Blocking of Internet Access: Legal Remedies for Violations of Personal Rights and the Privacy of Private Life

If a news article, social media post, video, photograph, comment, or personal data published on the internet has an unlawful impact on an individual's honor and reputation, private life, family life, image, voice, or professional standing, various legal remedies may apply. However, it is not possible to directly obtain an “access blockage” decision for every upsetting, critical, or negative content.

In current legal practice, the applicable remedy is determined according to the nature of the content:

If the content, constitutes one of the catalog crimes enumerated in Article 8 of Law No. 5651,the measure of content removal or access blockage may come into question.

If the content unlawfully discloses privacy, personal data, intimate images, or correspondence, criminal investigation and protective measures may be evaluated.

If the content infringes upon personal rights but does not fall within the scope of catalog crimes, as a rule, claims for the establishment of unlawfulness, cessation of publication, removal, rectification, publication of the judgment, and damages may be brought before the civil court of first instance pursuant to Articles 24 and 25 of the Turkish Civil Code (TMK).

If the content constitutes news, commentary, or criticism, a balance must be struck between personal rights and freedom of expression and the press, based on the specific circumstances of the case.

The former provision of Article 9 of Law No. 5651, which regulated direct access blockage on the grounds of violation of personal rights, was annulled by the decision of the AYM dated 11.10.2023 and numbered E.2020/76, K.2023/172. Therefore, information suggesting that anyone claiming a violation of personal rights can directly obtain an access blockage from the criminal judgeship of peace under the former Article 9 is no longer current.

---

WHAT DOES BLOCKING OF INTERNET ACCESS MEAN?

Blocking internet access refers to the technical restriction of access from Turkey to specific internet content or, in exceptional cases, to an entire website. This measure is not the same as content removal, suspension of publication, de-indexing from search engine results, or a compensation lawsuit.

The main concepts that may yield different legal consequences regarding an internet publication are as follows:

Legal Instrument	Purpose	Scope of Application
Removal of content	Deletion of content from its source	Through the intervention of the content provider or platform
Blocking of Access	Restriction of access to content from Turkey	Within the scope of protective measures stipulated by law
Suspension of publication	Prevention of the continuation of unlawful publication	In a civil lawsuit within the scope of TMK art. 24-25
Establishment of unlawfulness	Determination that the publication constitutes an attack on personal rights	Even if the attack has ended, if its effects continue
Publication of a correction or the decision	Remediation of the effects of the violation	If deemed necessary and proportionate in the specific case
Pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages	Redress of the damage or non-pecuniary distress	According to the circumstances of the unlawful attack

This distinction is particularly important. Blocking access to certain content may not mean that the content has been completely deleted from the internet. The same information can be reshared on different websites, social media accounts, forums, or platforms based abroad. The URL, content, and grounds for unlawfulness of each new post must be evaluated separately.

---

WHAT VALUES DO PERSONAL RIGHTS PROTECT ON THE INTERNET?

Personal right refers to the totality of legal values concerning a person's life, physical and mental integrity, name, picture, voice, honor and reputation, private life, family life, realm of secrecy, professional reputation, and personal data.

Pursuant to Article 24 of the TMK, a person whose personal rights have been unlawfully attacked may request the judge to protect them against the perpetrators. For an attack not to be deemed unlawful, one of the justification grounds must exist, such as the consent of the person, an overriding private or public interest, or the exercise of a power conferred by law.

Examples of personal rights violations on the internet may include:

Making false accusations,

Targeting an individual with statements incompatible with their reputation,

Sharing photographs, videos, audio recordings, or correspondence concerning their private life,

Publishing health information, family life, location data, or contact details,

Using a person's image for commercial or derogatory purposes without their consent,

Recirculating outdated, unverified, or out-of-context information,

Conducting a systematic defamation campaign via social media.

However, not every criticism constitutes an attack on personal rights. Freedom of expression protects harsh, shocking, and disturbing ideas to a certain extent. In legal assessments, the distinction between criticism and insult, comment and assertion of fact, and public debate and the exposure of the private sphere is taken into consideration.

---

PRIVACY OF PRIVATE LIFE AND DISSEMINATION OF PERSONAL DATA

Article 20 of the Constitution of the Republic of Turkey stipulates that everyone has the right to demand respect for their private and family life. The same provision also constitutionally guarantees the right to the protection of personal data.

