Press "Enter" to skip to content

The decision of the Supreme Court for the pharmacist who sells antibiotics without a prescription


In Bursa, the district governorship and district health directorate teams prepared three separate minutes for selling antibiotics without a prescription and fined 521 TL three times. The appeal of the pharmacist to the administrative fine was rejected by the Criminal Court of Peace.

When the Ministry of Justice made a request for violation for the benefit of the law, the Supreme Court Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office stepped in. Noting that 52 TL was fined three times, once for each drug, on the bet that the offending pharmacist sells antibiotics 3 times without a prescription, the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office stated that the Law on Misdemeanors no. article ‘In the event that the same misdemeanor is committed more than once, an administrative fine is given separately for each misdemeanor. For misdemeanors that can be committed with uninterrupted action, therefore, the act is counted as one until an administrative sanction decision is made. In the request for breaking it was stated:

“Despite the fact that three different minutes were drawn up and three separate administrative sanctions were issued due to the act of selling antibiotics without a prescription, all sales should have been considered as one act. Regardless of the fact that a separate administrative sanction decision cannot be issued for each drug, it is requested that the aforementioned decision be violated for the benefit of the law, in accordance with Article 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure No.5271, on the grounds that it is not appropriate to make a written decision instead of accepting the application in this respect. “

The Office of the Chief Prosecutor sent the file to the 19th Criminal Office for the ministry’s request for the annulment of the sentence to be discussed. The members of the chamber found the rejection decision of the Criminal Magistrate’s Office in place. The following statements were included in the unanimous decision of the 19th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals:

“1/2 of the Law No. 1262. Article in the article “Those who are legitimate to be given with a medical prescription only against a prescription and the others are sold exclusively in pharmacies and pharmacy businesses for the sake of law” is defined as an act that constitutes a misdemeanor. 15/2 of the Law No. 5326. ‘In case of committing the same misdemeanor more than once, administrative fines are given separately for each misdemeanor. For misdemeanors that can be committed with uninterrupted action, it has therefore been accepted that the act is considered a single act until the administrative sanction decision is made ”, and in terms of misdemeanors that can only be committed with uninterrupted action, it will be considered a single act until the administrative sanction is applied. It was unanimously resolved that the Supreme Court’s Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Supreme Court of Appeals unanimously dismissed the request to corrupt for the benefit of the law, since it cannot be mentioned that it is an uninterrupted act due to the fact that it is not an uninterrupted act due to the fact that it is carried out at different times and with different procedures. ”


Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *