What is the IBAN Amnesty (IBAN Victims Regulation)? New Regulation Under TCK Article 158 and Its Legal Consequences (2026)

Section 1

---

Introduction

In recent years, with the proliferation of digital banking applications in Turkey, the methods of committing fraud offenses have also changed significantly. In particular, the fact that internet banking, mobile applications, and electronic money transfer systems have become an indispensable part of daily life has caused criminal organizations to develop new methods using these technologies.

During this process, one of the most debated topics has been the use of third-party bank accounts as instruments in crimes.

Fraud organizations do not want the money obtained from victims to be sent directly to their own accounts; instead, they create a money transfer chain using bank accounts belonging to different individuals. Thus, it is aimed both to conceal the source of the crime revenue and to direct the investigation toward different individuals.

However, there is a significant problem that arises in practice.

While some individuals act as active members of the fraud organization, others may be prosecuted within the scope of the same investigation merely because they made their bank account or IBAN information available for use by others.

This is what is popularly known as “IBAN amnesty”, “IBAN victims regulation” or “TCK 158 amnesty” discussions surrounding the new regulation, known as such, have emerged precisely at this point.

---

Why Did the IBAN Victims Regulation Become Agenda?

Particularly over the last three years, a striking common pattern has emerged in qualified fraud investigations conducted by Chief Public Prosecutor's Offices.

Individuals planning the crime of fraud often;

• did not use their own bank accounts,
• obtained IBAN numbers belonging to third parties,
• rented out bank cards,
• and utilized individuals who allowed their accounts to be used in exchange for a commission.

As the investigations progressed, not only the organizers of the fraud scheme, but also the account holders began to be included in the case files with the status of suspects.

In particular;

• students,
• unemployed individuals,
• persons experiencing financial hardship,
• citizens who believe in “rent your account” advertisements on social media,

concerning Numerous criminal cases have been filed under TCK 158 for qualified fraud charges.

In practice, in some case files, the fact that the person who merely allowed their bank account to be used and the person who managed the fraud organization faced the same sanction has drawn criticism, and following these debates, new regulations have been brought to the agenda.

---

Why is it Publicly Referred to as the “IBAN Amnesty”?

Google’da en fazla aratılan ifadelerden biri “IBAN affı çıktı mı?” is the question.

The primary reason for this is that the regulation in social media posts is often promoted as an “amnesty”.

However, from a legal perspective amnesty with sentence reduction are not the same concept.

General amnesty or conditional pardon;

• of the offense,
• of the conviction,
• of the sentence,

results in the complete or partial elimination thereof.

Conversely, the regulation discussed in public opinion is a special regulation aimed at changing the manner in which sentences are evaluated for individuals who meet certain conditions. Therefore, the phrase “IBAN amnesty” should be considered a commonly established search term in society rather than a legal concept.

---

What is TCK Article 158?

Article 158 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK), the crime of aggravated fraud regulates.

While the basic form of the crime of fraud is set forth in Article 157 of the TCK, heavier sanctions are imposed if the crime is committed through certain methods or by using specific instruments.

For example;

• the use of information systems,
• the use of banks or credit institutions as tools,
• the use of public institutions as tools,
• the abuse of the status of merchant or corporate executive,
• the abuse of trust derived from being a self-employed professional,

the offense becomes qualified in such circumstances.

In recent years, a significant portion of the opened case files consists specifically of TCK 158/1-f fraud offenses evaluated within the scope of information systems and bank accounts being used as tools.

---

Is Letting Someone Use Your Bank Account Always a Crime?

No.

This is one of the most misunderstood topics in society.

The fact that a bank account has been used in a crime does not mean that the account holder is guilty in every case.

In criminal law, the occurrence of the result alone is not sufficient for liability to arise.

The court must also;

• evaluate in detail the person's intent,
• whether they were aware of the crime,
• their role within the organization,
• whether they derived benefit from the proceeds of crime,
• the nature of their contribution to the commission of the crime,

in detail.

Therefore, it cannot be said that every account holder is in the same legal position.

---

What Does the New Regulation Aim For?