The privacy of private life does not only encompass life within the home. An individual's family relationships, health status, private correspondence, images, audio recordings, daily life choices, location data, contact information, and personal data that have not been disclosed to the public may also fall within the scope of protection.

The legal risk is particularly higher with regard to the following content:

The publication of secretly recorded audio or video recordings,

Sharing private correspondence as a screenshot,

Disclosing health reports, phone numbers, addresses, or identity information,

Sharing confidential information regarding an individual's children or family members,

Disseminating images concerning private life on social media accounts,

Disclosing personal data to create an environment of targeting, intimidation, or harassment.

Such acts may also be evaluated within the scope of Articles 134, 135, and 136 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK), depending on the specifics of the incident. Article 134 of the TCK regulates the violation of privacy; Article 135 regulates the unlawful recording of personal data; and Article 136 regulates the unlawful delivery, dissemination, or acquisition of personal data.

Not every piece of information regarding private life automatically constitutes a crime. Whether the information is of a public nature, how it was obtained, the purpose of the sharing, the consent of the individual, the social status of the individual, and whether the publication carries public interest are examined collectively.

---

BLOCKING OF ACCESS UNDER ARTICLE 8 OF LAW NO. 5651

Article 8 of Law No. 5651 regulates the measure of content removal and/or blocking access regarding publications made on the internet for which there is sufficient suspicion that they constitute certain catalog crimes.

These crimes primarily include:

Encouraging suicide,

Sexual abuse of children,

Facilitating the use of drugs or stimulants,

Supplying substances hazardous to health,

Obscenity,

Prostitution,

Providing a place and facilities for gambling,

Offenses within the scope of the Law on Crimes Committed Against Atatürk,

Certain offenses related to betting and games of chance in sports competitions,

Certain offenses regulated under the Law on the National Intelligence Organization.

During the investigation stage, as a rule, the judge, or the public prosecutor in cases where delay is prejudicial; and during the prosecution stage, the court may decide to remove the content or block access. The decision rendered by the public prosecutor must be submitted for judicial approval.

Pursuant to Article 8/17 of Law No. 5651, the fundamental principle is a URL-based access block with respect to the specific publication, part, or section where the violation occurred. Blocking access to the entire website may only be considered if a URL-based measure is technically impossible or inadequate to prevent the violation.

Therefore, the rationale that "there is unlawful content on a website" does not alone justify blocking the entire site. The intervention must be structured in the narrowest scope that will achieve the intended protection.

---

LAWSUIT IN THE CIVIL COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE FOR VIOLATION OF PERSONAL RIGHTS

Regarding internet publications that do not fall within the scope of catalog offenses but are alleged to violate personal rights, the primary private law protections are the provisions of Articles 24 and 25 of TMK.

Under TMK Article 25, a person may:

Request the prevention of the threat of infringement,

Request the cessation of an ongoing infringement,

Request the determination of the unlawfulness of an infringement whose effects continue despite having ceased,

Request a rectification/correction,

Request that the decision be notified to third parties or published,

Request the payment of pecuniary damages,

Request the payment of non-pecuniary damages,

Request the surrender of profits derived from the unlawful infringement to themselves,

request the same.

In lawsuits for the protection of personal rights, unless there is a contrary special provision, the court of first instance (asliye hukuk mahkemesi) is generally the court with subject-matter jurisdiction. Regarding venue, TMK Article 25 grants the plaintiff the option to file the lawsuit in the court of their own domicile or the defendant's domicile. In cases constituting a tort, the alternative venue rules under Article 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure (HMK) may also be relevant depending on the specific circumstances of the case.

The fact that internet content is accessible from all over Turkey does not mean that every court has unlimited jurisdiction. When filing a lawsuit, the place of residence of the aggrieved party, the place of residence of the publisher or content provider, the place where the impact of the publication manifested, and the connection to the unlawful act must be clearly established.

---

THE BALANCE BETWEEN THE RIGHT TO INFORM, FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, AND PERSONAL RIGHTS

Article 26 of the Constitution of the Republic of Turkey guarantees the freedom to express and disseminate thoughts and opinions. Constitution Article 28 regulates freedom of the press and the prohibition of censorship. However, pursuant to Article 26 of the Constitution, freedom of expression may be restricted for the purpose of protecting the reputation and rights of others, as well as private and family life.

