RTÜK defends itself: 'Freedom of expression is not unlimited' – Evaluates penalties given to opposition channels

The Radio and Television Supreme Council (RTÜK) has responded to parliamentary questions discussing the justifications for the penalties it imposes on opposition television channels and the legality of these sanctions. The motions submitted to the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM) included allegations that the penalties RTÜK imposed on broadcasters such as Halk TV, Sözcü TV, Now TV, and Tele 1 were 'contrary to freedom of expression.'

RTÜK: FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IS NOT UNLIMITED

In a motion submitted by CHP Diyarbakır MP Sezgin Tanrıkulu with the request for Minister of Culture and Tourism Mehmet Nuri Ersoy to respond, it was asked on what grounds penalties were given to opposition media outlets. In its response, after listing examples regarding the relevant broadcasts, RTÜK cited the Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights, stating that freedom of expression can be restricted.

The following statements were included in the RTÜK response:

“It is regulated that the freedom to express and disseminate thought is free, but this freedom can be restricted by law for reasons such as national security, public order, and public safety. It is clearly understood from national and international legal texts that freedom of expression can be restricted in cases where it would limit or cause harm to the exercise of other freedoms, and therefore it is not unlimited.”

SARAÇHANE REACTIONS AND EMPHASIS ON 'SELF-REGULATION'

CHP Uşak MP Ali Karaoba also submitted another parliamentary question regarding the statements made by RTÜK President Ebubekir Şahin during the Saraçhane protests on March 19. At the time, Şahin had stated that “sanctions, which could reach as far as license revocation, could be applied to broadcasters who engage in illegal broadcasting, call the public to the streets, or feature commentators who act like spokespersons for illegal organizations.”

In the response RTÜK provided to this motion, the following assessments were included:

“In a society where the media is seen as the fourth estate, it is normal for the RTÜK President to call for common sense for media organizations to remain committed to their responsibility for self-regulation and public broadcasting principles, for reasons of national security, public order, and public safety, and during extraordinary periods.”

NO RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION ABOUT İMAMOĞLU

In the same parliamentary question, it was also asked why RTÜK and President Ebubekir Şahin did not make a statement regarding the targeting of Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu in some broadcasts, despite there being no finalized judicial decision against him. However, no response was provided by RTÜK to this question.