COURT OF APPEALS 18th Criminal Chamber
2015/9759 E.
2015/13708 K.
OFFENSE: Insult
VERDICT: No penalty
The case was reviewed after the Local Court’s verdict was appealed. The case was REJECTED based on the application period, the nature of the decision, and the date of the offense. The case was then reviewed, and the applicant’s request for a hearing was REJECTED pursuant to Article 318 of Code of Criminal Procedure No. 1412.
Since there were no grounds for rejecting the appeal, the merits of the case were considered.
A review of the minutes, documents, and justifications reflecting the hearing process where the conscientious objection arose revealed no other grounds.
However; Although it was determined that the defendant had a prior partnership with the respondent and that the insult was due to existing legal proceedings and debts against him, and that no penalty was warranted due to the act being committed in response to the tort, the defendant’s defense that he withdrew the messages in question because of a debt he had paid to the respondent in 1985 but claimed he had not received back, considering the long period of time that had elapsed, and without considering the conditions of the principle of reciprocity, it was decided that no penalty was warranted due to insufficient justification.
Contrary to the law and the respondent’s attorney’s grounds for appeal were found to be valid, the verdict was REVERSED, contrary to the request in the notification. The case was sent to the trial court for further proceedings, starting from the pre-circumcision stage, and for the case to be concluded. It was unanimously decided on December 17, 2015.