COVID-19’U İNKÂR EDEN HEKİMİN YARGILAMASI: ADİL V. GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL DAVASI VE DEĞERLENDİRMESİ

Feyza Ölçek

doi:10.59909/khm.06.02.005

TR EN

COVID-19’U İNKÂR EDEN HEKİMİN YARGILAMASI: ADİL V. GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL DAVASI VE DEĞERLENDİRMESİ

Abstract

COVID-19 pandemisi yalnızca küresel bir sağlık krizine yol açmamış, aynı zamanda ifade özgürlüğü ile kamu güveni ve sağlığının korunması arasındaki dengenin yeniden tartışılmasına neden olmuştur. Bu çalışma, Birleşik Krallık’ta görülen Adil v. General Medical Council davası üzerinden, bir hekimin bilimsel konsensüsle açık bir biçimde çeliştiği düşünülen açıklamalarının disiplin yaptırımına konu edilmesinin ifade özgürlüğü bakımından sınırlarını incelemektedir. Temyiz mercii, tıp mesleğine duyulan kamu güveninin ve kamu sağlığının korunmasını meşru amaç olarak kabul etmiş; hekimin mesleki unvanını kullanarak pandemi inkârı ve aşı karşıtı söylemleri yaymasının disiplin müdahalesini haklı kılabileceği sonucuna ulaşmıştır. Çalışmada Human Rights Act 1998 ve Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi çerçevesinde uygulanan üç aşamalı test esas alınarak müdahalenin yasallığı, meşru amacı ve demokratik toplumda gerekliliği değerlendirilmiştir.

Keywords

COVID-19, Hekim, İfade Özgürlüğü, Sınırlama, Kamu Sağlığı, Kamu Güveni.

Covid-19 Denial And Professional Discipline: An Apprasial of the Adıl v. General Medical council Decision

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has not only caused a global health crisis but has also reignited debates concerning the balance between freedom of expression and the protection of public trust and public health. This study examines, through the case of Adil v. General Medical Council in the United Kingdom, the limits of freedom of expression in situations where a physician’s statements -considered to be in clear conflict with scientific consensus- become subject to professional disciplinary sanctions. The appellate court recognized the protection of public confidence in the medical profession and the safeguarding of public health as legitimate aims. It concluded that the physicians’s use of his professional title to disseminate pandemic denial and anti-vaccination claims could justify disciplinary intervention. The study evaluates the legality of the interference, its legitimate aims, and its necessity in a democratic society by appyling the three-stage test developed under the European Convention on Human Rights and incorporated into domestic law through the Human Rights Act 1998.

Keywords

COVID-19, Physicians, Freedom of Expression, Limitation, Public Health, Public Trust.

Abstract

References

Alashry, Miral Sabry. “A Critical Analysis of Journalists’ Freedom of Expression and Access to Information While Reporting on COVID-19 Issues: A Case of Selected Arab Countries”. Journal of Information, Com-munication and Ethics in Society. 20/2 (2022): s. 193-212.
Alexy, Robert. Balancing, Constitutional Review and Representation”. International Journal of Constitutional Law. 3/4 (2005): s. 572-581.
Article 19, Coronavirus: Impact on Freedom of Expression, https://www.article19.org/coronavirus-impacts-on-freedom-of-expression/ (Erişim Tarihi: 01.02.2026.)
Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi, https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/convention_tur (Erişim: Tarihi: 13.02.2026.)
Amos, Merris. “Transplanting Human Rights Norms: The Case of the United Kingdom’s Human Rights Act”. Human Rights Quarterly. 36 (2013): s. 386-407.
Barak, Aharon. Constitutional Human Rights and Private Life, Human Rights in Private Life, ed: Daniel, Fri-edmann; Daphne, Barak- Erez, Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2001, s. 13-43.
BBC Royal Charter Archieve, https://www.bbc.com/historyofthebbc/research/royal-charter (Erişim Tarihi: 06.06.2025.)
Braithwait, Biljiana, Catharina Harby ve Goran Miletić. Covid-19 ve İnsan Haklarına Etkisi: Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi İçtihadına Genel Bir Bakış. Çev. Kasım Akbaş. Strasbourg: AIRE Centre, 2020.
Broadcasting, An Agreement Between Her Majesty’s Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and the British Broadcasting Corporation, https://downloads.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/about/how_we_govern/2016/agreement.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 06.06.2025.)
Boyar, Oya. Devletin Pozitif Yükümlülükleri ve Dolaylı Etki, İnsan Hakları Avrupa Sözleşmesi ve Anayasa (Ana-yasa Mahkemesine Bireysel Başvuru Kapsamında Bir İnceleme. Ed: İnceoğlu, Sibel. Anayasa Konseyi, 2013, s. 53-80.

