Decision on music ban introduced during the pandemic reached 2 years later

The 4th Chamber of the Council of State has decided to stay the execution of the Ministry of Interior's circular that extended the music broadcast ban until 01:00 a.m. due to the pandemic.

The justification stated that the Ministry of Interior does not have the authority to limit the duration of music broadcasts. The ministry has the right to appeal the decision.

IT HAD STARTED WITH THE PANDEMIC

The Ministry of Interior had explained the issue as follows: "Demands for the extension of the music broadcast ban hours determined during the pandemic, in line with the approaching summer season and the accompanying tourism activity, were evaluated jointly by our Ministry, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Environment, Urbanization and Climate Change, and the Ministry of Culture and Tourism, and the music broadcast time was extended until 01:00 a.m." The Ministry of Interior's circular dated May 10, 2022, had been sent to the governorates.

CHP Istanbul MP Gamze Akkuş İlgezdi, as well as many others, filed a lawsuit for the cancellation and stay of execution of the circular regarding the "music ban." İlgezdi announced that she had won the lawsuit she filed for the cancellation of the Ministry of Interior's circular regarding the music ban.

"THE CIRCULAR IS UNLAWFUL IN TERMS OF AUTHORITY"

In the justification for the decision to stay the execution by the 4th Chamber of the Council of State, which conducted the initial review of the lawsuit filed by İlgezdi, it was stated that the circular in question, which determined the extension of the duration for music broadcasts across the country until 01:00 a.m., was decided to be stayed "because it is unlawful in terms of the element of authority and could cause irreparable and impossible damages if implemented."

The justification emphasized that in administrative law, authority refers to the decision-making power granted to the administration by the Constitution and laws, and that authority can only be exercised by the body to which it is granted by law.

It was stated that the duties and powers of the defendant ministry were listed in the Presidential decree, and that no regulation regarding "determining the duration of music broadcasts across the country" was included in this section.

It was stated that the Regulation on the Assessment and Management of Environmental Noise, which was cited as the basis for the action subject to the lawsuit and was in effect at the time the action was established, "covers the principles and procedures regarding environmental noise and environmental vibration to which people are exposed, including in areas where the population is dense, in parks or quiet areas in residential zones, in quiet areas in open land, and including schools, hospitals, and other noise-sensitive areas."

The justification stated, “It has been concluded that the provisions of the regulation in question shall be executed by the Ministry of Environment, Urbanization and Climate Change, that the authority to determine area and time limitations for activities within the scope of the regulation belongs to the Provincial Local Environment Boards, which are the provincial units of the aforementioned ministry, and therefore the defendant administration does not have the duty and authority to limit the duration of music broadcasts across the country.”

THE DEFENDANT MINISTRY OF INTERIOR HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL

On the other hand, it was emphasized that there is "no regulation regarding the determination of the duration of music broadcasts across the country" in the provisions mentioned in the circular subject to the lawsuit, within the Environmental Law No. 2872 and the Regulation on Workplace Opening and Operating Licenses.

The defendant Ministry of Interior has the right to appeal the decision. The appeal will be reviewed by the Council of State's Board of Administrative Litigation Chambers.

News Source: 12punto