Trial for Annulment of Internet Filter

The Alternative Information Association opened a trial against the Prime Ministry Telecommunication Association (BTK) on the grounds of the central internet filter system to be applied by the BTK. The lawsuit aims at the revocation of the corresponding decision and of the Principles and Procedures for the Safe Internet Service.

The much disputed internet filter application was submitted on 22 February 2011 but withdrawn in August as the result of negative public reactions. The decision was revised subsequently and its new version was published by the BTK on 16 September 2011.

On 4 November 2011, the Alternative Information Association opened a lawsuit at the Council of State with the demand to revoke the decision since it allegedly continues a censoring approach.

"The BTK is not entitled to give such a decision"

The association gave the following reasons for the trial:

* Fundamental rights and freedoms according to Article 13 of the Constitution can only be restricted by law. The Secure Internet application disproportionally limits fundamental rights and freedoms. For this reason, the regulation lacks a legal basis.

* The "Principles and Procedures for Safe Internet Service" is a regulatory administrative process that will affect millions of people. The BTK unlawfully regulated an area which is not regulated by law by an administrative procedure. The BTK is not entitled to give such a decision.

* The regulation could only be rendered legal if it would be published in the Official Gazette. Therefore, a regulation that is not published in the Official Gazette should be cancelled.

"Regulation is not based on voluntariness"

* Contrary to what was said, the regulation of the BTK does not only rest on a voluntary basis. The internet service providers will not be able to refuse the lists (white and black lists) presented by the administration. They will not be able to avoid the establishment of an according infrastructure.Using the privileges of public power and by exceeding its authority, it made a regulation that affects millions of people.

* The "Committee on Criteria for a Child and Family Profile" is being presented in the regulation as a positive development whereas it is not defined by any law. The members of the committee are appointed by the Ministry and the Institution without regard to any criterion.

* The committee's working methods and issues like personal rights of its members have not been regulated in the Procedures and Principles. It is not possible for such a committee to do independent and unbiased work without pressure and take likewise decisions as it is actually aimed.

Previous trial filed by bianet

In April 2011, the IPS Communication Foundation (IPS)/bianet applied to the Council of State for the removal of the censorship imposed to all internet users in Turkey due to the compulsory internet filter that was initially going into to be enforced on 22 August. The Council of State dismissed bianet's request to stall the application on the grounds of changes in the regulation. (NV/VK)