Calo, Ryan. “Digital Market Manipulation”, The George Washington Law Review, 82, 2014: s. 996-1050.
Comstock, Audrey L. “Human Rights Treaty Derogation and COVID-19: WHO Guidance and State Response”. Global Constitutionalism (2026).
Communications Act 2003, https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/contents (Erişim Tarihi: 22.02.2026.)
Corrado, Micheal Louis. Comparative Constitutional Review - Cases and Materials. Durham: Carolina Academic Press, 2005
Court’s of King’s Bench Division, https://www.judiciary.uk/courts-and-tribunals/kings-bench-division/courts-of-the-kings-bench-division/ (Erişim Tarihi: 10.02.2026.)
Dainow, Joseph. “The Civil Law and the Common Law: Some Points of Comparison”. The American Journal of Comparative Law. 15/3 (1966-1967): s. 419-435.
Defamation Acts, 2013, https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/26/contents (Erişim Tarihi:02.02.2026.)
Didinmez, Mehmet Alp. “Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi’nin Üç Aşamalı Testi”. Kırıkkale Hukuk Mecmuası. 1/1 (2021): s. 149-174.
Dönmezer, Sulhi. Demokratik ve Uygar Toplumlarda İfade Özgürlüğü ve Türk Ceza Hukuku. İstanbul: Ceza Hukuku Derneği Yayınları, 2003.
Dönmezkuş, Dilara. Temel Hakların Yatay Etkisi ve İfade Özgürlüğü. Ankara: On İki Levha Yayınları, 2021.
Doctors Use of Social Media, https://www.gmc-uk.org/-/media/gmc-site/ethical-guidance/archived-guidance/doctors-use-of-social-media.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 02.02.2026.)
Doğru, Derya. Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi Yargılamasında Takdir Marjı Doktrini. Ankara: Turhan Kitabevi, 2019.
Dyer, Owen. “Wakefield Tells GMC He Was Motivated by Concern for Autistic Children”. BMJ (Clinical Research). 336 (2008): s. 738.
Dworkin, Gerald. “Paternalism”. The Monist. 56/1 1972: s. 64-84.
Ellery, David ve Michael Altshuler. “Coronavirus Containment Depends on Human Rights: Freedom of Expression and Press Are Needed to Fight Pandemic”. International Journal of Human Rights in Healthcare. 14/3 (2021): s. 270-278.
Elliot, Mark. “The Common Law and the European Convention on Human Rights: Do We Need Both?”, https://publiclawforeveryone.com/2022/02/11/the-common-law-and-the-european-convention-on-human-rights-do-we-need-both/ (Erişim Tarihi: 15.02.2026.)
Erdoğan, Mustafa. “Demokratik Toplumda İfade Özgürlüğü: Özgürlükçü Bir Perspektif”. Liberal Düşünce. 24, http://www.liberal.org.tr/sayfa/demokratik-toplumda-ifade-ozgurlugu-ozgurlukcu-bir-perspektif-mustafa-erdogan,224.php (Erişim Tarihi: 01.01. 2026)
Eren, Abdurrahman. Özgürlüklerin Sınırlanmasında Demokratik Toplum Düzeninin Gerekleri. İstanbul: Beta Yayıncılık, 2004.
Errera, Roger. Freedom of Speech in Europe, European and US Constitutionalism. ed: Nolte, George, Cambrid-ge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
European Parliament, Freedom of Expression, A Comparative-Law Perspective, The United Kingdom, Euro-pean Parliamentary Research Service, 2019.
Finkelnburg, Klaus. Demokraside İfade Özgürlüğü, içinde Düşünce Özgürlüğü. Çev: Ülner, Nihat, Hukuk Felsefesi ve Sosyolojisi Arkivi Yayınları, İstanbul: Afa Yayıncılık, 1998.
Fordham, Michael. “Common Law Rights”. Judicial Review. 16/1 (2011): s. 14-23.
General Medical Council, https://www.gmc-uk.org/ (Erişim Tarihi: 25.05.2026.)
Greene, Alan. “States Should Declare a State of Emergency Using Article 15 ECHR to Confront the Coronavirus Pandemic”. https://strasbourgobservers.com/2020/04/01/states-should-declare-a-state-of-emergency-using-article-15-echr-to-confront-the-coronavirus-pandemic/ (Erişim Tarihi: 07.01.2026.)
Good Medical Practice Content, https://www.gmc-uk.org/professional-standards/the-professional-standards/good-medical-practice/domain-4-trust-and-professionalism (Erişim Tarihi: 02.02.2026.)