According to the draft text reflected in the public sphere, the aim is to ensure a fairer distinction between the principal perpetrators of the fraud organization and individuals who merely allowed their bank accounts to be used.

The draft provides for a different sentencing regime regarding contributions limited solely to the sharing of account information or tools enabling the use of the account. However, this regulation does not imply impunity for criminal organization leaders or individuals who personally organize the fraud.

---

Most Common Misconception: “Everyone Will Be Released”

A great deal of misinformation is circulating on social media regarding this matter.

For example;

• “Article 158 of the TCK has been completely abolished.”
• “Everyone who allowed their IBAN to be used will be set free.”
• “All final and binding case files will be dismissed.”
• “Everyone in prison will be released.”

None of these claims are legally accurate at the current stage.

First, the legislative process of the bill must be completed. Thereafter, each case file must be evaluated individually within the framework of the scope of the regulation, enforcement provisions, and the principle of retroactivity of the more favorable law (lex mitior).

Who Will Benefit from the IBAN Victims Regulation and Who Will Not? Detailed Analysis of the Regulation Proposed to Be Added to TCK Article 158

Important Legal Note: This section is based on the draft bill text adopted by the Justice Commission of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM). As of the date this article was prepared, this regulation is not yet a law enacted by the General Assembly of the TBMM and published in the Official Gazette. Therefore, the following evaluations are made based on the draft text.

---

The Biggest Misconception Among the Public

“An amnesty for IBAN cases has been enacted.”

“No one who allows their account to be used by others will face criminal penalties anymore.”

“An amnesty under Article 158 of the TCK has been introduced.”

These are the most common comments encountered on social media platforms and various news sites in recent days. However, these statements are legally inaccurate.

Upon examining the proposed regulation, the legislature's intent is not to mitigate the offense of aggravated fraud nor to grant a blanket amnesty to everyone who commits a crime.

The objective is, among participating parties, a fairer sentencing system based on the degree of culpability to establish.

One of the fundamental principles of criminal law, the principle of culpability, requires everyone to be held accountable in proportion to their contribution to the offense. Subjecting the person who drafts the fraud scheme, deceives the victims, and obtains the primary gain from the crime to the exact same sentencing regime as the person who merely allows their bank account to be used may not always yield equitable results.

Thus, the proposed regulation aims to make this distinction more pronounced.

---

What Exactly Does the Proposed Regulation Change?

TBMM According to the motion adopted in the Committee on Justice, adding a new paragraph to Article 158 of the TCK it is envisaged.

Pursuant to this regulation;

if a person's contribution to the crime of fraud or qualified fraud is limited to;

• letting their bank account be used,
• providing their bank card,
• allowing their payment instrument to be used,
• sharing mandatory information that enables the use of the account,

if limited to, a reduction of up to half in the sentence to be imposed may be made.

Although this provision may seem simple at first glance, it has the potential to lead to significant legal disputes in practice.

---

Is Providing a Bank Account Sufficient to Benefit from the Regulation?

No.

In our opinion, this is the most crucial point of the proposed text.

The mere fact that an individual has allowed their bank account to be used does not automatically mean that a sentence reduction will be applied.

The court will primarily seek answers to the following questions:

• Did the individual know about the fraud scheme?
• Did they obtain any financial benefit from the crime?
• Were they a permanent member of the criminal organization?
• Did they manage the money transfers?
• Did they communicate with the victims?
• Did they organize the fraudulent activity?

The answers to these questions will directly affect the individual's legal status.

---

Who Can Benefit from the Regulation?

Considering the purpose of the draft text, the following groups may be evaluated according to the specific circumstances of the case.

1. Those Whose Contribution is Limited Solely to Providing Bank Accounts

This is the most typical example.

For instance, the individual may have:

• shared their bank account,
• handed over their bank card,
• provided their internet banking password,

yet assumed no other role in the fraudulent activity aside from these.

The proposal primarily targets these individuals.