When evaluating the legality of a news report or social media post, the following criteria are of importance:

Evaluation Criterion	Examined Matter
Truthfulness	Whether the publication is based on a sufficient factual basis
Up-to-dateness	Whether the information contributes to an ongoing public debate
Public Interest	Whether the publication is significant in terms of the public's right to information
Social Interest	Whether the matter falls within the scope of legitimate public interest
The position of the individual	Whether the individual is a public figure
The manner of expression	Whether the headline, language, visuals, and comments lead to unnecessary exposure or humiliation
Proportionality	Whether the means used for the purpose of reporting are necessary and proportionate

Public figures may be required to endure more intense criticism. Nevertheless, the right of these individuals to be protected against the core area of their private life, family life, health information, personal data, and unfounded accusations does not disappear.

The prior publication of content about an individual on other websites does not make such information infinitely republishable. In particular, the re-sharing of unverified, outdated information, or information that unnecessarily exposes one's private life, may additionally constitute a violation of personal rights.

---

PRECEDENT DECISIONS AND THE APPROACH IN PRACTICE

The following decisions illustrate the balance between internet publications and personal rights. The decisions pertain to specific cases and do not imply that the same outcome will automatically result in every dispute.

Ruling	The Case and Legal Issue	Reasoning and Conclusion of the Decision	Direction
AYM, E.2020/76, K.2023/172, D. 11.10.2023	Constitutional review of the former Article 9 provision of Law No. 5651, which regulates the blocking of access on the grounds of violation of personal rights	The Constitutional Court annulled the former Article 9 provision. The decision demonstrates that the fast-track access blocking remedy cannot be maintained in its former form regarding personal rights, and that mechanisms interfering with freedom of expression and the press must be carefully regulated in terms of constitutional guarantees.	Adverse for those requesting fast-track access blocking on the grounds of personal rights violation; protective regarding freedom of expression
AYM, App. No: 2018/14884, D. 27.10.2021	The balance between the blocking of access on the grounds of violation of personal rights and freedom of expression and the press	The decision establishes that interference with internet publications must be justified, proportionate, and open to effective judicial review.	Protective regarding freedom of expression and the press against access blocking
AYM, App. No: 2016/14513, D. 28.12.2022	Right to an effective remedy in the event of an alleged violation of personal rights due to an internet publication	The decision emphasizes the importance of the applicant's access not merely to a formally existing remedy, but to an effective legal protection capable of remedying the violation in claims of personal rights infringement.	In favor of the victim of a personality right violation
Yargıtay HGK, E.2017/2603, K.2021/1389, D. 11.11.2021	Requests for the determination of unlawfulness, cessation of publication, and removal of content upon accusations of data theft made against an individual in internet and press announcements	The General Assembly of Law accepted that there is a legal interest regarding the requests for determination, cessation, and removal within the scope of Articles 24 and 25 of the TMK, and that Law No. 5651 does not eliminate the private law protection under the TMK. The decision dictates that the civil court of first instance must conduct an examination by proceeding to the merits.	In favor of the person claiming a personality right violation
Court of Cassation 4th Civil Chamber, E.2021/25442, K.2024/1909, D. 22.02.2024	Claim for non-pecuniary damages due to the republication of an access-blocked allegation via a news website and social media account	The Court of Cassation accepted that the republication of an allegation lacking evidence of its veracity may violate the right to respect for private and family life, and that the judgment of non-pecuniary damages against the publishing company can be upheld. Conversely, it determined that there was a lack of passive standing regarding the individual who acted solely in the capacity of the chairman of the board of directors.	Mixed: in favor of the victim regarding the publishing company; against the victim regarding the improper selection of the defendant

The decision of the General Assembly of Law of the Court of Cassation dated 11.11.2021, numbered E.2017/2603, K.2021/1389, clearly demonstrates that a civil lawsuit based on the provisions of Articles 24 and 25 of the TMK can be filed on the grounds of an attack on personality rights due to internet publication. In the decision, it was accepted that a lack of legal interest cannot be claimed since the request for the determination of unlawfulness is separately regulated.