Gostin, Lawrence O.; Gronvall, Gigi. “The Origins of Covid-19 -Why It Matters (and Why It Doesn’t)”. New England Journal of Medicine, 388/25 2023: s. 2305-2308.
Gümüş Boyacı, Özgem Tuğçe. Kriz Zamanlarında İnsan Hakları: Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi 15. Madde Kapsamında Derogasyon Rejimi. Ankara: Adalet Yayınevi, 2023.
Harris, David, Michael O’Boyle, Ed Bates ve Carla Buckle. Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi Hukuku. Çev. Mehveş Bingöllü Kılcı ve Ulaş Karan. Strasbourg: Avrupa Konseyi Yayınları, 2013.
Harrison, Joel A. Andrew Wakefield Has Never Been Exonerated: Why Justice Mitting’s Decision in the Professor John Walker-Smith Case Does Not Apply to Wakefield. 2016.
Haupt, Claudia. “Professional Speech”, Yale Law Journal, 125/5 (2016), s. 1240-1302.
Human Rights Act 1998, https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/crossheading/introduction (Erişim Tarihi: 14.02.2026.)
Ioannidis, John P.A. “Citation Impact and Social Media Visibility of Great Barrington and John Snow Signatories for COVID-19 Strategy”. BMJ Open, 2022, s. 1-8.
İnsan Hakları Evrensel Beyannamesi, https://www.hsk.gov.tr/eklentiler/dosyalar/9a3bfe74-cdc4-4ae4-b876-8cb1d7eeae05.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 01.01.2026.)
Jasanoff, Sheila. States of Knowledge: The Co-Production of Science and Social Order. London: Routledge, 2004.
Karan, Ulaş. İfade Özgürlüğü, Anayasa Mahkemesine Bireysel Başvuru El Kitapları Serisi 2. Avrupa Konseyi, 2018.
Kapani, Münci. Kamu Hürriyetleri. Ankara: Yetkin Yayınları, 1993.
Kişisel ve Siyasal Haklar Uluslararası Sözleşmesi, https://inhak.adalet.gov.tr/Resimler/Dokuman/2312020093321bm_05.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 02.01.2026.)
Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions Volume II, Number 2. International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, Chicago: Foundations of the Unity of Science, 1970.
Lavrysen, Laurens. Human Rights in a Positive State: Rethinking the Relationship between Positive and Negative Obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights. Cambridge: Intersentia, 2016.
Lipson, Leslie. Demokratik Uygarlık. İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Yayınları, 1984.
Marecos, Joao; Shattock, Ethan; Bartlett, Oliver; Silva, Francisco Goianada; Maheswaran, Hendramoorthy; Ashrafian, Hutan; Darzi, Ara. “Health Misinformation and Freedom of Expression: Considerations for Policymakers”. Health Economics, Policy and Law, 18/2 (2023): s. 204-217.
Marsili, Marco. “COVID-19 Infodemic: Fake News, Real Censorship, Information and Freedom of Expression in Time of Coronavirus”. Europea. 2 (2021): s. 147-168.
Maxmen, Amy; Mallapaty, Smriti. “The COVID Lab-Leak Hypothesis: What Scientists Do and Don’t Know”, Nature, 594/7863 2021: s. 313-315.
Medical Act 1983, https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1983/54/contents (Erişim Tarihi: 24.01.2026.)
Melo-Martín, Inmaculada de; Intemann,Kristen. “Scientific Dissent and Public Policy”, EMBO Reports, 14/3 2013: s. 231-235.
Norton, Helen, “The Government’s Speech and the Constitution”, University of Illinois Law Review, 2022, s. 1671-1694.
Ölçek, Feyza. “Ulusal Koruma Mekanizmalarının Bir Örneği Olarak 1998 İnsan Hakları Yasası”. İnsan Hakları Yıllığı. 42/1 (2024): s. 205-245.
Ölmez, Gökhan. Suçun Tanımlanabilir ve Değerlendirilebilir Unsurları. Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi, Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü, Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, 2020.
Roosevelt, Franklin. 1941 State of the Union Address “The Four Freedoms. https://voicesofdemocracy.umd.edu/fdr-the-four-freedoms-speech-text/ (Erişim Tarihi: 02.01.2026.)
