1. General Legal Framework and Definition of the Crime 

Within the scope of Law No. 7258 on the Regulation of Betting and Games of Chance in Football and Other Sports Competitions, it has been regulated as a crime to illegally operate fixed-odds and mutual betting or games of chance based on sports competitions, or to provide a place or opportunity for them to be played. According to Supreme Court decisions, for this crime to occur, the perpetrator must provide others with the opportunity to bet, and merely accessing foreign-linked betting sites is not considered sufficient for the crime to be constituted (Supreme Court 19th Criminal Chamber, 2016/4701 E., 2017/2142 K.). The material element of the crime is defined as operating betting games based on sports competitions or providing a place/opportunity for them; especially providing the opportunity for foreign-sourced bets to be played from Turkey via the internet has been considered an aggravated circumstance (Supreme Court 7th Criminal Chamber, 2021/15525 E., 2021/10533 K.).

2. Responsibility of Venue and Service Providers 

Illegal betting crimes based on sports competitions can be committed in physical environments, as well as telephone, computer, or through location providers in an internet environment. At this point, the criminal liability of service providers is tied to the elements of “intent to commit a crime” and “participation in the concrete crime”. In cases where the service provider does not have the intent to commit a crime and does not participate in the concrete crime, it is not possible to subject them to criminal liability merely due to their service provider activity. However, operating betting over the internet based on the authority granted by law does not constitute a crime.

3. Conditions of Proof and the Importance of Expert Examination 

The precedents of the Court of Cassation mandate technical examination for the substantiation of the crime of facilitating online betting. In this context:

Access Frequency and Nature: An expert examination must be conducted on computer hard drives and digital materials to determine; the frequency of access to betting sites, access dates, whether coupons were created, and the balance status (Court of Cassation 19th Penal Chamber, 2019/30876 E., 2019/11115 K.).

Determination of Foreign Origin: For the defendant’s actions to be evaluated under Article 5/1-b of Law No. 7258 (foreign-sourced betting), it must be unequivocally determined that the accessed sites are of foreign origin (Court of Cassation 7th Penal Chamber, 2022/6829 E., 2022/14266 K.)K.

Distinction of Individual Use: It must be established through technical data whether the defendant only placed bets on their own behalf or acted as an intermediary for others (distinction between individual user vs. illegal betting operator) (Court of Cassation 19th Penal Chamber, 2016/4701 E.). Simply accessing legal sites or having an insufficient number of accesses is not considered sufficient evidence for conviction (Court of Cassation 19th Penal Chamber, 2019/768 E., 2019/5165 K.).

4. Participation and Intermediary Activities 

Regarding participation in a crime, there must be conclusive and convincing evidence, beyond all reasonable doubt, that workplace employees or individuals acting as service providers concretely participated in the crime. It has been emphasized that an acquittal decision should be rendered for employees for whom there is no concrete evidence of participation (Court of Cassation 19th Penal Chamber, 2020/4079 E., 2021/3378 K.). On the other hand, intense money transfers made through bank accounts and the transfer of these funds to legal betting sites can be deemed contrary to the ordinary course of life and evaluated within the scope of the crime of “facilitation” (Court of Cassation 8th Penal Chamber, 2021/18703 E., 2023/7850 K.).

5. Secondary Sources and Administrative Sanctions

 The following points have been determined within the framework of secondary information sources and administrative court decisions:

Administrative Sanctions: According to Council of State decisions, if it is established by an expert report or law enforcement determination that illegal betting is being conducted online at a workplace, administrative sanctions such as the closure of the workplace and cancellation of the license can be applied in accordance with Law No. 7258 (Council of State 10th Chamber, 2023/6062 E.; Council of State 2nd Chamber, 2021/4720 E.). However, it has been stated that in lawsuits filed against such closure procedures, the competent judicial authority is the ordinary judiciary (Criminal Judgeship of Peace) (Council of State 10th Chamber, 2023/6142 E.).

Media and Broadcast Responsibility: In RTÜK decisions, it is accepted that the advertising of illegal betting sites using virtual advertising techniques during sports competition broadcasts encourages viewers to illegal betting and incites gambling. In this context, media service provider organizations are subject to administrative fines and program suspension sanctions due to their obligation to intervene in the broadcast (RTÜK, decision no. 27 dated 09.08.2023; decision no. 28 dated 27.11.2024).

Institutional Damage and Participation: There are differing views in judicial decisions regarding whether the Sports Toto Organization Presidency (STTB) directly suffers damage from these crimes; while some decisions state that STTB does not have the authority to participate in the case and appeal, dissenting opinions argue that STTB, as the sole supervisory body, is harmed by the crime (Court of Cassation 19th Criminal Chamber, 2015/6432 E.).

Conclusion: Judicial decisions require the complete determination of technical evidence (IP addresses, access density, site origin) by an expert in crimes related to online betting and providing means for it. Responsibility for service providers is only possible with proof of criminal intent and participation; activities based on legal authority are excluded from the scope of the crime.

WHY IS EXPERT LEGAL SUPPORT NECESSARY?

Illegal betting investigations conducted under Law No. 7258 are not ordinary criminal cases. These cases;

Are based on digital evidence

Require technical expert examination

Include areas requiring expertise such as IP, log, bank transactions, and site infrastructure

An incorrect or incomplete defense strategy can lead to being treated as a “betting operator” while an individual user, and being penalized as an “offender” while a service provider.

For this reason, especially in illegal betting investigations conducted in Istanbul, Tuzla, and the Anatolian Side;

Proficient in digital evidence analysis

Closely following the precedents of the Court of Cassation and BAM (Regional Courts of Justice)

Able to effectively object to expert reports

working with an expert criminal lawyer is of vital importance.

Legal Support in Illegal Betting Cases in Istanbul – Tuzla – Anatolian Side

In illegal betting cases heard primarily at the Istanbul Anatolian Courthouse, and in Tuzla, Kartal, Pendik, Maltepe and surrounding districts, establishing the defense correctly from the initial stage directly affects the outcome.

In this field, 2M Law Office, which has extensive experience in criminal law and digital evidence-based cases, provides services related to illegal betting crimes concerning:

Defense at the investigation stage

Objections to expert reports

Appeals to regional courts of justice and the Court of Cassation

Legal processes against administrative sanctions (workplace closure, license cancellation)

provides effective and result-oriented legal support on these matters.