---

2. Individuals Who Do Not Manage the Criminal Organization

For individuals who did not prepare the fraud scheme,

did not meet with the victims,

did not organize the money flow,

and provided only a limited contribution, the application of the proposed provision may be considered.

However, it must be borne in mind that this is not an automatic outcome.

---

3. Those Who Do Not Derive Principal Benefit from the Crime

One of the key criteria to be evaluated by the courts is economic gain.

For example;

• an individual who merely receives a small commission

with

• and an individual who organizes a multimillion-lira fraud

are not in the same legal standing.

Therefore, the economic benefit derived by the individual from the crime is of importance.

---

Who May Not Benefit?

Upon examining the draft text, it is evident that it is quite difficult for certain individuals to fall within the scope of this regulation.

For example;

Organizers of the Fraud Scheme

Those who prepare the plan,

allocate duties,

organize the accounts,

and direct the victims are not expected to be granted the proposed reduction.

---

Individuals Who Deceive Victims

Those who make phone calls,

act as fake investment consultants,

or misrepresent themselves as public officials,

Persons who manage websites may also be evaluated among the principal perpetrators of the crime.

---

Account Collectors / Intermediaries

In practice, some individuals do not only use their own accounts;

• dozens of bank accounts,
• cards belonging to different individuals,
• IBAN information,

by collecting them, deliver them to the organization.

The contribution of these individuals may no longer be evaluated merely as "allowing the use of one's account".

---

What Does "Whose Contribution Remains Limited to This" Mean?

This is one of the most critical phrases in the draft text.

Because the sentence reduction;

persons whose contribution is limited solely to providing the account or account information

is stipulated for.

This statement can determine the fate of many lawsuits in practice.

For example;

If a person has both provided their account details,

met with the victims,

withdrawn the funds,

and distributed the commission,

it can no longer be said that their contribution was limited solely to providing account details.

---

Which Evidence Will the Courts Examine?

When determining whether this regulation will apply, the courts will not solely look at the bank account.

The following evidence will be evaluated together:

• MASAK reports,
• Bank account transactions,
• ATM camera records,
• HTS records,
• Cell tower records,
• Phone examination reports,
• WhatsApp correspondence,
• Telegram records,
• Signal communications,
• IP logs,
• Digital materials,
• Witness statements.

Therefore, each case file must be evaluated within its own evidentiary structure.

---

What Will Happen to Pending Cases If the Proposal Is Accepted?

This question is one of the most frequently wondered issues in practice.

If the bill becomes law;

• files at the investigation stage,
• cases before the court of first instance,
• files under appellate review,
• files at the appeal stage before the Court of Cassation,
• finalized judgments,

will be separately evaluated in terms of their application method, enforcement provisions, and the principle of the retroactive application of the more favorable law (lex mitior) framework.

However, this automatic release, automatic acquittal or automatic sentence reduction it must be underlined that this does not mean. The draft text also provides for certain execution-stage files and special transitional provisions regarding effective repentance.

---

Why File Evaluation with a TCK Article 158 Lawyer Is Important?

Even if the draft text enters into force, it cannot be said that every file will be evaluated within this scope.

Because what matters in criminal law is;

• not the name of the crime,
• but the actual role of the person.

Completely different outcomes may arise for two individuals prosecuted under the same provision of the law.

Therefore, especially in charges of qualified fraud;

• the indictment,
• the MASAK report,
• digital evidence,
• bank records,
• of the affiliate relationship,

needs to be analyzed in detail. Therefore, TCK 158 lawyerwith İletişimyou can contact.

How Will the IBAN Victims Regulation Affect Practice? Favorable Law, Aiding and Abetting Provisions, and Potential Consequences in Practice

Note: This section has been prepared based on the draft text adopted by the Justice Commission of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM) during the drafting of this article. Changes may be made to the text until the legislative process of the regulation is completed. Therefore, each specific case must be evaluated separately in accordance with the legislation in force.

---

Does the New Regulation Introduce a Radical Change in TCK 158?

When public news reports are examined, it is seen that many people interpret the new regulation as the complete overhaul of the crime of qualified fraud .

However, a careful examination of the draft text reveals that this is not the case.