Rowbottom, Jakob. Media Law. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2024.
Rowbottom, Jakob. “To Rant, Vent and Converse Protecting Low Level Digital Speech”. The Cambridge Law Journal. 71/2 (2012): s. 355-383.
Russell, Bertrand. Free Thought and Offical Propaganda. Londra: Watts&Co., 1922.
Penney, Jonathan W. Understanding Chilling Effects, Minnesota Law Review, 106/3, 2022: s. 1452-1513.
Post, Robert. Democracy, Expertise and Academic Freedom, A First Amendment Jurisprudence for the Modern State. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2012.
Salihpaşaoğlu, Yaşar. Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi ve Yargılamada Kullandığı Yöntem ve İlkeler. Ankara: Adalet Yayınevi, 2020.
Salihpaşaoğlu, Yaşar. Türkiye’de Basın Özgürlüğü. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık, 2007.
Scanlon, Thomas. “A Theory of Freedom of Expression”. Philosophy and Public Affairs. 1/2 (1972): s. 204-226.
Schauer, Frederick. “Fear, Risk and the First Amendment: Unraveling the Chilling Effect”, William&Mary Law School Scholarship Repository, 1978, s. 685-732.
Stoyanova, Vladislava. Positive Obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights: Within and Beyond Boundaries. Oxford University Press, 2023.
Sunstein, Cass; Thaler, Richard. Nudge. New Haven, Yale University Press, 2008.
Süngü, Fatih. “Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi ve Anayasa Mahkemesine Bireysel Başvuru Kararlarında “Chilling Effect” Kavramı”. İnsan Hakları Yıllığı, 39, 2021, s. 105-134.
Taylor, Hughson A. ve Simina Dragoş. “The United Kingdom’s Free Speech Crisis: From the Fringes to a Ma-instream Political Project 2010-2023”. Current Sociology. 73/6 (2024): s .856-873.
Takahashi- Arai, Yutaka. The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine and the Principle of Proportionality in the Jurisprundence of the ECHR. Oxford: Intersentia Publication, 2001.
Tümay, Murat. “The Concept of ‘Necessary in a Democratic Society’ in Restriction of Fundamental Rights A Reflection From European Convention on Human Rights”, Human Rights Review, 1/2 (2011): s. 1-15.
Özdemir, Şebnem. Liberter Paternalizm (Özgürlükçü Babacılık) ve Devlet Politikaları, Toplumsal Politika Dergi-si, 3/1 (2022), s. 38-51.
UK Parliament, House of Lords Library, Freedom of Expression Online: Communications and Digital Commit-tee Report, https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/freedom-of-expression-online-communications-and-digital-committee-report/, (Erişim Tarihi: 21.01.2026.)
UNESCO, Communication and Information Response to COVID-19, https://www.unesco.org/en/covid-19/communication-and-information-response, (Erişim Tarihi: 03.01.2026.)
Utomo, Laksanto. “Criminalizing the Freedom of Expression by State During COVID-19 Pandemic in Indone-sia”. International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences. 16/2 (2021): s. 416-430.
Voorhoof, Dirk. “Freedom of Expression under the European Human Rights System. From Sunday Times (no. 1) v. UK (1979) to Hachette Filipacchi Associés (“Ici Paris”) v. France (2009)”, Inter American and European Human Rights Journal 2/1-2, 2009, s. 34-40.
Yüzer Eltimur, Dilara. AİHS Kapsamında Özel Hayatın ve Aile Hayatının Korunmasında Devletin Pozitif Yükümlülükleri. İstanbul: On İki Levha Yayınları, 2019.
Zysset, Alain. “To Derogate or to Restrict? The COVID-19 Pandemic, Proportionality and the Justificatory Gap in European Human Rights Law”. Jus Cogens. 4/3 (2022): s. 300-320.
WHO Policy Brief: COVID-19 Infodemic Management, https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-2019-nCoV-Policy_Brief-Infodemic-2022.1, (Erişim Tarihi: 01.01.2026.)

