Best Parental Control

Bianet: Internet Censorship: Turkey “Under Surveillance” of RSF

Reporters Without Borders added Turkey and Russia to the organization’s ‘under surveillance’ list published in the latest report on 12 March. ‘Taboo topics’ for Turkey are quoted as mainly related to Atatürk, the army, minorities and the dignity of the nation.

Erol ÖNDEROĞLU – hukuk@bianet.org
Paris – BİA News Center
15 March 2010, Monday

The international organization Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has recently added Turkey and Russia to their ‘under surveillance’ list regarding internet censorship. This was announced in a joint press release of RSF Secretary General Jean-François Julliard and Lucie Morillon, head of the New Media Desk.

‘In Turkey, taboo topics mainly deal with Ataturk, the army, issues concerning minorities (notably Kurds and Armenians) and the dignity of the Nation’, RSF indicates.
Ban of YouTube and probable judicial reprisals

The organization warns other countries, such as the United Arab Emirates, Belarus and Thailand, ‘which are also maintaining their ‘under surveillance’ status, but will need to make more progress to avoid getting transferred into the next ‘Enemies of the Internet’ list’.

RSF emphasized that ‘the fight for free access to information is being played out to an ever greater extent on the Internet. In Turkey, several thousand sites have been blocked, thereby triggering a great deal of protest. Bloggers and netizens who express themselves freely on such topics may well face judicial reprisals’.

Enemies of the Internet

RSF describes the internet in Russia as the ‘freest space for sharing information’, ‘aside from the control exercised by the Kremlin on most of its media outlets’. However, RSF draws attention to existing constraints: ‘Yet its independence is being jeopardized by blogger arrests and prosecutions, as well as by blockings of so-called ‘extremist’ websites. The regime’s propaganda is increasingly omnipresent on the Web. There is a real risk that the Internet will be transformed into a tool for political control’.

The following countries are listed as ‘Enemies of the Internet’: Saudi Arabia, Burma, China, North Korea, Cuba, Egypt, Iran, Uzbekistan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, and Vietnam.

Assessment of Turkey

According to the European Security and Cooperation Organization (OSCE), Turkey banned access to about 3,700 internet sites mostly for ‘arbitrary and political reasons’. The majority of these sites are of foreign origin, deal with the Kurdish question or aim at homosexual communities.

There is no doubt that the most well known incident in the media is the global video sharing site YouTube. The site has been banned since May 2008 because of videos that allegedly affronted the remembrance of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, founder of the modern Turkish nation, and clips that were supposed to constitute an attack of the Turkish nation.

Between March 2007 and June 2008, different courts took a total of 47 decisions related to the access ban of YouTube. The Internet Technology Association (İNETD) applied to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) on the grounds of violating the right to freedom of expression. MySpace.com was blocked for the duration of one month in September 2009 by reason of ‘violating copyrights’.

The report furthermore mentions the access bans imposed on Günlük newspaper and istanbul.indymedia.org, trials against Barış Yarkadaş from Gerçek Gündem and Ali Barış Kurt and Mehmet Kökçüoğlu from the Güneşin Çocukları (‘Children of the sun’) website and the punishments handed down to Hacı Boğatekin from gerger.fırat.net and Cumali Badur from Gergerim.com.

Additionally, the report addresses the issue of gazetevatan.com website publishing director Ayiln Duruoğlu and Devrimci Hareket magazine employee Mehmet Yeşiltepe, who were detained for ten months and touches on the hacking of the website of Armenian Agos newspaper by a self-declared admirer of the murderer of Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink. (EÖ/VK)

129

16.02.2010

Press release issued by the Registrar

Chamber judgment1

Akdas v. Turkey (no 41056/04)

SEIZURE OF THE NOVEL Les ONZE MILLE verges BY Guillaume Apollinaire and conviction of the publisher hindered public access to a work belonging to the european literary heritage

Unanimously:

Violation of Article 10 (freedom of expression)

of the European Convention on Human Rights

Principal facts

The applicant, Mr Rahmi Akdaş, was born in 1958 and lives in Bandırma. He is a publisher and in 1999 published the Turkish translation of the erotic novel Les onze mille verges by the French writer Guillaume Apollinaire (“The Eleven Thousand Rods” – On Bir Bin Kırbaç in Turkish), which contains graphic descriptions of scenes of sexual intercourse, with various practices such as sadomasochism or vampirism.

Mr Akdaş was convicted under the Criminal Code for publishing obscene or immoral material liable to arouse and exploit sexual desire among the population. The applicant argued that the book was a work of fiction, using literary techniques such as exaggeration or metaphor, and that the postface to the edition in question was written by specialists in literary analysis. He added that the book did not contain any violent overtones and that the humorous and exaggerated nature of the text was more likely to extinguish sexual desire.

The seizure and destruction of all copies of the book was ordered and the applicant was given a “heavy” fine – a fine that may be converted into days of imprisonment – of 684,000,000 Turkish liras (equivalent to approximately 1,100 euros). In a final judgment of 11 March 2004 the Court of Cassation quashed the part of the judgment concerning the order to destroy copies of the book, in view of a 2003 legislative amendment. It upheld the remainder of the judgment.