The bill;

• does not abolish the crime of qualified fraud,
• does not generally alter penalty amounts,
• does not redefine the elements of the crime.

The proposed regulation, merely provides for a sentence reduction with respect to a specific form of complicity.

Therefore, the fundamental structure of TCK Article 158 is preserved.

---

The Core Basis of the Regulation is the Law of Complicity

In criminal law, a crime is not always committed by a single person.

In certain cases;

• the person who planned the crime,
• the person who deceived the victim,
• the person who received the money,
• the person who provided the bank account,
• the person who transferred the crime proceeds to other accounts,

may assume different roles within the same incident.

The Turkish Penal Code (TCK) regulates this situation under the provisions on complicity and participation.

However, in practice, the scope of liability for individuals who allow their bank accounts to be used has long been a subject of debate.

The new proposal aims precisely to resolve this controversy.

---

“Their Contribution Remains Limited to This” Why is the Expression So Crucial?

In our opinion, this is the most critical expression in the draft text.

Because the legislature;

with respect to contributions limited solely to providing information or tools regarding account usage,

provides for a discretionary reduction in the sentence.

So, what does this mean in practice?

In fact, the court will seek an answer to the following question:

Did this person truly only let their account be used, or were they an active part of the fraud organization?

This is precisely the point that will determine the fate of the case file.

---

Which Criteria Will the Courts Take into Account?

As in every criminal case, the court will not rely solely on a single piece of evidence here either.

In practice, the following matters will be of particular importance:

1. Fund Traffic

From the bank account;

• the number of transactions,
• the amount of money,
• the frequency of transfers,
• whether continuous transactions are conducted with the same individuals,

will be examined in detail.

---

2. MASAK Analyses

MASAK reports, in particular;

• the movement of criminal proceeds,
• the money transfer chain,
• the connections between accounts,

as demonstrated in its jurisprudence.

Therefore, they rank among the most critical technical evidence in many cases.

---

3. Digital Evidence

Courts no longer rely solely on bank records.

Furthermore;

• WhatsApp,
• Telegram,
• Signal,
• SMS records,
• e-mail correspondence,
• and forensic phone examination reports

are also evaluated.

For example;

correspondence regarding the use of the account,

commission negotiations,

discussions concerning the distribution of funds,

can reveal the individual's actual role within the organization.

---

4th Civil Court of First Instance ATM Camera Records

In some case files, the funds are;

withdrawn by the account holder personally,

while in others, they are withdrawn by third parties.

Therefore, ATM footage constitutes significant evidence.

---

How Can the Principle of Retrospective Application of the Favorable Law Be Applied in This Regulation?

One of the fundamental principles in criminal law is the application of the more favorable law.

Accordingly:

if a regulation enacted after the date of the offense produces favorable outcomes for the perpetrator, it may be applied to past events under certain conditions.

However, there is an important distinction here.

In order for the new regulation to be applied;

it must first be determined whether the individual actually falls within the group covered by the offer.

Therefore;

every TCK 158 case,

every conviction,

every investigation,

will not automatically fall within the scope of this regulation.

---

What Will Happen to Finalized Convictions?

One of the most frequently searched questions on the internet is:

“My sentence has been finalized. Does the new regulation affect me?”

It is not possible to answer this question with a single sentence.

Because;

• the grounds of the judgment,
• the form of participation,
• the material facts accepted by the court,
• the individual's role in the crime,

must be examined separately.

While the new regulation may produce favorable outcomes in some cases,

it may not cause any changes in others.

---

Implications for Ongoing Proceedings

The same assessment shall also apply to cases that are currently;

• at the investigation stage,
• pending before the Criminal Court of First Instance or the Assize Court,
• under appellate review before the regional court of appeal,
• at the supreme court appeal stage,

files.

Court;

the currently enforced law,

transitional provisions,

the principle of retroactivity of the more favorable law,

shall evaluate them together.

---

Case Study 1

Ali allowed his bank account to be used at the request of an individual he met on social media.

The funds transferred to his account were forwarded to another account on the same day.