The significant aspect of this decision is that it is not restricted solely to criminal law or access blocking measures due to internet content. An individual may, if the conditions are met, before the civil court of first instance determine unlawfulness, cease publication, and remove content and may request compensation. However, the decision does not preemptively accept that every concrete publication constitutes a violation of personal rights. The unlawfulness of the publication must be evaluated separately.

Furthermore, the decision of the 4th Civil Chamber of the Yargitay dated 22.02.2024 and numbered E.2021/25442, K.2024/1909 demonstrates that the republishing of an access-blocked claim through another news site and social media account must be evaluated independently. In the decision, the recirculation of an unsubstantiated privacy claim and the rendering of the previous protection order ineffective were evaluated in terms of the right to respect for private and family life.

The decision also highlights the importance of determining the proper defendant. The content creator, publisher, social media account manager, publishing legal entity, hosting provider, or company executive are not evaluated within the scope of the same legal liability. The fact that a person is the chairman of a company's board of directors does not mean, by itself, that they bear personal liability for every internet publication.

---

HOW SHOULD EVIDENCE BE COLLECTED FOR INTERNET CONTENT?

Internet content can be deleted, modified, moved to a different URL, or removed from social media accounts. Therefore, content must be preserved in a reliable and integral manner as soon as it is observed.

The primary evidence includes:

URL list: Direct links for each news item, post, video, comment, or profile must be recorded.

Time-stamped screenshots: The address bar, date, time, posting account, title, text, visual, and comments should be included in the same image as much as possible.

Notarized detection report: This is a strong tool for proving that the content was accessible on a specific date and how it appeared.

Application to the content provider: The request for removal or correction must be submitted in writing; delivery and response records must be retained.

Personal data or privacy documents: Documents demonstrating that the shared information pertains to the private sphere or personal data must be used in a manner that does not lead to unnecessary disclosure.

Documents regarding pecuniary damage: Damage claims such as loss of income, contract cancellation, loss of clientele, or medical treatment expenses must be supported by concrete documentation.

Previous decisions and investigation documents: Access blocking decisions issued regarding the same content, investigation documents, or previous court rulings may be significant in terms of context.

The absence of a notary public attestation does not preclude filing an application in any case. However, due to the possibility of the content being altered or deleted, notary attestation or reliable timestamped records enhance evidentiary weight.

---

INITIAL STEPS FOR CONTENT REMOVAL

The general roadmap to be followed in claims of infringement of personal rights or privacy is as follows:

1- The nature of the content must be determined

First, it must be evaluated whether the content constitutes a catalog crime, whether it involves a violation of privacy or personal data, or whether it is essentially a publication constituting an attack on personal rights.

2- The URL and content must be reliably ascertained

The content subject to the application must not be left abstract. Instead of general claims such as “There are numerous posts about me on the internet”, each URL, date, title, image, and ground for violation must be specified individually.

3- The application to the content provider must be evaluated

An application may be made to the publisher, news site, social media account, or platform requesting the removal, correction, or restriction of access to the content. Although this application is not mandatory in every case, it can be useful in terms of dispute resolution and evidentiary strategy.

4- It must be determined whether a criminal investigation is necessary

If there are intimate images, audio recordings, personal data, private correspondence, or clear suspicion of a crime, filing a criminal complaint with the Chief Public Prosecutor's Office may come into question. A criminal investigation and a civil lawsuit are not mutually exclusive; however, the conditions and evidentiary frameworks of both applications differ.

5- The request must be formulated proportionally to the violation

If the person's objective is to stop the dissemination of an intimate image, a request directed specifically at the relevant URL and content may be more proportionate. If the objective is to remedy reputational damage, the options of declaratory relief, cessation, correction, publication of the decision, and non-pecuniary damages should be evaluated together.

---

CAN PECUNIARY AND NON-PECUNIARY DAMAGES BE CLAIMED?

In the event of an unlawful attack on personal rights, claiming pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages is possible. However, the conditions for damages vary depending on the type of claim.

Regarding pecuniary damages, the injured party must prove actual and concrete property damage. For instance, the termination of an employment contract, the cancellation of a commercial agreement, loss of customers, or the incurrence of specific expenses must be demonstrated through written documents, accounting records, contracts, or expert witness examination.

