The Constitutional Court's decision on insults has sparked controversy.

When catalog crimes specified through internet publications were committed, courts would make a decision within 24 hours upon the application of the parties involved, ensuring the removal of the relevant news or content. However, in the Constitutional Court's decision that came into effect on October 10, 2024, this situation was reversed. Even if personal rights are severely violated through internet publications by insults, peace criminal courts will not be able to decide on the removal of content or the blocking of access.

Evaluating the issue, Chief Public Prosecutor Asım Ekren stated that the Constitutional Court's decision significantly affects citizens and private-public institutions, the legislative body (the Grand National Assembly of Turkey), judicial authorities, and journalists as members of the press. "In cases where there is sufficient suspicion regarding certain serious crimes, the authority of the President of the Information Technologies and Communications Authority (BTK) to order the removal of content and/or blocking of access as an administrative protection measure; and the authority of peace criminal courts to order the removal of content and/or blocking of access as a judicial protection measure upon the request of the parties claiming that their personal rights have been violated has been completely revoked," he said.

"AFTER THE AYM DECISION, 2 OPTIONS ARE ON THE AGENDA"

Regarding the completely revoked legal provision, Ekren continued his explanation about the paths that can be followed until a new legal regulation is made by the Grand National Assembly of Turkey: "After the Constitutional Court's annulment decision came into effect, since there is currently no legal regulation, can individuals or institutions whose personal rights are violated through the internet protect their rights against these publications (how)? It is possible to say that the parties can act in two ways according to the existing legal regulations."

"RIGHT TO CORRECTION AND RESPONSE CAN BE USED"

"First of all, let us state that in cases where individuals' rights are violated in publications on internet news sites, the practice of using the right to correction and response continues in accordance with Article 14 of the Press Law No. 5187. Even though there is a certain process and procedure, this right can be exercised. Not every internet publication qualifies as an internet news site. Those registered with the relevant public prosecutor's office are considered internet news sites."

"JUDGE CAN DECIDE ON PROTECTION"

"Secondly, they can apply based on Article 24 of the Turkish Civil Code No. 4721, which is accepted as a general principle against unlawful attacks on personal rights. According to the first paragraph of this article, a person whose personal rights have been unlawfully attacked can request protection from the judge against the attackers. According to the second paragraph of the article, unless justified by the consent of the person whose personal rights have been violated, a superior private or public interest, or the use of the authority granted by law, every attack on personal rights is unlawful."

"DECISIONS SHOULD BE MADE PRECAUTIONARILY"

"According to this article, making a decision will only be possible after a certain procedure in accordance with the Civil Procedure Code. In our opinion, regarding the balance between the nature of internet publications and the protection of personal rights, the judge should examine the relevant publication personally, as much as possible without resorting to other research or examination, and request a brief response from the relevant internet publication in electronic form. Based on the response given, or in cases where no response is provided or it is not possible to reach it electronically, a precautionary decision should be made by granting partial superiority to the press publication. In other words, through an uncontested application regarding whether the personal right has been violated, based solely on the statements in the application, it should be determined whether expressions that violate personal rights and constitute unlawful acts have been used, and if it is accepted that the personal right has been violated, then it should be quickly and effectively decided whether the expressions in the publication fall within the scope of freedom of expression and press freedom.

"THE STATUS OF THE ADDRESSEE SHOULD BE ESSENTIAL IN DECISIONS"

"As a result, it has been highlighted in the Constitutional Court's decision that the review of appropriateness has also come to the forefront, and it has been ruled without knowing the extent of the number of peace criminal court decisions outside the basis and applications made to it, without investigating this aspect, and at least without reflecting this in the decision. Nevertheless, it has been generalized without understanding whether it is actually so, and even if it were so, these issues are more about application problems rather than legal provisions, which can only be taken into account in the legal path, that is, in appeals or cassation, and if not resolved in the legal path, it can be subject to individual application. Conversely, the application, that is, the legal provision's annulment can lead to a legal debate, and as a mandatory consequence of the annulment decision, any potential legal regulation by the Grand National Assembly of Turkey should consider the nature of internet publications, whether the publisher qualifies as an internet news site, and whether there is a known addressee in terms of records.

"WHEN PUBLIC SECURITY IS AT STAKE, ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN QUICKLY"

"In cases where crimes are committed in the internet environment and there is suspicion of their occurrence, the legal necessity for the protection of national security, public order, general morality, and health must be carried out in a manner that is as fast and effective as the nature of the internet publication. We believe that a fair balance and proportion must be established between such publications and attacks on the honor, dignity, reputation, and privacy of individuals and institutions, as well as freedom of expression (press freedom). Because it is significant enough to say that "if one does not exist, the other cannot exist" in terms of both sides of the coin. Therefore, as one aspect, the fair balance between public and individual security and development, personal rights and freedoms, and on the other hand, freedom of expression (press freedom) is of utmost importance. Considering the existing confusion and diversity in the legislation regarding press publications and the internet, including the subject of annulment, it may be beneficial to codify the relevant provisions of Laws No. 5187, 6112, 2954, 5846, 2860, 5411, and 5894 by creating sections regarding both the general and specific aspects of the issue as a result of detailed work. In this way, we believe that our legal resources and practices in this field can be more beneficial in terms of better protection of both freedom of expression (press freedom) and public security and personal rights, as well as providing speed, effectiveness, and procedural economy.