Ali states that he only received a commission of 3,000 TRY.

Court;

Ali's;

• whether he communicated with the victims,
• whether he had knowledge of the fraud scheme,
• whether he procured other accounts,

will be investigated.

If his contribution is indeed limited solely to letting his account be used, the regulation stipulated in the proposal may be debated.

---

Case Study 2

Mehmet;

• has gathered 28 different bank accounts,
• has organized these accounts,
• has managed money transfers,
• and has distributed commissions.

In this case, Mehmet’s contribution can no longer be considered merely as allowing the use of his account.

Therefore, applying the proposed reduction will be quite difficult.

---

What Will Be the Biggest Debate in Practice?

In our opinion, the most debated issue will be;

the proof of which role the individual actually undertook.

Because in many files, suspects;

“I merely provided my account.”

make such a defense.

However, digital evidence,

telephone records,

MASAK reports,

HTS analyses,

witness statements,

may support or completely refute this defense.

Therefore, each case must be evaluated within its own evidentiary structure.

Finalized Cases, Enforcement Process, and the Application of the New TCK 158 Regulation

Note: In the third part of this article series, publicly known as “IBAN amnesty”, “IBAN victims regulation” and “TCK 158 amnesty” , the impact of the new regulation on finalized cases, the enforcement process, the principle of retroactive application of the more favorable law (lex mitior), and potential legal issues likely to be encountered in practice are discussed.

---

Does the New Regulation Affect Finalized Conviction Judgments?

One of the most frequently asked questions following the entry into force of the new regulation is:

“I have a finalized conviction against me. Can I also benefit from this regulation?”

There is no single answer to this question.

Because in criminal law, every new legislative amendment is not automatically applied to all finalized cases. For this to occur, first of all, the introduced regulation must whether it produces a favorable outcome for the defendant or convict must be evaluated.

as one of the fundamental principles of Turkish criminal law the principle of the retroactive application of the more favorable law, allows penal provisions in favor of the perpetrator to be applied retroactively under certain conditions. However, this assessment is made by taking into account all the specific circumstances of the case; it is not sufficient solely for the offense to fall within the scope of TCK Article 158.

---

What is the Principle of the More Favorable Law?

One of the fundamental principles in criminal law is that laws unfavorable to the perpetrator do not apply retroactively; conversely, regulations in favor of the perpetrator may be applied under certain conditions.

The purpose of this principle is to ensure criminal justice and to allow lighter sanctions that enter into force at a later date to be reflected in past events under appropriate conditions.

However, the important point here is whether the new regulation is truly of a nature that will alter the legal standing of the defendant.

If the new provision does not create any change in the specific case, the mere fact that the law has changed does not, by itself, require a reassessment.

---

How Does the Process Work for Convicts at the Enforcement Stage?

The same principle applies to individuals whose judgments have become final and the execution of whose sentences has commenced.

If the new regulation is capable of producing a favorable outcome for the convict, the evaluation of this matter by the competent judicial authorities may come into question.

However, the point that must be taken into consideration here is:

The new regulation does not automatic release for every convicted person, automatic dismissal of the sentence or annulment of the conviction judgment does not mean.

Each case file;

• grounds for conviction,
• the offender's role in the crime,
• evidence,
• proceeds derived from the crime,
• manner in which the crime was committed,

must be evaluated separately within the framework of such criteria.

---

Cases at the Appellate and Appeal (Temyiz) Stages

Regarding cases that have not yet become final, the impact of the new regulations may differ.

For example;

• if a decision has been rendered by the court of first instance but appellate review is pending,
• if an appellate decision has been rendered and the case file is at the stage of appeal before the Court of Cassation,
• if the investigation has not yet been completed,

whether the new regulation applies to the specific case at hand will be evaluated by the relevant judicial authority.

Therefore, it is crucial that defenses to be submitted in ongoing cases are prepared by taking the new regulation into account.

---

Not Every TCK 158 Case Yields the Same Outcome

One of the most common mistakes in practice is assuming that all qualified fraud cases share the same legal structure.

However, there can be significant differences among cases brought under TCK 158.

