Click to read the article in Turkish
Examining a municipal employee's individual application, the Constitutional Court has ruled that tracking employees' working time by fingerprinting violates the right to demand the protection of personal data.
According to the verdict published in the Official Gazette, the Söke District Municipality in Aydın started fingerprint tracking in 2016.
One employee filed a lawsuit for annulment with the Aydın 1st Administrative Court after the municipality rejected their request to end fingerprint tracking.
The administrative court ruled for the cancellation of fingerprint tracking. The municipality appealed against the verdict.
The 2nd Administrative Trial Chamber of the İzmir Regional Court of Justice accepted the appeal, concluding that the practice was in accordance with the public interest and service requirements.
Taking fingerprints of employees to track their working times did not violate the right to privacy, the appeals court ruled.
Then the civil servant filed an individual application with the Constitutional Court.
Examining the application, the top court ruled that the right to demand the protection of personal data within the scope of the right to respect for private life, which is guaranteed by article 20 of the Constitution, was violated.
"Legal arrangements should be made"
According to article 20, personal data can only be processed in cases stipulated by the law and with the explicit consent of the person, the court stated.
Citing article 6 of the Law No. 6698 on the Protection of Personal Data, the court said the processing of personal data is bound to stricter rules due to its importance.
Noting that the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) regards fingerprints, biological samples and genetic profiles as personal data, the Constitutional Court stated that the ECtHR emphasized that legal arrangements should be made in domestic law to provide adequate guarantees.
"Especially in order to implement a personnel tracking system with the method of recording biometric data, it should be emphasized that the explicit consent of the person must be present in cases not regulated by the laws," the court concluded.
The condition of legality
Law no. 657 on Civil Servants and the Municipal Law no. 5393 do not include clear provisions regarding the processing of personal data to control employees' attendance, the top court noted.
The applicant did not have explicit consent and thus the interference with their right did not meet the condition of legality, it concluded. (HA/VK)
