Araştırma Makalesi

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF JOINT DATA CONTROLLERSHIP UNDER EU AND TURKISH LAW

Cilt: 34 Sayı: 1 30 Haziran 2026
PDF İndir
TR EN

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF JOINT DATA CONTROLLERSHIP UNDER EU AND TURKISH LAW

Öz

Technological development and the expansion of digital ecosystems have significantly increased the scale, speed and complexity of personal data processing. This evolution has reshaped the legal meaning of “data controller” and brought forward the modern notion of joint data controllership, particularly under the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Although Turkish Personal Data Protection Law No. 6698 (PDPL) does not explicitly regulate joint data controllers, the processing practices of both public and private actors demonstrate that multiple entities frequently determine purposes and means together. Therefore, a comprehensive comparative analysis is necessary to clarify the legal nature, conditions, obligations and liability of joint data controllers under both legal systems. This article consists of three parts. Part I examines the historical evolution of personal data protection, basic concepts such as personal data, sensitive data and data processing, and core principles guiding lawful processing. Part II analyses the emergence, definition and legal basis of joint data controllership, including seminal Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) rulings—Wirtschaftsakademie, Jehovah’s Witnesses and Fashion ID—which shaped the concept. Part III investigates the consequences of joint data controllership, focusing on liability, compensation, internal allocation of responsibility, and the applicability of joint liability principles in Turkish law. Through this comparative approach, the article demonstrates that Turkey must incorporate explicit joint data controllership rules into the PDPL to close interpretive gaps, strengthen legal certainty, and align its framework with international standards. The analysis also highlights that joint data controllership serves both to enhance data protection and to impose more burdens on organisations operating in complex digital environments.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Etik Beyan

It is hereby declared that scientific and ethical principles were ashered to in the conduct and writing of this study, and that all sources used have been properly cited. The author did not use any generative AI tool for data analysis, coding, interpretation, or the generation of research findings. The author reviewed and approved all revisions and takes full responsibility for the manuscript’s final content.

Kaynakça

  1. Alsenoy, B. (2016). Liability under EU data protection law: From Directive 95/46 to the General Data Protection Regulation. Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and E-Commerce Law, 7, 271–288.
  2. Ardıç, Ş. (2018). Kişisel verilerin silinmesi, yok edilmesi veya anonim hale getirilmesi. Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi, 24(2), 748–752.
  3. Atasoy, A. S. (2019). 6698 sayılı Kişisel Verilerin Korunması Kanunu ve GDPR kapsamında veri sorumlusu ve veri işleyen kavramları. İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası, 77(2), 755.
  4. Ayözger, Ç. (2019). Kişisel verilerin korunması hukuku: Elektronik haberleşme sektörüne ilişkin özel düzenlemeler dahil (2nd ed.). Beta Basım Yayın.
  5. Ayrancı, H., Çolak, A., & Özcan, O. (2022). Kişisel Verilerin Korunması Kanunu şerhi. Yetkin Yayınları.
  6. Başalp, N. (2019). Kişisel verilerin korunması hukukunda veri sorumlusu, veri işleyen ve ortak veri sorumlusu. Kişisel Verileri Koruma Dergisi, 1(1), 22–25.
  7. Blume, P. (2013). Controller and processor: Is there a risk of confusion? International Data Privacy Law, 3(2), 140–145.
  8. Bygrave, L. A. (2014). Data privacy law: An international perspective. Oxford University Press.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

İngilizce

Konular

Avrupa Birliği Hukuku

Bölüm

Araştırma Makalesi

Yazarlar

Yayımlanma Tarihi

30 Haziran 2026

Gönderilme Tarihi

30 Kasım 2025

Kabul Tarihi

30 Haziran 2026

Yayımlandığı Sayı

Yıl 2026 Cilt: 34 Sayı: 1

Kaynak Göster

APA
Çalışkan, Ü. (2026). A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF JOINT DATA CONTROLLERSHIP UNDER EU AND TURKISH LAW. Marmara Üniversitesi Avrupa Araştırmaları Enstitüsü Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi, 34(1), 33-57. https://doi.org/10.29228/mjes.482
AMA
1.Çalışkan Ü. A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF JOINT DATA CONTROLLERSHIP UNDER EU AND TURKISH LAW. MJES. 2026;34(1):33-57. doi:10.29228/mjes.482
Chicago
Çalışkan, Ümit. 2026. “A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF JOINT DATA CONTROLLERSHIP UNDER EU AND TURKISH LAW”. Marmara Üniversitesi Avrupa Araştırmaları Enstitüsü Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi 34 (1): 33-57. https://doi.org/10.29228/mjes.482.
EndNote
Çalışkan Ü (01 Haziran 2026) A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF JOINT DATA CONTROLLERSHIP UNDER EU AND TURKISH LAW. Marmara Üniversitesi Avrupa Araştırmaları Enstitüsü Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi 34 1 33–57.
IEEE
[1]Ü. Çalışkan, “A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF JOINT DATA CONTROLLERSHIP UNDER EU AND TURKISH LAW”, MJES, c. 34, sy 1, ss. 33–57, Haz. 2026, doi: 10.29228/mjes.482.
ISNAD
Çalışkan, Ümit. “A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF JOINT DATA CONTROLLERSHIP UNDER EU AND TURKISH LAW”. Marmara Üniversitesi Avrupa Araştırmaları Enstitüsü Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi 34/1 (01 Haziran 2026): 33-57. https://doi.org/10.29228/mjes.482.
JAMA
1.Çalışkan Ü. A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF JOINT DATA CONTROLLERSHIP UNDER EU AND TURKISH LAW. MJES. 2026;34:33–57.
MLA
Çalışkan, Ümit. “A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF JOINT DATA CONTROLLERSHIP UNDER EU AND TURKISH LAW”. Marmara Üniversitesi Avrupa Araştırmaları Enstitüsü Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi, c. 34, sy 1, Haziran 2026, ss. 33-57, doi:10.29228/mjes.482.
Vancouver
1.Ümit Çalışkan. A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF JOINT DATA CONTROLLERSHIP UNDER EU AND TURKISH LAW. MJES. 01 Haziran 2026;34(1):33-57. doi:10.29228/mjes.482