Adana Cybercrime Lawyer

Which Files We Take On as an Adana Cybercrime Lawyer

An Adana cybercrime lawyer is a lawyer who defends the suspect and the defendant, and conducts the victim's complaint and the preservation of evidence, in files concerning entering an information system (TCK Art. 243), hindering a system and corrupting data (TCK Art. 244) and the misuse of bank or credit cards (TCK Art. 245). In these files, the outcome is often determined by how the digital evidence was obtained and to whom it belongs.

On this page we explain how cybercrimes are set out in the law, which type of offence account takeover files fall under, the procedure for search and seizure on computers and telephones, and the course to be followed by the victim. For fraud files that lead to a loss of money through banks and the internet, we recommend that you refer to our Adana fraud lawyer page, and for the general framework, to our Adana criminal lawyer page.

What Are Cybercrimes and What Are the Penalties

The Turkish Penal Code regulates offences in the field of information technology in Art. 243 et seq. The three articles we encounter most often in practice and their penalties are as follows:

Where the data in the system are destroyed or altered as a result of the act of entering, the law sets the penalty at imprisonment from six months to two years (Art. 243/3). Where the acts of hindering and disrupting are committed against the system of a bank, a credit institution or a public institution, the penalty is increased by one half (Art. 244/3).

Situations Frequently Encountered in Files Concerning Entering an Information System

Entering an email, social media or cloud account with another person's password, opening another person's session on a shared computer and unauthorised access to a system at the workplace are investigated under this article. The first question an Adana lawyer for entering an information system will ask in the defence is whether the entry was unlawful, that is, whether there was the consent of the account holder or an authorisation. Secondly, it should be examined whether it has been technically established from whose device and through which connection the entry was made. The question most frequently put to Adana lawyers for entering an information system, on the other hand, is whether looking at a spouse's or a colleague's account left open on a shared device constitutes an offence; the answer is determined by the element of unlawfulness required by the law, that is, consent and authorisation.

Account Takeover and Corrupting Data (TCK 244)

The act of a person who, not content with entering the account, changes the password and prevents the real owner's access may, as seen in the Court of Cassation decision below, be assessed as altering data and rendering it inaccessible; whether the act falls under Art. 243 or Art. 244 directly changes the penalty. In terms of the limitation period for prosecution, there is no difference between Art. 243/1 and Art. 244/2: since the upper limit of the penalty for neither offence exceeds five years, the period is eight years for both, and TCK Art. 66/1-e sets this period as "Beş yıldan fazla olmamak üzere hapis veya adli para cezasını gerektiren suçlarda sekiz yıl" ("eight years for offences requiring imprisonment not exceeding five years or a judicial fine", unofficial translation). Where obtaining an unjust benefit through these acts does not constitute another offence, the penalty is imprisonment from two to six years and a judicial fine of up to five thousand days (Art. 244/4); since the upper limit is six years, in this case the limitation period for prosecution rises to fifteen years (TCK Art. 66/1-d: "Beş yıldan fazla ve yirmi yıldan az hapis cezasını gerektiren suçlarda onbeş yıl" ("fifteen years for offences requiring imprisonment of more than five years and less than twenty years", unofficial translation)).

Court of Cassation Decision on Account Takeover

In its decision dated 20.04.2026, E. 2021/32808, K. 2026/4219, the 11th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation characterised the allegation of preventing the victims from accessing their accounts by cracking their email passwords not as entering an information system (TCK Art. 243) but as the offence of hindering or disrupting a system, destroying or altering data (TCK Art. 244/2); since the extraordinary limitation period for prosecution of twelve years, calculated on the basis of this characterisation, had expired, taking into account also the period during which it was suspended because of the deferral of the announcement of the verdict (hükmün açıklanmasının geri bırakılması, HAGB), the Chamber reversed the judgment and decided that the case be discontinued:

Misuse of Bank and Credit Cards (TCK 245)

Obtaining possession of a card belonging to another person and using it, or having it used, without that person's consent requires imprisonment from three to six years (Art. 245/1). Producing, selling or accepting a counterfeit card is punishable by imprisonment from three to seven years (Art. 245/2), and obtaining a benefit by using a counterfeit card by imprisonment from four to eight years (Art. 245/3). Where the card is used to the detriment of a spouse in respect of whom no decision of separation has been given, an ascendant, a descendant, relatives by marriage in the same degree, an adoptive parent, an adopted child or a sibling living in the same dwelling, no penalty is imposed on the relative concerned (Art. 245/4); for the acts in the first paragraph, the provisions on effective repentance (etkin pişmanlık, a statutory reduction of or exemption from penalty for an offender who remedies the harm or assists in revealing the offence) relating to offences against property apply (Art. 245/5).

Search, Seizure and Digital Evidence on Computers and Telephones

In cybercrime files, the lawfulness of the evidence is one of the strongest grounds of the defence. The law makes a search of the suspect's computer and the taking of copies conditional on strong suspicion based on concrete evidence and on the absence of any other means of obtaining evidence, and, as a rule, leaves the decision to the judge (CMK Art. 134/1).

• In cases where delay would be prejudicial, the decision given by the public prosecutor is submitted to the judge for approval within twenty-four hours; if approval is not given, the copies taken are destroyed immediately (Art. 134/1).
• During the seizure, a backup of all the data in the system is taken (Art. 134/3).
• A copy of this backup is given to the suspect or their counsel, and this is recorded in an official record (Art. 134/4).

The question that persons facing a charge of corrupting data should ask at their first meeting with Adana lawyers for corrupting data is on which copy the examination report was prepared. On the first day we take over the file, we check whether the image copy was provided, whether the verification (hash) values were entered in the official record and on which copy the examination report was prepared.

Complaints in Cybercrime: Steps for the Victim

1. Keep screenshots, email header information, login alerts and account activity with their dates and times; do not reset the device.
2. Start the service provider's account recovery process and obtain records of your written applications.
3. File a complaint with the Chief Public Prosecutor's Office or with law enforcement; attach your account details and the digital records in your possession to the complaint petition.
4. If a case is filed, you may join the public prosecution at every phase of the prosecution stage before the court of first instance, until judgment is rendered, by declaring that you are a complainant (CMK Art. 237/1).

What victims first expect from Adana cybercrime lawyers is often the recovery of the account; the quickest way to achieve this is to conduct the service provider's account recovery process together with the criminal investigation. Posts containing insults and threats made through social media are assessed as a separate type of offence and fall outside the scope of this page.

Adana Cybercrime Lawyers and How Our Office Works

As the office of Av. Yakup Buğrahan SEVDİ and YBS Hukuk, we conduct the defence of suspects and defendants and represent victims in cybercrime files in Adana. When choosing among Adana account takeover lawyers, we recommend that you bring screen recordings, login alerts and the documents you have received through service of process to the first meeting; who entered the account, when and from which device can often be understood from these records. We also recommend that you check that your lawyer is registered on the roll of a bar association by searching the bar association's roll.

If money has been transferred from the account that was taken over, an allegation of aggravated fraud may also enter the file; in the decision mentioned above, a separate judgment had also been rendered in respect of the defendant for fraud committed by using information systems as a tool (TCK Art. 158/1-f). For these allegations we have prepared our Adana fraud lawyer page, and for the court and procedure our Adana high criminal court lawyer page. For other criminal files, we have our drug offences, firearms, wounding offences and intentional homicide pages. For pre-trial detention, we recommend that you refer to our article conditions for pre-trial detention; for the deferral of the announcement of the verdict (HAGB), to our article conditions for HAGB; for general questions, to our criminal law frequently asked questions page; and for a meeting, to our contact details page.