Details

Primary Language

Turkish

Subjects

International Humanitarian and Human Rights Law

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Feyza Ölçek ^*
0000-0002-0910-5832
Türkiye

Publication Date

October 30, 2026

Submission Date

March 4, 2026

Acceptance Date

July 22, 2026

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 6 Number: 2

DOI

https://doi.org/10.59909/khm.06.02.005

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA43PS64YG

APA

Ölçek, F. (2026). COVID-19’U İNKÂR EDEN HEKİMİN YARGILAMASI: ADİL V. GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL DAVASI VE DEĞERLENDİRMESİ. Kırıkkale Hukuk Mecmuası, 6(2), 513-546. https://doi.org/10.59909/khm.06.02.005

AMA

1.Ölçek F. COVID-19’U İNKÂR EDEN HEKİMİN YARGILAMASI: ADİL V. GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL DAVASI VE DEĞERLENDİRMESİ. KHM. 2026;6(2):513-546. doi:10.59909/khm.06.02.005

Chicago

Ölçek, Feyza. 2026. “COVID-19’U İNKÂR EDEN HEKİMİN YARGILAMASI: ADİL V. GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL DAVASI VE DEĞERLENDİRMESİ”. Kırıkkale Hukuk Mecmuası 6 (2): 513-46. https://doi.org/10.59909/khm.06.02.005.

EndNote

Ölçek F (October 1, 2026) COVID-19’U İNKÂR EDEN HEKİMİN YARGILAMASI: ADİL V. GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL DAVASI VE DEĞERLENDİRMESİ. Kırıkkale Hukuk Mecmuası 6 2 513–546.

IEEE

[1]F. Ölçek, “COVID-19’U İNKÂR EDEN HEKİMİN YARGILAMASI: ADİL V. GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL DAVASI VE DEĞERLENDİRMESİ”, KHM, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 513–546, Oct. 2026, doi: 10.59909/khm.06.02.005.

ISNAD

Ölçek, Feyza. “COVID-19’U İNKÂR EDEN HEKİMİN YARGILAMASI: ADİL V. GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL DAVASI VE DEĞERLENDİRMESİ”. Kırıkkale Hukuk Mecmuası 6/2 (October 1, 2026): 513-546. https://doi.org/10.59909/khm.06.02.005.

JAMA

1.Ölçek F. COVID-19’U İNKÂR EDEN HEKİMİN YARGILAMASI: ADİL V. GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL DAVASI VE DEĞERLENDİRMESİ. KHM. 2026;6:513–546.

MLA

Ölçek, Feyza. “COVID-19’U İNKÂR EDEN HEKİMİN YARGILAMASI: ADİL V. GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL DAVASI VE DEĞERLENDİRMESİ”. Kırıkkale Hukuk Mecmuası, vol. 6, no. 2, Oct. 2026, pp. 513-46, doi:10.59909/khm.06.02.005.

Vancouver

1.Feyza Ölçek. COVID-19’U İNKÂR EDEN HEKİMİN YARGILAMASI: ADİL V. GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL DAVASI VE DEĞERLENDİRMESİ. KHM. 2026 Oct. 1;6(2):513-46. doi:10.59909/khm.06.02.005

This work is licensed under Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International cc.svg?ref=chooser-v1 by.svg?ref=chooser-v1 nc.svg?ref=chooser-v1

COVID-19’U İNKÂR EDEN HEKİMİN YARGILAMASI: ADİL V. GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL DAVASI VE DEĞERLENDİRMESİ

Abstract

Keywords

Covid-19 Denial And Professional Discipline: An Apprasial of the Adıl v. General Medical council Decision

Abstract

Keywords

Abstract

References

Details

Primary Language

Subjects

Journal Section

Authors

Publication Date

Submission Date

Acceptance Date

Published in Issue

DOI

IZ

Cite