AİHM ve Anayasa Mahkemesi İçtihadında İnternette Topyekûn Erişim Engelleme ve İfade Özgürlüğü Kapsamında Öngörülen Hukuki Güvenceler
Abstract
Bu makale, internetin bilgi toplumunda oynadığı kritik rolü ve ifade özgürlüğünün korunmasını merkeze alarak, Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi (AİHM) ve Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Anayasa Mahkemesinin internette erişimin topyekûn engellenmesi konusundaki içtihatlarını karşılaştırmalı bir perspektifle incelemektedir. Çalışmada, internetin düşünce ve ifade özgürlüğünün hem korunup geliştirilmesi hem de ihlal edilmesi bakımından internet öncesi döneme kıyasla çok geniş bir alan sunduğu vurgulanmış, bu hakkın internetin kendine has doğası göz önünde bulundurularak internet mecrasında nasıl somutlaştırılması gerektiği AİHM ve Anayasa Mahkemesinin içtihatlarında incelenmiştir. AİHM içtihadının erişim engellemeler ve ifade özgürlüğüne yönelik müdahalelerin sınırlarını netleştirdiği ve devletlerin bu müdahalelerle ilgili sağlaması gereken hukuki güvenceleri standartlaştırdığı ortaya konulmuş, Anayasa Mahkemesi’nin içtihadının AİHM içtihadına paralel olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Ancak buna rağmen, Türkiye’deki olağan kanun yolu makamlarının Anayasa Mahkemesinin içtihadını sistematik olarak uygulamadığı, Anayasa Mahkemesinin ise önüne gelen başvuruları karara bağlama süresinin oldukça uzun olduğu vurgulanmaktadır. Mevcut durumda Anayasa Mahkemesinin internette topyekûn erişim engellemelere dair uyuşmazlıklarda etkili bir iç hukuk yolu olmadığı savunulmaktadır.
References
- Akdeniz Y, ‘The Calm Before the Storm? The Inadmissibility Decision in Wikimedia Foundation v Turkey' (Strasbourg Observers 2022). google scholar
- Akdeniz Y ve Güven O, 'Engelliweb 2022 Sulh Ceza Hakimliklerinin Gölgesinde AnaYasa Mahkemesi' (2023). google scholar
- Aliyev C, Çevrimiçi ifade Özgürlüğü Teorisi ve Hukuku (Liberte 2018). google scholar
- Ayata A, ‘Restrictions of internet access in Turkey: legislation, methods and practice’ (2024) 69(8) EDPACS 21- 39. google scholar
- Benedek W ve Kettemann M, Freedom of Expression and the Internet (1st ed, Council of Europe 2013). google scholar
- Benedek W, Bauer V ve Kettemann M (edr), Internet Governance and the Information Society: Global Perspectives and European Dimensions (Utrecht 2008). google scholar
- Caren N, Andrews KT ve Lu T, 'ContemporarY Social Movements in a HYbrid Media Environment' (2020) 46 Annual Review of SociologY 443-465. google scholar
-
‘Columbia Global Freedom of Expression’ (globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu)
- Deibert R, PalfreY J, Ronozinski R ve Zittrain J, Access Denied: The Practice and Policy of Global Internet Filtering (The MIT Press 2008). google scholar
- Goldsmith J ve Wu T, Who Controls the Internet? Illusions of a Borderless World (Oxford UniversitY Press 2006). google scholar
- GosztonYi G, ‘The European Court of Human Rights: Internet Access as a Means of Receiving and Imparting Information and Ideas’ (2020) 6(2) International Comparative Jurisprudence 134- 140. google scholar
- Jenzen O, Erhart I, Eslen-ZiYa H, Korkut U ve McGarrY A, 'The SYmbol of Social Media in ContemporarY Protest: Twitter and the Gezi Park Movement' (2021) 27(2) Convergence 414-437. google scholar
- Karakaş I, 'Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi İçtihatlarında Etkili Başvuru Yolu: AnaYasa Mahkemesi’ne BireYsel Başvuru Çerçevesinde Gözlemler' (2015) 4(7) AnaYasa Hukuku Dergisi 245-259. google scholar
- KaYa M, Teknik ve Hukuki Boyutlarıyla internete Erişimin Engellenmesi 5651 Sayılı Kanun ve Dünya Uygulamaları (On İki Levha YaYıncılık 2020). google scholar
