There is no single answer, because “leaked document” is not a legal category. What matters is what the document is. Two documents out of the same envelope can fall under entirely different provisions.
A risk map by document type
| Type of document | Applicable provision | Penalty |
|---|---|---|
| Investigation papers (statements, records, reports) | Criminal Code, Art. 285/1 | 1–3 years’ imprisonment or a judicial fine (conditional) |
| Telephone, message or e-mail content | Criminal Code, Art. 132/2 | 2–5 years’ imprisonment; publication through the press carries the same penalty |
| A recording of a non-public conversation | Criminal Code, Art. 133/3 | 2–5 years’ imprisonment and a judicial fine of up to 4,000 days |
| Images or sounds relating to private life | Criminal Code, Art. 134/2 | 2–5 years’ imprisonment; publication through the press carries the same penalty |
| Content of a closed hearing | Criminal Code, Art. 285/3 with CPC Art. 187/2 | 1–3 years’ imprisonment or a judicial fine |
| An administrative document containing personal data | Criminal Code, Art. 134; Law No. 6698 | Depends on the circumstances |
Investigation papers: a conditional offence
Article 285/1 does not treat every disclosure as an offence; it requires one of two alternatives. The disclosure of the content of an act carried out during the investigation stage must infringe the right to benefit from the presumption of innocence, or the confidentiality of communications or of private life; or it must be capable of preventing the emergence of the material truth.
The protective provision follows immediately. Article 285/6: “Making the investigation and prosecution proceedings the subject of news without exceeding the limits of reporting shall not constitute an offence.”
Publishing the document versus reporting the information
| Approach | Risk | News value |
|---|---|---|
| Publishing the document in full as an image | High — every piece of personal data in it is published too | The same |
| Quoting the passage with news value | Moderate | The same |
| Verifying the information through independent sources and reporting it | Low | Stronger — because it is verified |
Your source is protected
Article 12 of Law No. 5187 is explicit: “The owner of a periodical, the responsible editor and the author of the work may not be compelled to disclose their news sources of any kind, including information and documents, or to give evidence on that matter.” You are not obliged to say who gave you the document.
That the document was stolen or leaked
Whoever obtained the document, and however, bears their own liability — for example, where they are a public official the sentence is increased by up to one half under Article 285/4. That does not remove the publisher’s own liability; publication is a separate act.
A pre-publication checklist
- Has the document been verified? Is there an independent second source?
- Which category does it fall into — investigation papers, communications, private life, administrative document?
- Have the personal data of third parties been removed?
- Are there persons whose identity is protected (Law No. 5187, Art. 21)?
- Is publishing the document in full necessary, or is the relevant passage enough?
- Has the response of the party concerned been obtained?
- Has the public interest in publication been recorded in writing?
The filing deadline
A criminal case arising from a document story is also subject to a time limit. Under Article 26 of Law No. 5187 such cases must be brought, as a condition of prosecution, within four months for daily periodicals and online news sites and six months for other printed works. For online news sites the period runs from the date of the criminal complaint concerning the report.
Investigation confidentiality is covered in the confidentiality guide and the limits of source protection in the source limits guide.