The crime of publicly disseminating misleading information in terms of freedom of expression

The study aims to evaluate the crime of "Publicly Disseminating Misleading Information" regulated under article 217/A of the PCT from the perspective of freedom of expression. For this purpose, the first part of the study examines the crime in terms of criminal law. This review is examined under the headings of the creation of the article of the law concepts, protected legal value, elements of the crime, difference from similar crimes, attempt, participation and association, sanction and prosecution procedure, and the principle of ultima ratio in terms of limitation of punishment. In the second part of the study, the crime was evaluated in terms of freedom of expression. First of all, freedom of expression in general and in the European Convention on Human Rights, limitation of freedom of expression, the relationship between public dissemination of misleading information and freedom of expression, and public dissemination of misleading information in Turkish law are discussed. Then, regulations and practices in some other countries and institutions, including Europe, the United States of Europe, Asia, African countries, the European Union and NATO, which can be examined comparatively with the crime subject to our study, are included. Finally, the crime is examined in judicial decisions. In the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, sample judgments regarding the acts constituting the offense subject to our study were examined and publicly disseminating misleading information was expressed in the decisions of the Turkish Courts. The annulment application for Article 217/A of the PCT and the perspective of the Constitutional Court are examined, followed by the decision of the Court of Cassation regarding the crime that is the subject of our study. At the end of our study, the necessity of the crime, the principles of criminal law regarding the crime and the criticisms in terms of freedom of expression, the suggestions that can be realized for the intended goal of the crime, the suggestions to avoid the violation of freedom of expression, the similarities and differences in terms of comparative law are expressed. The annulment request regarding Article 217/A of the PCT and the perspective of the Constitutional Court are examined, and then the decision of the Court of Cassation regarding the crime subject to our study is discussed.