Constitutional Court's precedent on 'boycotts' contradicts Minister Bolat's remarks: He had said 'They can file lawsuits'

The Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office has launched an ex officio investigation into those calling for a boycott.

Minister of Trade Ömer Bolat also issued a statement inviting the boycotted companies to file compensation lawsuits against those making these calls.

THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT'S PRECEDENT IS AS FOLLOWS

However, the Constitutional Court had previously issued a precedent-setting ruling in a case on this matter.

Artist Ozan Güven, who boycotted Turkcell, had been sentenced to pay compensation. Upon Güven's application, the General Assembly of the Constitutional Court ruled that the decision to pay compensation was a violation of freedom of expression.

The incident that was the subject of the ruling, which was included in an article by Kısa Dalga writer Kemal Vuraldoğan, is as follows:

“Ozan Güven applied to the Constitutional Court after he was ordered to pay compensation due to a social media post he made about Turkcell.

In early March 2016, a newspaper published a report regarding the Ensar Foundation, stating that at least ten students had been abused by a teacher in charge of a dormitory. The report stated that the incident came to light after one of the children told a psychologist about what they had experienced and the psychologist reported the matter to the authorities, and that the public prosecutor in Karaman had launched an investigation into the matter. The incident, which caused great public outrage, was followed by numerous non-governmental organizations and was brought to the agenda of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM).

Following these reports, allegations emerged that there was a financial support relationship between Turkcell and the Ensar Foundation. In a statement made on March 24, 2016, regarding the allegations, Turkcell announced that it would continue its support for the foundation, saying, “We are not supporting any foundation, association, or non-governmental organization, but rather the education of our students,..., we will continue to support our youth, who are the guarantee of our country's future.”

Upon this, on May 17, 2016, Ozan Güven shared a post on his account on a social media platform stating, "I have canceled my 16-year contract with the pro-pedophilia and censoring Turkcell. #censorship... @...Boycott".

Turkcell filed a compensation lawsuit against Ozan Güven due to this post. The Istanbul Anadolu 3rd Civil Court of First Instance sentenced Güven to pay 500 TL in compensation.

The decision was upheld by the 4th Civil Chamber of the Istanbul Regional Court of Justice (Appellate Court) and became final.

WHAT WAS THE RULING?

Upon Ozan Güven's application, the Constitutional Court ruled that this compensation decision was a violation of human rights. The Constitutional Court General Assembly's decision dated September 27, 2023, stated the following:

“The applicant expressed in harsh and provocative language to the public that the commercial relationship to be established with the plaintiff Company would mean supporting child abusers because the plaintiff Company supported the relevant foundation's campaign. As emphasized in many decisions of the Constitutional Court, freedom of expression is valid not only for information or ideas that are accepted, harmless, or indifferent, but also for those that are offensive, shocking, or disturbing. In this sense, although the expressions subject to the post are of a disturbing nature, it is clear that they aimed to create pressure on the plaintiff by primarily targeting the financial support relationship between the foundation and the plaintiff, rather than the plaintiff's commercial reputation. Therefore, it is not possible to reach the conclusion that the post falls outside the protection of freedom of expression by accepting that the applicant's sole purpose was to engage in offensive discourse through insult.”

For these reasons, the Constitutional Court decided that 18 thousand TL in non-pecuniary damages should be paid to Ozan Güven.