Court ruling on March 19: Istanbul Governor's Office's four-day ban found unlawful

The 10th Administrative Chamber of the Istanbul Regional Administrative Court has upheld the cancellation of the Istanbul Governor's Office's March 19, 2025, decision to ban meetings, demonstrations, and press statements throughout the province.

The ban, which was implemented following the detention of Ekrem İmamoğlu and covered the dates of March 19-23, 2025, had been taken to the judiciary by the Istanbul Bar Association. The Istanbul 3rd Administrative Court had cancelled the Governor's Office's action, and the Governor's Office had subsequently filed an appeal against the decision.

The Regional Administrative Court unanimously rejected the Governor's Office's appeal. Thus, the cancellation decision of the court of first instance has become final. It was stated that the decision was rendered as final on July 16, 2026.

COURT: AUTHORITY DOES NOT EXTEND TO PROVINCE-WIDE BANS

The decision emphasized that while Article 11/C of the Provincial Administration Law No. 5442 and Articles 17 and 19 of the Law on Meetings and Demonstrations No. 2911 grant governors the authority to intervene under certain conditions, this authority does not provide a basis for a general ban covering the entirety of Istanbul.

The court assessed that Article 17 of Law No. 2911 contains the authority to ban a specific meeting, and that Article 19 can only be applied to one or a few regions of a province. It was concluded that banning all meetings and demonstrations across Istanbul for four days without defining geographical boundaries exceeded legal limits.

The decision further stated that the ban was not in accordance with the requirements of a democratic society, did not meet the principle of minimal intervention in fundamental rights, and was contrary to the principle of proportionality. The court found the assessment of the court of first instance, which stated that the action did not serve the public interest and was not in compliance with the relevant legal provisions, to be correct.

In its appeal, the Istanbul Governor's Office had argued that, based on social media posts and information obtained, there was a possibility of social unrest in the city and that there were assessments suggesting that groups affiliated with terrorist organizations might participate in protests. The Governor's Office had claimed that the decision was taken for the purpose of ensuring public order, national security, and general safety.

Under the scope of the Governor's Office decision in question, not only were meetings and demonstrations banned; it was also decided to close entrances and exits at certain stations on the M1A Yenikapı-Atatürk Airport, M1B Yenikapı-Kirazlı, and M2 Yenikapı-Hacıosman lines, and to close some roads, primarily Vatan Avenue, to vehicle traffic.