- Lendvai G, ‘HYbrid Regimes and the Right to Access the Internet - Findings from TurkeY and Russia in the Context of the Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights’ (2024) 2 ELTE Law Journal 87- 107. google scholar
- LYon D, ‘Surveillance Culture: Engagement, Exposure, and Ethics in Digital ModernitY’ (2017) 11 International Journal of Communication 824-842. google scholar
- Mladenov M ve Staparski T, ‘Human Rights Approach to Internet Access with a Special Emphasis on the Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights’ (2022) 24 Review of European Law 23- 38. google scholar
- Özenç B, ‘The Impact of the European Convention on Human Rights on the Legal Order of TurkeY: Achievements and Problems’ (2018) 2 GalatasaraY Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 129-155. google scholar
- Parti K ve Marin L, ‘Ensuring Freedoms and Protecting Rights in the Governance of the Internet: A Comparative AnalYsis on Blocking Measures and Internet Providers’ Removal of Illegal Internet Content’ (2013) 9 (1) Journal of ContemporarY European Research 138-159. google scholar
- Pollicino O ve Susi M, ‘Internet and human rights law: Introduction’ (2019) 25 European Law Journal 120-121. google scholar
- 'Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression' (2011), UN Doc A/HRC/17/27. google scholar
- 'The Promotion, Protection and EnjoYment of Human Rights on the Internet' (2012), UN Doc A/HRC/20/8. google scholar
- Tan M, Küresel Bilgi Akışının Korunmasında internet Özgürlüğü ve Devletin Müdahalesi (Oniki Levha YaYinları 2022). google scholar
- Uçarer O, ‘Eliminating External Constraints: An AnalYsis of the Domestic Constitutional Courts’ Modalities of Non-Compliance with the ECtHR Judgments in HungarY, Poland and TurkeY’ (LL.M. Thesis, Central European UniversitY 2022). google scholar
- Wisniewski A, ‘The European Court of Human Rights and Internet-Related Cases’ (2021) 26(3) BialYstok Legal Studies 109- 133. google scholar
Blanket Ban on the Internet and Legal Safeguards Provided Within the Scope of Freedom of Expression in the Jurısprudence of the ECHR and the Constitutional Court
Abstract
This article takes a comparative perspective to examine the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Turkiye on the issue of blanket internet access bans, centering on the critical role the internet plays in the information society and the protection of freedom of expression. The study emphasizes that the internet provides a much broader scope for both the protection and violation of thought and expression freedoms compared to the pre-internet era, and examines how this right should be concretized in the internet medium, considering the unique nature of the internet, through the jurisprudence of the ECtHR and the Constitutional Court. The work reveals that the ECtHR’s jurisprudence has clarified the limits of access bans and interventions on freedom of expression and has standardized the legal safeguards that states must provide in relation to these interventions, and it has been determined that the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court is parallel to that of the ECtHR. However, despite this, it is stressed that the ordinary legal authorities in Turkiye do not systematically implement the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court, and that the Constitutional Court takes a very long time to resolve the applications that come before it, arguing that in the current situation, the Constitutional Court is not an effective domestic legal remedy in disputes regarding blanket internet access blocks.
