Divorce Lawsuit Based on Commission of a Crime and Leading a Dishonorable Life

Divorce Attorney’s Guide — Att. Rafet Aslan

In the Turkish Civil Code (TCC), the commission of a crime and leading a dishonorable life are regulated as special grounds for divorce. A technical correction is essential here: this ground for divorce is not found in Article 166/1-b, but in Article 163 of the TCC. According to the text of the law, if one of the spouses commits a humiliating crime or leads a dishonorable life, and for this reason, the other spouse cannot be expected to continue living with them, the other spouse may file for divorce at any time.

In practice, this regulation is often confused with general grounds for divorce. However, Article 163 of the TCC is a special, fault-based, and relative ground for divorce. This means that the mere existence of a crime or a dishonorable life is not sufficient; additionally, the common life must have become unbearable for the other spouse due to this situation. Both the legislative intent and legal doctrine explicitly state that today, both committing a humiliating crime and leading a dishonorable life are "relative" grounds for divorce.

In divorce cases, particularly in Antalya, criminal behaviors accompanying drug trafficking, fraud, sexual offenses, domestic violence, threats, mediation for prostitution, continuous infidelity, alcohol or substance addiction, and lifestyles that severely damage the spouse's reputation in society are frequently discussed under this heading. However, not every crime or every bad behavior directly leads to the consequences of TCC Art. 163. The litigation strategy must be established according to the nature of the act, its continuity, the structure of the evidence, and its impact on the matrimonial union.

What is TCC Art. 163 and Under Which Conditions is it Applied?

According to TCC Art. 163, one of two alternative situations must exist to file a divorce lawsuit: one of the spouses must have either committed a humiliating crime or lead a dishonorable life. However, regardless of which of these two alternatives is present, the common condition is the same: it must no longer be expected of the plaintiff spouse to continue living together because of these reasons.

Three fundamental elements stand out here. The first element is that the act must occur while the marriage continues. The second element is that the defendant spouse must be at fault. The third element is that the act must not only be morally criticizable but also of such severity that it makes the matrimonial union unsustainable for the plaintiff. Doctrine states that for a lawsuit based on TCC Art. 163 to be filed, the crime must be of a humiliating nature, and the dishonorable life must have become a lifestyle that continues for a certain period.

What is a Humiliating Crime?

The law does not list the concept of "humiliating crime" one by one. Therefore, every incident is evaluated separately. The nature of the crime, the way it was committed, social perception, and its effect on the spouse's reputation within the marriage are examined together. In doctrine, humiliating crimes are accepted as those that discredit the person in the eyes of society and make living together difficult for the other spouse within the matrimonial union. Furthermore, it is required that the crime was committed while the marriage was ongoing.

In practice, the following types of crimes come to the fore more frequently:

• Crimes related to drug trafficking or use
• Sexual offenses
• Crimes that severely damage reputation, such as fraud, theft, and forgery
• Mediation for prostitution or similar disgraceful acts
• Crimes involving violence against the spouse or children

The critical point here is that the mere existence of a criminal conviction does not always directly result in divorce; the court also evaluates whether this act makes living together unbearable for the other spouse. This is because TCC Art. 163 is a relative, not an absolute, special ground for divorce.

What is Leading a Dishonorable Life?

Leading a dishonorable life refers to a pattern of behavior that has turned into a lifestyle and gained continuity, rather than a one-time mistake or an isolated incident. Doctrine explicitly states that leading a dishonorable life must be a way of life that continues for a certain period; single and instantaneous behaviors are often not sufficient on their own.

In this context, the following may be considered as examples:

• Living within a circle of continuous prostitution or mediation for prostitution
• A life order maintained based on criminal proceeds
• A state of social collapse accompanying continuous alcohol or substance addiction
• Continuous sexual or moral deviations that degrade the matrimonial union
• A lifestyle that continuously damages the spouse's honor and family life

The distinction between a single incident and a continuous lifestyle is very important here. This is because some acts may be grounds for divorce based on adultery, behavior shaking trust, or the shaking of the matrimonial union under TCC Art. 166; however, they are not always accepted as a dishonorable life under TCC Art. 163.

