Middle court deems certain non-consensual recordings presentable as exhibits

Voice recordings obtained on the grounds of obstructing the commission of illicit acts can be presented as exhibits, the Court of Second Instance (TSI) has recently ruled.

The TSI pointed out that recordings obtained for the purposes of proving criminality, preventing crimes and self-defence can be accepted as exhibits.

The clarification was made during the appeal of intimidation and blackmail cases.

According to the court, two individuals B and C were accused of the aforementioned violations. The original exhibits comprised two voice recording clips – one provided by A, the civil complainant in the procedure, and the other obtained from D’s cellphone.

D was convicted in another legal procedure. The recording captured a conversation between A, C, D and A’s father, referred to as E.

During the hearing at the base court, the recordings were ruled as illegally recorded and thus invalid. Meanwhile, the recordings may subject the makers to a charge of making an illegal recording or photograph.

In January 2021, the court invalidated the recordings as exhibits and in May 2021, the judgment was made against A. Thereafter, A filed an appeal, arguing that the recordings should have been considered valid.

Underlining the nature of the initial procedure as proving or disproving the existence of intimidation and blackmail, the middle court highlighted the recordings managed to evidence signs of blackmail.

It noted that the recordings concerned a single conversation, in which the court could hear C and D making threatening utterances to A, who took the recordings so as to prevent malicious and illicit acts. As such, the recordings should be considered a means of self-protection, the court ruled.

Moreover, the court cited the top court in ruling that the balance between the rights to speech and to evidence should be struck so that “the protection of the former cannot become the violation of the latter.”