References
- Akdeniz Y, ‘The Calm Before the Storm? The Inadmissibility Decision in Wikimedia Foundation v Turkey' (Strasbourg Observers 2022). google scholar
- Akdeniz Y ve Güven O, 'Engelliweb 2022 Sulh Ceza Hakimliklerinin Gölgesinde AnaYasa Mahkemesi' (2023). google scholar
- Aliyev C, Çevrimiçi ifade Özgürlüğü Teorisi ve Hukuku (Liberte 2018). google scholar
- Ayata A, ‘Restrictions of internet access in Turkey: legislation, methods and practice’ (2024) 69(8) EDPACS 21- 39. google scholar
- Benedek W ve Kettemann M, Freedom of Expression and the Internet (1st ed, Council of Europe 2013). google scholar
- Benedek W, Bauer V ve Kettemann M (edr), Internet Governance and the Information Society: Global Perspectives and European Dimensions (Utrecht 2008). google scholar
- Caren N, Andrews KT ve Lu T, 'ContemporarY Social Movements in a HYbrid Media Environment' (2020) 46 Annual Review of SociologY 443-465. google scholar
-
‘Columbia Global Freedom of Expression’ (globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu)
- Deibert R, PalfreY J, Ronozinski R ve Zittrain J, Access Denied: The Practice and Policy of Global Internet Filtering (The MIT Press 2008). google scholar
- Goldsmith J ve Wu T, Who Controls the Internet? Illusions of a Borderless World (Oxford UniversitY Press 2006). google scholar
- GosztonYi G, ‘The European Court of Human Rights: Internet Access as a Means of Receiving and Imparting Information and Ideas’ (2020) 6(2) International Comparative Jurisprudence 134- 140. google scholar
- Jenzen O, Erhart I, Eslen-ZiYa H, Korkut U ve McGarrY A, 'The SYmbol of Social Media in ContemporarY Protest: Twitter and the Gezi Park Movement' (2021) 27(2) Convergence 414-437. google scholar
- Karakaş I, 'Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi İçtihatlarında Etkili Başvuru Yolu: AnaYasa Mahkemesi’ne BireYsel Başvuru Çerçevesinde Gözlemler' (2015) 4(7) AnaYasa Hukuku Dergisi 245-259. google scholar
- KaYa M, Teknik ve Hukuki Boyutlarıyla internete Erişimin Engellenmesi 5651 Sayılı Kanun ve Dünya Uygulamaları (On İki Levha YaYıncılık 2020). google scholar
- Lendvai G, ‘HYbrid Regimes and the Right to Access the Internet - Findings from TurkeY and Russia in the Context of the Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights’ (2024) 2 ELTE Law Journal 87- 107. google scholar
- LYon D, ‘Surveillance Culture: Engagement, Exposure, and Ethics in Digital ModernitY’ (2017) 11 International Journal of Communication 824-842. google scholar
- Mladenov M ve Staparski T, ‘Human Rights Approach to Internet Access with a Special Emphasis on the Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights’ (2022) 24 Review of European Law 23- 38. google scholar
- Özenç B, ‘The Impact of the European Convention on Human Rights on the Legal Order of TurkeY: Achievements and Problems’ (2018) 2 GalatasaraY Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 129-155. google scholar
- Parti K ve Marin L, ‘Ensuring Freedoms and Protecting Rights in the Governance of the Internet: A Comparative AnalYsis on Blocking Measures and Internet Providers’ Removal of Illegal Internet Content’ (2013) 9 (1) Journal of ContemporarY European Research 138-159. google scholar
- Pollicino O ve Susi M, ‘Internet and human rights law: Introduction’ (2019) 25 European Law Journal 120-121. google scholar
- 'Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression' (2011), UN Doc A/HRC/17/27. google scholar
- 'The Promotion, Protection and EnjoYment of Human Rights on the Internet' (2012), UN Doc A/HRC/20/8. google scholar
- Tan M, Küresel Bilgi Akışının Korunmasında internet Özgürlüğü ve Devletin Müdahalesi (Oniki Levha YaYinları 2022). google scholar
- Uçarer O, ‘Eliminating External Constraints: An AnalYsis of the Domestic Constitutional Courts’ Modalities of Non-Compliance with the ECtHR Judgments in HungarY, Poland and TurkeY’ (LL.M. Thesis, Central European UniversitY 2022). google scholar
- Wisniewski A, ‘The European Court of Human Rights and Internet-Related Cases’ (2021) 26(3) BialYstok Legal Studies 109- 133. google scholar
Details
| Primary Language | Turkish |
|---|---|
| Subjects | Public Law (Other) |
| Journal Section | Research Article |
| Authors | |
| Submission Date | April 21, 2024 |
| Acceptance Date | August 25, 2025 |
| Publication Date | October 24, 2025 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2025.83.3.014 |
| IZ | https://izlik.org/JA34JX98TY |
| Published in Issue | Year 2025 Volume: 83 Issue: 3 |