Breaking decision from the Constitutional Court regarding illegal internet broadcasts
According to the Constitutional Court's decision published in the Official Gazette, the CHP filed a lawsuit with the Constitutional Court seeking the annulment and stay of execution of the relevant article of Law No. 7346 on Amendments to Certain Laws, which allows access to entire websites to be blocked if football matches are illegally used online. The Constitutional Court ruled that the regulation be annulled and that the decision would take effect nine months later.
In the justification, it was stated that the rule in question regulates the procedures and principles regarding the blocking of access to the relevant broadcast, section, section or the entire website in case it is determined that broadcasts related to football matches within the borders of the Republic of Turkey are being made available on the internet in an unlawful manner, and that the rule foresees a restriction on freedom of expression.
"RULES MUST BE SPECIFIC IN A WAY THAT DOES NOT ALLOW ARBITRATION" It was emphasized in the justification that the formal existence of a legal regulation aimed at limiting freedom of expression is not sufficient, and that legal rules must be "specific and predictable" in a way that does not allow arbitrariness, and the following determinations were made:
According to the rule, if it is determined that broadcasts of football matches within the borders of the Republic of Turkey are being made available on the internet in an unlawful manner, access to the relevant broadcast, section, or section (in the form of a URL, etc.) will first be blocked. If the violation cannot be prevented in this way, access to the entire website will be blocked. The rule stipulates that the authority to block access to the relevant content or the entire website will be exercised by the Board of Directors and the administrative unit to be established within the TFF. The rule does not contain a provision requiring the Board of Directors or the administrative unit to submit the access blocking decision to a judge or court for approval.
In cases where broadcasts of football matches within the borders of the Republic of Turkey are unlawfully made available online, the legislator has the discretion to determine the authorities that will block access to the relevant content or the entire website. However, regulations authorizing the relevant authorities to use a severe restriction, such as blocking access, without requiring the approval of judicial authorities must contain safeguards against arbitrary practices.
"RESTRICTIONS ON FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION ARE NOT LAWFUL" The justification, which states that the Turkish Football Federation is a public legal entity that benefits from public privileges and is affiliated with the public, explains that the TFF Board of Directors has been granted the authority to block access, and that this authority cannot be overseen by the relevant ministry. The justification states, "In this regard, the rule granting the Board of Directors and the administrative unit, whose members have no specified qualifications, structure, or composition, the authority to make executive decisions regarding the restriction of freedom of expression, without being subject to Ministry oversight, cannot be said to contain measures against arbitrary practices."
It was noted that the access blocking method stipulated in the rule was similar to the procedure stipulated in Article 8/A of Law No. 5651, which the Constitutional Court had previously annulled, and that the justifications outlined in the Constitutional Court's decisions regarding the principle of legality also applied to this rule. The justification concluded that, therefore, the restriction on freedom of expression imposed by the rule did not meet the requirement of legality.
Source: ANKA
Tele1