Mr Akdaş paid the fine in full in November 2004.

Complaints, procedure and composition of the Court

Relying on Article 10, the applicant complained about his conviction as publisher of the novel Les onze mille verges by Guillaume Apollinaire and about the seizure of the book.

The application was lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 2 September 2004.

Judgment was given by a Chamber of seven judges, composed as follows:

Françoise Tulkens (Belgium), President,
Ireneu Cabral Barreto (Portugal),
Vladimiro Zagrebelsky (Italy),
Danutė Jočienė (Lithuania),
Dragoljub Popović (Serbia),
András Sajó (Hungary),
Işıl Karakaş (Turkey), Judges,

and also Françoise Elens-Passos, Deputy Section Registrar.

Decision of the Court

It was not disputed that there had been an interference, that the interference had been prescribed by law and that it had pursued a legitimate aim, namely the protection of morals. The Court further reiterated that those who promoted artistic works also had “duties and responsibilities”, the scope of which depended on the situation and the means used.

The requirements of morals varied from time to time and from place to place, even within the same State. The national authorities were therefore in a better position than the international judge to give an opinion on the exact content of those requirements, as well as on the “necessity” of a “restriction” intended to satisfy them.

Nevertheless, the Court had regard in the present case to the fact that more then a century had elapsed since the book had first been published in France (in 1907), to its publication in various languages in a large number of countries and to the recognition it had gained through publication in the prestigious “La Pléiade” series. Acknowledgment of the cultural, historical and religious particularities of the Council of Europe’s member States could not go so far as to prevent public access in a particular language, in this instance Turkish, to a work belonging to the European literary heritage.

Accordingly, the application of the legislation in force at the time of the events had not been intended to satisfy a pressing social need. In addition, the heavy fine imposed and the seizure of copies of the book had not been proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued and had thus not been necessary in a democratic society, within the meaning of Article 10. There had therefore been a violation of that provision.

The Court considered that it was not necessary to examine the applicant’s other complaints.

Since the applicant did not submit a claim for just satisfaction within the time allowed, there was no need to make any award on that account.

***

The judgment is available only in French. This press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court. The judgments are available on its website (http://www.echr.coe.int).

Press contacts
Céline Menu-Lange (tel: + 33 (0)3 90 21 58 77) or

Stefano Piedimonte (tel: + 33 (0)3 90 21 42 04)
Kristina Pencheva-Malinowski (tel: + 33 (0)3 88 41 35 70)

Tracey Turner-Tretz (tel: + 33 (0)3 88 41 35 30)

Frédéric Dolt (tel: + 33 (0)3 90 21 53 39)

Nina Salomon (tel: + 33 (0)3 90 21 49 79)

The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.

1 Under Article 43 of the Convention, within three months from the date of a Chamber judgment, any party to the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred to the 17-member Grand Chamber of the Court. In that event, a panel of five judges considers whether the case raises a serious question affecting the interpretation or application of the Convention or its protocols, or a serious issue of general importance, in which case the Grand Chamber will deliver a final judgment. If no such question or issue arises, the panel will reject the request, at which point the judgment becomes final. Otherwise Chamber judgments become final on the expiry of the three-month period or earlier if the parties declare that they do not intend to make a request to refer.

OSCE concerned over ban on internet freedoms in Turkey

02 February 2010, Tuesday
ABDULLAH BOZKURT STRASBOURG

A senior official at the world’s largest intergovernmental organization focusing on media freedoms has lambasted Turkey for imposing restrictions on Internet sites and criticized media accreditation methods to ban reporters from attending press conferences.

The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) media representative Miklos Haraszti told Today’s Zaman in Strasbourg last week that Turkey needs to reform or abolish Law 5651, commonly known as the Internet Law, which restricts access to popular Web sites including video-sharing Web site YouTube. He also warned that changes made to notorious Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK), which makes it a crime to attack the Turkish nation in the media, are inadequate and that the government simply needs to get rid of that law.

‘It puts Turkey in bad company with countries like Iran and China, though Turkey is basically a free country,’ Haraszti said, stressing that Turkey should either reform or abolish the Internet Law in its current form. He warned that the practice is simply not in line with OSCE commitments and other international standards on freedom of expression. ‘The government does have tools to go after illegitimate sites and punish those who violate laws. But do not block whole access to Web sites. It is not solving problems,’ he remarked.

The OSCE has recently issued a report on restrictions on the Internet in Turkey and criticizes current practices. ‘At present, 3,700 Internet sites are blocked in Turkey, including YouTube, GeoCities and Google sites. Even as some of the content that is deemed ‘bad,’ such as child pornography, must be sanctioned, the law is unfit to achieve this. Instead, by blocking access to entire Web sites in Turkey, it paralyzes access to numerous modern file-sharing or social networks,’ Haraszti stated, when announcing the report.

With respect to the amended Article 301, Haraszti emphasized that the government had not done enough in reforming the law. ‘Basically it was not a reform. The decision making was moved from the judiciary to the political level. That benefitted journalists because much less or no cases were allowed to proceed,’ he said. According to the amended law, any case brought against writers and media professionals requires the approval of the justice minister.

