Avukatlar Günü’nde Ankara’da ‘Savunmanın Bağımsızlığı ve Hukuka Saygı’ yürüyüşü yaptı. Barolar adına konuşma yapan Türkiye Barolar Birliği Başkanı Av. R. Erinç Sağkan, “Biz bugün hukuk devletini savunmak için, yargı bağımsızlığını savunmak için buradayız. Bu ses susturulamaz” dedi. “İSTANBUL BAROSU, HUKUKA AYKIRI YARGI KARARLARIYLA GÖREVİNDEN UZAKLAŞTIRILMAK İSTENİYOR” Anıtpark’ta bir […]

Uncategorized @tr

Determination and Recommendations regarding the Main Procedural Problems in Terms of Earthquake-Related Civil Cases

“It is Not Possible to Get Rid of the Responsibility of Those Responsible by Obscuring the Evidence of the Earthquake, On the Contrary, Their Responsibilities Increase” Prof. Dr. Muhammet Özekes (12.02.2023) If the CCP and procedural rules can be applied consciously, correctly and quickly, the judiciary can get out of this earthquake without being in […]

Uncategorized @tr

The Decision of the Council of State that the Consumer Bank Cannot Receive Account Operating Fees

COUNCIL OF STATE 15. apartment Basis: 2014/9570 Verdict: 2018/1194 Plaintiff : Consumer Problems Association Acting Director : Av… Respondent : Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency Acting Director : Av… Summary of the Case: Article 10 of the Regulation on the Procedures and Principles regarding Fees to be Collected from Financial Consumers, which entered into force […]

Uncategorized @tr

Negative Detection Case Based on the Guarantee Bond Claim, Exchange Monitoring Supreme Court Decision

T.C. SUPREME 19. law office MAIN NUMBER: 2016/3357 DECISION NO: 2016/13899 DECISION DATE: 24.10.2016 >> FOREIGN EXCHANGE MONITORING, NEGATIVE DETECTION CASE BASED ON THE CLAIM THAT THE BILL IS A SECURITY BILL, BURDEN OF PROOF AND STATE OF EVIDENCE 6100/m.222/5 6102/m.64 SUMMARY: The case is related to the request for negative determination. The plaintiff has […]

Back To Top
manavgat avukat

İletişim:

+905425139898

+902425139898

info@antalya.law

Adres

Hacet Mahallesi, Canlılar Sokak,
Avukatlar İş Merkezi, No: 7, Daire: 2-3
Alanya / Antalya

Copyright © 2020 Aşıkoğlu Hukuk ™ Aşıkoğlu Uluslararası Hukuk Bürosu, Her Hakkı Saklıdır

WhatsApp us