The appeal filed by T24 against the access ban imposed on its website and X account on the grounds of "LGBT propaganda" has been rejected by the Istanbul 2nd Criminal Judgeship of Peace. T24 announced that it will take the rejection decision to the Constitutional Court.
Upon the request of the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office, the Istanbul 1st Criminal Judgeship of Peace had previously decided to block access to T24's website and X account. T24 appealed the decision on October 1; on October 5, it made an additional application for the petition to be "evaluated urgently."
Evaluating the appeal, the Istanbul 2nd Criminal Judgeship of Peace rejected the application. The decision stated that the ruling regarding the access ban was "in accordance with procedure and law," "appropriate according to the justification of the decision," and that there was "no concrete evidence to change the decision."
WHAT WAS IN THE APPEAL PETITION?
Legal scholar Kerem Altıparmak, founder of the Freedom of Expression Association, also contributed his views to the appeal petition submitted by T24 lawyers Özlem Tekşen and Gökhan Tekşen. The petition argued that the access ban decision was contrary to the Constitution, the provisions of the relevant law, and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the Constitutional Court.
The petition stated that there were factual errors in the decision, noting that the claim that "118 articles capable of disrupting the family structure were written in the last 1 year" did not reflect the truth. Accordingly, only 21 of the 118 contents pointed out in the decision were published within the last year; 22 of the 57 authors mentioned as having written the articles had left T24 years ago.
The application also alleged that some of the articles were published 5, 10, and 15 years ago, and that the investigation regarding the content subject to the decision was carried out using the "mass virtual patrol" method, which has been found unlawful by the Constitutional Court.
In its appeal, T24 noted that it was technically possible to block the problematic content individually, and that despite this, imposing an access ban on the entire site constituted a disproportionate intervention. The petition stated that the decision violated the right to property as well as freedom of expression and the press.
The petition also referred to Constitutional Court decisions regarding access bans within the scope of Article 8/A of Law No. 5651. It was recalled that the Constitutional Court evaluates this method only as a protective measure that can be applied in exceptional cases where "there is a risk in delay."
T24 will go to the Constitutional Court via individual application against the decision of the Istanbul 2nd Criminal Judgeship of Peace to reject the appeal.
News Source: 12punto
