Hitchhiking defense rejected! Court rules 'Martı Tag' is 'illegal transport'

During a traffic inspection conducted in İzmir's Alaçatı neighborhood on August 14, H.O. was stopped on suspicion of engaging in illegal transport. Denying the accusation, H.O. claimed that the 4 people in his vehicle were hitchhikers.

H.O.'s vehicle was banned from traffic for 60 days for engaging in illegal transport for a fee, and an administrative fine of 20,342 liras was imposed. H.O. applied to the judiciary for the cancellation of the action. H.O. claimed that he resides in his house in Çeşme during the summer and that while returning to İzmir on the day of the incident, he picked up 4 people who were hitchhiking at night so they would not have to wait.

HITCHHIKING DEFENSE REJECTED

Reviewing the case, the İzmir 6th Administrative Court stated that S.Ç., B.D., B.S., S.Y., and D.S.K., who were in H.O.'s vehicle during the inspection, reached H.O. through the application called 'Martı Tag' and were traveling for a fee. It was noted that the 4 individuals signed the report prepared for identification purposes, and that H.O. also had his signature on the report.

The court stated that, in accordance with the legislative provisions enacted by the İzmir Metropolitan Municipality, permission or a license must be obtained from the authorized municipality to carry out passenger transport within the metropolitan municipality boundaries. The court ruled that it was established that H.O. was engaged in passenger transport without obtaining permission and a license from the authorized municipality. The judge, therefore, decided to reject H.O.'s request for the cancellation of the action.

Evaluating the court's decision, lawyer Ahmet Can Gürlek said, "Martı Tag is said to be a form of 'favor transport' (hatır taşımacılığı). According to our law, the best example of favor transport is hitchhiking. However, when the application is used, since a fee is paid by the passenger, the court concludes that there is no favor transport here. There is also a passenger transport contract. That is why the administration decided to reject the cancellation of the action. The important point here is that the fee is determinable. If the fee were not determinable, and if a situation where a fee was paid did not occur, the court could have characterized this transport operation not as a commercial activity but as favor transport, and could have decided to accept the case and cancel the administrative action."

News Source: 12punto