.jpg)
Click to read the article in Turkish / Kurdish
The Constitutional Court has announced its verdict regarding an objection lodged against a ruling that blocked access to the news report entitled "Sıcak İş İlişkileri Değil Taciz" (Not Warm Business Relations But Harassment) published on bianet in 2006.
In the verdict of the court, which was published on the Official Gazette today (December 4), the Constitutional Court unanimously ruled that "the freedoms of expression and press as guaranteed by the Articles 26 and 28 of the Constitution have been violated." The court also ruled for a re-trial so that the consequences of the violation could be eliminated.
What happened?
The news report entitled "Sıcak İş İlişkileri Değil Taciz" (Not Warm Business Relations But Harassment) was published on bianet on August 30, 2006.
The director general of the airline company, whose name was mentioned in the news report, requested that access to the news reports which were published on a number of websites, including bianet, be blocked on the ground that "his personal rights had been violated."
On June 23, 2015, the İstanbul 7th Penal Court of Peace ruled that access be blocked to the news report in question. The objection to this ruling was rejected by the İstanbul 8th Penal Court of Peace on July 21, 2015.
"Publication of the news serves public interest"
In response to the ruling of rejection of the court, IPS Communication Foundation Chair and bianet Project Advisor Nadire Mater and IPS Communication Foundation Secretary General Ertuğrul Kürkçü applied to the Constitutional Court via attorney Meriç Eyüboğlu.
In the application, it was emphasized that the ruling of access block "violated the freedoms of expression and press" and added that the publication of the news report in question "served public interest."
"Freedoms of press and expression violated"
Announcing its verdict regarding the objection of bianet, the Constitutional Court has ruled that "the freedoms of expression and press have been violated". The ruling of the court was published on the Official Gazette today.
The ruling has first emphasized that "blocking access to a news report which is published on a news website is an intervention in the freedom of press and freedom of expression." In its ruling, the Constitutional Court has also underlined that the content of the news report in question "does not necessitate such a serious legal measure as access block."
The Constitutional Court has also ruled that "the grounds given for the indefinite access block cannot be considered relevant or sufficient."
"News report is high in informative value"
In the verdict of the Constitutional Court, the following remarks have been made in relation with the informative value of the news report:
"It is indisputable that the news report in question is about one of the most important problems of the society, namely the immoral treatment of and attitudes towards women in working life, and therefore, the report is deemed related to public interest and is high in informative value." (AS/SD)
