Constitutional Court ruling on access bans: BTK's authority revoked

The Constitutional Court has annulled certain regulations added to Law No. 5651 by Law No. 7253, titled "Law on Amendments to the Law on the Regulation of Publications Made on the Internet and Combating Crimes Committed Through These Publications."

According to the Constitutional Court's decision published in the Official Gazette, the CHP filed a lawsuit with the Constitutional Court requesting the annulment of certain regulations added to Law No. 5651 by Law No. 7253, titled "Law on Amendments to the Law on the Regulation of Publications Made on the Internet and Combating Crimes Committed Through These Publications."

The Tavşanlı Criminal Court of Peace also applied for an appeal, concluding that the same regulations were unconstitutional during a case it was presiding over.

Consolidating the applications, the Constitutional Court annulled the provisions of Law No. 7253 that granted the President of the Information and Communication Technologies Authority (BTK) the authority to block access on their own initiative, as well as the articles providing for decisions to block access or remove content from internet broadcasts.

RATIONALE FOR THE DECISION

The rationale stated that under the rule, the BTK President could issue a decision to remove content related to broadcasts made on the internet that constitute certain specified crimes, noting that it was not required for a judicial process to have begun against the person making the broadcast, nor was it a condition that the person had been convicted by a criminal court.

Emphasizing that it was considered sufficient for the President to determine that the crimes listed in the first paragraph of Article 8 had been committed in order to implement the content removal process, the rationale noted the following:

- "It is understood that the measure provided for in the rules subject to the lawsuit is a final measure applied based on a crime determination to be made by the President, detached from the criminal justice process. It has been evaluated that issuing a content removal decision, which is in the nature of a final measure, based on a crime determination to be made by an administrative authority before it is determined by a final court decision that acts defined as crimes in criminal laws have been committed, and imposing an administrative fine in case this decision is not executed, violates the presumption of innocence.

- The rules requested to be annulled limit freedom of expression by allowing the content of broadcasts made on the internet to be removed and/or access to these broadcasts to be blocked, and also limit freedom of the press, considering that this broadcast could also be a publication within the scope of internet journalism."

The annulment provision will enter into force in 9 months.

News Source: 12punto