Court annuls İzmir Governor's Office ban on 'İmamoğlu protests': Must be justified and targeted

IMM Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu's detention and subsequent arrest led to protests in Saraçhane Squareand, primarily, in many parts of Turkey, citizenscitizens organized a protest tooppose the decision.The Izmir Governor's Office then banned alltypes of meetings,demonstrations,marches,andpressannounced the ban onpublicstatements via a press release, and subsequently extended the ban for another fivedays.The

EGEÇEP, along withcitizens, filed aAs a result of thelawsuit filed, the İzmir 6th Administrative Court annulled the Governor's Office's "blanket ban" action. In the court's ruling, it was stated that the basiscitedby the Governor's Office, Article 11/C of the Provincial Administration Law No. 5442, cannot be usedfor a ban covering the entire provinceand targeting all meetingsanddemonstrations.it was emphasized that it was not possible.This provisiononlylimited in terms of “place, time, and person” foresees measuresitwas stated.

The court alsoFurthermore, regarding the Law on Meetings andDemonstration Marchesnumbered 2911,the authority to impose bans must be limited to specific meetingsor to one or a fewdistricts of the province,stating that the İzmir Governor's Office had instead imposed a ban across the entire province on all unspecifiedmeetings.for which it imposed a banand therefore demonstrated that it did not meet the 'requirement of legality'.EGE

ÇEP stated that the ban decisionnot only restricted citizenreaction regarding the March 19period, but alsoviolated the right to assembly.within the scope of World Water Dayawareness-raising activitiessuch as environmental events, petition campaigns,and the right to democratic protest, stating that it effectively eliminated these rights, and noted the following regarding the annulment decision:

"InTurkey, on March 19, 2025 Following the detention of Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu, freedom of expression and peaceful assembly rights across the countrylaborrights, the Spring Resistances began within the scope of the right to assemble; the developments caused a widespread reaction in the public. The Ministry of Interior, on the other hand, between the dates of 19–23 Marchin connection with the actions that tookplace,a total of 1,133 people were taken intocustody,it was announced.Inthis atmosphere, the İzmir Governor's Office imposed a ban on all

types of activities "province-wide" from 10:00 on 21.03.2025 to 23:59 on 25.03.2025.all meetings, demonstration marches and press statements, announcing the ban via a press release, and subsequently extended the ban for five dfurther extended. This ban did not only target a specific event; it also affectedWorld Water Dayawareness-raising efforts, which were entirely peaceful environmental activities, signature campaigns,and the right to democratic protest were effectively eliminated.

As citizens and the EGEÇEP Association,in the lawsuit wefiled,the İzmir 6th Administrative Court annulled this 'blanket ban' action by the Governor's Office.

In its ruling, the court in summary;

the provisionof Article 11/C of the Provincial Administration Law No. 5442, which the Governor's Officecited as a basis,cannot serve as a legal basisfor a ban that covers the entire provinceand targets allmeetings.that thisprovision stipulates measuresthat are limited in terms of place, time, andperson,and that

under Law No. 2911,the authority to ban is limited to specific meetings or one/several parts of the province.should be interpreted as limited to the district andthat, in contrast, the İzmir Governor's Office imposed a ban across the entire province on all unspecifiedmeetingsin terms oftheir direction,and that for this reason, the requirement of legality was not met,explicitly.has demonstrated..

The court also cited the Constitutional Court's decision on the Aklime Hanas and Others application in a similar dispute, reminding that the right to peaceful assembly cannot be suspended for "general and abstract reasons."

Why this decision is important?

1- The right tohold meetings anddemonstration marchescannotbe banned“wholesale across the province” as clarified by the court ruling. This is one of the minimum guarantees of a democratic socialorder.

2- Civil society's peaceful activities, including environmental protests, cannot be stopped with claims of "abstract provocation." Bans must be justified, proportionate, and targeted.3- "The effect will be exhausted

if itThe damages arising from the implementation of bans that constitute an 'administrative act' createirreparable consequences: Indeed, during the banperiod in İzmir, a large numberof citizens and lawyers weredetainedtaken into custody, and the İzmir Bar Association alsohad to makestatements regarding thedetentions.As EGEÇEP,

we believe this decisionis not just the result of a single case; it is a significant development forİzmir and Turkey.We emphasize that this is a "legal threshold" in terms of fundamental rights inTurkey. In our 20th year, we underline once again: Defending natureis defending life; and defending life means having theright to speak andpeaceful assembit also includes defending the right toassemble in this manner.We respectfully announce this to the public."

On the other hand,the lawsuit filed by the

Istanbul Bar Association isongoing.As a result of the lawsuit filed, the sameperiod the ban on meetings, demonstrations, and pressstatements declared in Istanbul was also found to be unlawful and annulled.