Difference Between TCC Art. 163 and TCC Art. 166

One of the most common mistakes in practice is confusing TCC Art. 163 with TCC Art. 166. The following table clarifies the difference:

The text of the law states for TCC Art. 163 that one "may file for divorce at any time." Doctrine also notes that no specific statutory forfeiture period is envisaged for lawsuits based on this ground. However, if the act is very old, deemed forgiven by the party, or no longer makes the common life unbearable, the chance of success for the lawsuit may decrease.

Is There a Statutory Forfeiture Period for Dishonorable Life and Humiliating Crime?

Regarding TCC Art. 163, a specific 6-month or 5-year statutory forfeiture period, as found in the provisions for adultery or attempt on life, has not been regulated. The law explicitly says "may file for divorce at any time." Academic sources also state that no special statutory forfeiture period is envisaged for lawsuits based on TCC Art. 163.

Nevertheless, this does not mean that the lawsuit will be accepted in every case, limitlessly and unconditionally. Doctrine further expresses that if a very long time has passed since the act or if the incident has been de facto forgiven, it will become difficult to speak of the unbearability of living together. Therefore, the currentness of the incidents and their impact on the matrimonial union must be particularly emphasized in the litigation strategy.

Which Evidence Can Be Used?

The structure of evidence is extremely important in TCC Art. 163 cases. The strongest evidence usually includes:

• Criminal court files
• Prosecution investigation documents
• Criminal records and conviction registries
• Police reports
• Witness statements
• Social media content
• Messaging records
• Hospital or addiction treatment records
• Photographs, videos, and official records revealing the lifestyle

Doctrine also states that the absence of an investigation or prosecution, or even the absence of a conviction, does not prevent a divorce lawsuit on its own; the family court will evaluate the incident separately within its own evidence system. In other words, the absence of a criminal case does not directly make a divorce lawsuit based on TCC Art. 163 impossible.

How Effective Are Criminal Court Decisions?

Criminal court decisions are very strong evidence in TCC Art. 163 cases. Especially a conviction regarding a humiliating crime very seriously supports the existence of the crime. However, the family court does not perform a formality audit bound only by the criminal judgment; it also evaluates the impact of the crime on the matrimonial union separately.

Therefore, the following distinction is important:

The Importance of Witnesses in Dishonorable Life Cases

Witness evidence is very important in this type of lawsuit. This is because a dishonorable life is often proven not by a single official document, but by the reflection of the person's way of life on their environment. Neighbors, family circles, close witnesses, work circles, or people who directly witnessed the incidents can explain the continuity of the behaviors.

When Can TCC Art. 166 Be Preferred Over TCC Art. 163?

Not every incident may be suitable for filing a lawsuit directly under TCC Art. 163. For example, if the element of a humiliating crime is debatable, if the continuity of the dishonorable life is not clear, or if the evidence is more at the level of "behavior shaking trust," a general divorce lawsuit based on TCC Art. 166 may be safer.

How Are Compensation and Alimony Claims Affected?

Since TCC Art. 163 cases are fault-based, they produce significant results regarding pecuniary and non-pecuniary compensation claims. When the fault of the spouse who committed a humiliating crime or lead a dishonorable life is accepted as severe, the ground for compensation in favor of the other spouse is strengthened. Similarly, the fault status is decisive in the evaluation of alimony.

Conclusion

A divorce lawsuit due to the commission of a crime and leading a dishonorable life is technically filed under TCC Art. 163. This ground, unlike general grounds for divorce, is a special, fault-based, and relative ground. Although the law states that a lawsuit can be filed "at any time," the court carefully examines the nature of the act, its continuity, whether it has been forgiven, and whether it has made living together unbearable.

Frequently Asked Questions

• Which article is a divorce lawsuit due to the commission of a crime based on? It is based on TCC Art. 163.
• Is a single incident sufficient for leading a dishonorable life? Generally, no. It must be a lifestyle.
• Is a conviction mandatory for a humiliating crime? No, but it is very strong evidence.
• Is there a statutory forfeiture period for TCC Art. 163? No, the law says "at any time."
• Can compensation be requested in these cases? Yes, pecuniary and non-pecuniary compensation can be claimed based on fault.

Divorce Attorney’s Guide — Att. Rafet Aslan