Article 301 criminalizes insulting ‘the Turkish nation.’ Before the current government passed an amendment, the crime of ‘insulting Turkishness’ was far more serious and broadly prosecuted, which led to the conviction of numerous intellectuals for criticizing the nation and the state. The government’s recent changes to the TCK now require the justice minister’s approval to take someone to court over Article 301 violations, thus eliminating prosecutorial discretion.

The OSCE media representative argued that this is not a solution. ‘The law is still there. The government cannot dictate solutions in every law. For now, the government has undertaken the political responsibility, and they are holding the [line] tight. But it cannot go on forever like this,’ he underlined, urging the complete abolishment of the notorious article.

Haraszti further noted concern over the usage of media accreditation as a censorship tool against media outlets. ‘Obviously we have concerns over these matters and noted it in our reports,’ he said. The Zaman Media Group, which also publishes Today’s Zaman, has not been allowed to cover the press briefings by the chief of General Staff because the group was not extended accreditation by the military.

Reuters: Turkey blocking 3,700 websites

Turkey blocking 3,700 websites: OSCE
VIENNA, Mon Jan 18, 2010 8:37am EST

VIENNA (Reuters) – Europe’s main security and human rights watchdog said Monday Turkey was blocking some 3,700 Internet sites for ‘arbitrary and political reasons’ and urged legal reforms to show its commitment to freedom of expression.

Technology

Milos Haraszti, media freedom monitor for the 56-nation Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), said Turkey’s Internet law was failing to preserve free expression in the country and should be reformed or abolished.

‘In its current form, Law 5651, commonly known as the Internet Law of Turkey, not only limits freedom of expression, but severely restricts citizens’ right to access information,’ Haraszti said in a statement.

He said Turkey, a European Union candidate, was barring access to 3,700 Internet sites, including YouTube, GeoCities and some Google pages, because Ankara’s Internet law was too broad and subject to political interests.

‘Even as some of the content that is deemed ‘bad’, such as child pornography, must be sanctioned, the law is unfit to achieve this. Instead, by blocking access to entire websites from Turkey, it paralyzes access to numerous modern file-sharing or social networks,’ Haraszti said.

‘Some of the official reasons to block the Internet are arbitrary and political, and therefore incompatible with OSCE’s freedom of expression commitments,’ he said.

Haraszti said Turkish law was still failing to safeguard freedom of expression, and numerous criminal code clauses were being used against journalists, who risked being sent to jail as a result.

‘Therefore ‘reform or abolish’ the Internet Law is our main recommendation … (to ensure Turks can be) a part of today’s global information society.’

Fears for press freedom in Turkey have risen as a result of state attempts to collect a $3.3 billion fine from major media group Dogan in a tax row, part of pressure on Dogan to obey a law limiting foreign ownership of Turkish firms.

In October, the European Commission’s annual report on Turkey’s progress toward EU membership urged Turkey to treat Dogan fairly and said Ankara needed to do more to protect freedom of expression and the press.

(Writing by Mark Heinrich; editing by Tim Pearce)

L’OSCE tance la Turquie sur sa loi sur l’internet trop restrictive – Le Monde.fr

18.01.10 | 12h04

Le représentant pour la liberté de la presse de l’Organisation pour la sécurité et la coopération en Europe (OSCE), Miklos Haraszti, a demandé lundi aux autorités turques de ‘réformer ou d’abolir’ la loi sur l’internet trop restrictive aux yeux de l’organisation.

‘Dans sa forme actuelle, la loi 5651, connue sous le nom de loi turque sur l’internet, limite non seulement la liberté d’expression mais en plus elle restreint sévèrement le droit des citoyens à l’accès à l’information’, a affirmé M. Haraszti, dans un communiqué publié à Vienne.

Selon un rapport sur les limitations de l’accès à l’internet en Turquie, préparé par l’expert international Yaman Akdeniz pour les services de M. Haraszti, ‘3.700 sites internet sont actuellement bloqués en Turquie, incluant YouTube, GeoCities et des sites Google’. Le rapport souligne que la loi en question n’arrive pas en revanche ‘à sanctionner des sites dangereux, comme ceux propageant des photos de pornographie infantile’ par exemple.

‘En bloquant l’accès à des sites dans la totalité de leurs contenus en Turquie, la loi empêche l’accès à de nombreux sites de communication et de socialisation’, a noté M. Haraszti.

Il a relevé que lors de son séjour en Turquie la semaine dernière, lors de la présentation de ce rapport à la Bilgi University à Istanbul ainsi qu’à celle d’Ankara, entre autres, lui-même n’a pas pu consulter le site YouTube de l’OSCE.

‘Les résultats ne justifient pas les moyens’, commente-t-il, en ajoutant que ‘certaines des raisons avancées pour bloquer l’internet sont arbitraires et politiques et ainsi incompatibles avec les engagements de l’OSCE en matière de liberté d’expression’.

M. Harazsti a en outre une nouvelle fois tancé les autorités turques pour les limitations au travail des journalistes contenues dans le code pénal.