Self-Defence and Domestic Violence: An Analysis of Turkish Criminal Law Practice

Abstract

How to assess the criminal liability of the abused woman who kills her abuser while in his sleep or in a state of unconsciousness has become a salient topic of debate in recent years. Although there is a tendency to consider these acts within the context of self-defence with the impact of “the battered woman syndrome” theory and the movement to battle against domestic violence, the debate still persists. Despite some opinions that such acts should be considered self-defence in the Turkish doctrine, the Turkish Courts, for the most part, tend to evaluate them as provocation. According to the Turkish Penal Code, only acts that are a response to occurring attacks or those that are certain to ensue are considered “self-defence.” Domestic violence is not accepted as itself as an attack if it does not meet these conditions. In this study, we will examine how such cases are treated in Turkish law practice in light of three decisions of The Court of Cassation. Prior to the explanations about self-defence and domestic violence, we will provide an overview of how this practice should be interpreted in the context of domestic violence according to the Turkish penal doctrine (I). It is argued that the conditions of self-defence are gender-neutral provisions, indicating they do not take into consideration “the battered woman syndrome” or female victims of domestic violence. This study will also focus on the conditions of self-defence in the Turkish Penal Code and will analyse it in the context of domestic violence (II). Keywords: Violence against women; domestic violence; battered woman syndrome; self-defence; provocation.