For example;

First Example

An individual may have merely allowed a third party to use their bank account for a short period of time.

This person's;

• lack of awareness of the fraud scheme,
• not being part of the organization,
• not obtaining a significant benefit from the proceeds of crime,

the legal assessment may differ in this case.

---

Second Example

Another person, however;

• has organized numerous bank accounts,
• has procured accounts belonging to different individuals,
• has managed money transfers,
• has coordinated the distribution of commissions,

may be.

In this case, the individual's role within the organization will be evaluated quite differently.

Therefore, even if the same statutory provision is applied in both cases, the legal consequences may not be the same.

---

What Evidence Do Courts Pay Particular Attention To?

In qualified fraud cases, courts do not merely look at whose name the bank account is registered under.

Conversely, the entire case file is evaluated as a whole.

The following evidence is of particular importance:

• Bank account transactions,
• MASAK analysis reports,
• HTS records,
• Base station data,
• Phone examination reports,
• Digital materials,
• Correspondence on WhatsApp and other messaging applications,
• IP logs,
• Witness statements,
• Camera footage,
• ATM records,
• Footage regarding the moments of cash withdrawals.

By evaluating this evidence together, an attempt is made to determine the individual's position within the criminal organization.

---

Does the Deposit of Money into a Bank Account Constitute Proof of a Crime by Itself?

No.

The mere transfer of money alleged to be derived from a crime into a bank account is not sufficient for a conviction on its own.

In criminal law, for a conviction to be issued;

• the individual's intent,
• contribution to the crime,
• control over the incident,
• whether they were aware of the crime,

and similar elements must also be established.

Therefore, while bank account transactions are important, they are not deemed sufficient on their own.

---

What Should Be Considered While Preparing a Defense?

Defense strategy is of great importance in investigations and prosecutions conducted within the scope of TCK 158.

In particular;

• how the bank account was used,
• with whom the account information was shared,
• on which dates the money transfers took place,
• whether the account holder was aware of these transfers,
• digital correspondence,
• telephone calls,

must be examined in detail.

Since each case has its own evidentiary structure, there is no standard defense method.

---

The Contribution of the TCK 158 Lawyer to the Case

Qualified fraud offenses are cases with strong both technical and legal dimensions.

In these cases, merely knowing the statutory provisions is not sufficient.

At the same time;

• analysis of financial movements,
• evaluation of digital evidence,
• application of criminal procedure rules,
• determination of the provisions of the favorable law,
• monitoring of processes related to execution law,

many technical issues such as these must be addressed together.

Therefore, the evaluation of the file in all its aspects is of great importance in terms of preventing loss of rights.

---

Misinformation Encountered in Practice

Following the new regulation, a significant amount of inaccurate information has been shared on social media platforms and various websites.

The most common misinformation includes:

“TCK 158 has been completely amnestied.”

This is not true.

The regulation has not abolished the crime of qualified fraud.

---

“Everyone who received a sentence will be released.”

This information is also incorrect.

Each case must be evaluated individually.

---

“No one who allows their IBAN to be used will receive a penalty anymore.”

This is also legally incorrect.

The individual's role in the incident, intent, and status of evidence remain decisive.

---

“The new law automatically covers all past cases.”

This statement is also incorrect.

Whether it will produce a favorable outcome is evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

---

Conclusion

In the public eye “IBAN amnesty”, “IBAN victims regulation” or “TCK 158 amnesty” Although the new regulation, referred to as such, has brought about a significant change in the crimes of qualified fraud, this change does not yield the same result for every case.

Particularly with regard to final convictions, cases at the enforcement stage, and ongoing proceedings, it cannot be said that an automatic right is conferred. Whether the new provisions can be applied is evaluated based on the characteristics of the file, the evidence, and the person's role in the crime.

Therefore, conducting a detailed legal analysis of the file is of great importance during the investigation, prosecution, or execution processes carried out within the scope of TCK 158.

Atty. Batın YILMAZ – Attorney at Law, Istanbul Bar Association

Contact: +90 532 669 34 90