Search and seizure in investigations of criminality regulated by the Anti Smuggling Law

Search and seizure measures are detailed under the Code of Criminal Procedure No. 5271. Although not explicitly defined under the Anti-Smuggling Law No. 5607, references are made to the Code of Criminal Procedure. The aim of this study is to evaluate the procedural provisions related to search and seizure operations in investigations of smuggling offenses regulated by the Anti-Smuggling Law, by examining the legal definitions, scopes, and their practical applications to contribute to the solution of problems. The procedural provisions related to search and seizure operations, which restrict fundamental rights and freedoms, are generally explained in the first part of the study. The differences between judicial search and preventive search are discussed, and the general conditions of the judicial search are mentioned. Special provisions related to the place or persons associated with the search operation have been addressed. The legal, criminal, and compensatory consequences of search and seizure operations being conducted unlawfully are explained along with judicial precedents. The search operation according to the Anti-Smuggling Law constitutes the second part of the study. Since smuggling comes into question when goods are attempted to be brought into the country without going through customs procedures, it has been stated that there is no need for a judicial search decision while searching at customs gates and halls. The considerations to be taken into account depending on the location of the search have been explained. During the investigation, the search and seizure operations applied are aimed to be lawful by associating the subject with the Supreme Court precedents. In the final part of the study, the seizure process according to the Anti-Smuggling Law is generally described, and the concept of detention that emerges is detailed. Provisions related to the seizure of vehicles, which are of great importance during the commission of smuggling offenses, and the situations of seizure in the mail that interfere with communication and privacy are addressed. It has been mentioned that the seizure operation involving third parties who did not commit the crime should be evaluated according to concrete cases together with judicial decisions.