Regarding non-pecuniary damages, the distress suffered in the person's honor, reputation, private life, family life, or personal integrity is evaluated. Non-pecuniary damages are not a means of enrichment, but rather a means of satisfaction aimed at remedying the moral harm caused by the unlawful attack.

In claims for damages arising from a tort, the statute of limitations regime under Article 72 of the Turkish Code of Obligations (TBK) is significant. Within the general framework, a two-year period starting from the date on which the injured party learns of the damage and the obligor, and in any case a ten-year period from the date the act was committed, are evaluated. If a longer statute of limitations is stipulated in criminal codes for the act, the effect of this period on the claim for damages is also examined separately.

In ongoing attacks on personal rights, unlike damages, the currency of the request to prevent or cease the attack, whether the violation continues, and the persistence of legal interest are decisive.

---

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Can I obtain a blocking access order for a news article about me on the internet?

A blocking access order cannot be obtained for every news article. If the content is connected to one of the catalog crimes under Article 8 of Law No. 5651, a protective measure may come into question. As for the violation of personal rights, in most cases, a civil lawsuit pursuant to Articles 24 and 25 of the TMK is evaluated.

Can an application be made to the criminal judgeship of peace due to the violation of personal rights?

The application mechanism for the violation of personal rights based on the former provision of Article 9 of Law No. 5651 has been annulled by the decision of the Constitutional Court numbered E.2020/76, K.2023/172. The remedy must be determined according to the criminal nature of the content, the violation of privacy, and the legal nature of the request.

What can I do against a person who shares my private photograph?

Depending on the fact that the photograph belongs to the sphere of private life, its sharing without consent, and the nature of the publication, a criminal investigation, removal of content, blocking access measure, lawsuit for the protection of personal rights, and a claim for non-pecuniary damages may come into question.

Is a social media post considered a violation of personal rights?

The content, accuracy, purpose, language, number of people reached, repetition, and impact on the individual of the post are evaluated. Mere criticism may not constitute a violation of personal rights; however, untrue accusations, insults, disclosure of private life, or dissemination of personal data may be unlawful.

Can I request the removal of an old news article about me?

If an old news article loses its timeliness, continues to affect a person's private life unnecessarily, the public interest in accessing the information decreases, or the content is untrue, a need for legal protection may arise. In each case, the content of the news and its current effects are evaluated separately.

Can a complete access block be imposed on a website?

As a rule, an access block should be limited to the specific URL or content subject to the violation. Blocking access to the entire website may exceptionally be considered only if the URL-based measure cannot be technically implemented or is insufficient to prevent the violation.

Is the publication of my personal data a crime?

The unlawful recording, acquisition, transfer, or dissemination of personal data may constitute a crime under Article 135 and Article 136 of the TCK, depending on the specifics of the case. However, whether each piece of shared information constitutes a crime is determined based on consent, grounds for lawfulness, and the nature of the publication.

Can I claim non-pecuniary damages due to defamation on the internet?

If the conditions of untrue imputation, unlawful attack on personal rights, and non-pecuniary damage are met, non-pecuniary damages may be claimed. The court evaluates the scope, severity, repetition, and reach of the publication, the status of the parties, and the specifics of the case.

Will only the person making the post be held liable, rather than the news website?

Liability is determined based on a person's connection to the content. The initial creator of the content, the reshaper, the publisher, the social media account manager, the content provider, or hosting provider may not have the same legal liability.

Can a lawsuit still be filed if the content has been deleted?

Even if the content has been deleted, if its effects persist, claims such as the establishment of unlawfulness, compensation, or publication of the court decision may be brought forward. At this point, it is crucial whether the legal interest continues even if the content has been removed.

---

CONCLUSION

Blocking internet access is an important tool in protecting personal rights and privacy; however, it is not a one-size-fits-all solution applicable to every type of content. The legally correct approach is first to determine the nature of the content, and then to evaluate the balance between catalog crimes, violation of privacy, breach of personal data, attacks on personal rights, freedom of expression, and the right to inform based on the specific circumstances of the case.

Articles 24 and 25 of the TMK form the fundamental legal framework for attacks on personal rights, Article 20 of the Constitution and Articles 134-136 of the TCK for violations of privacy and personal data, and Article 8 of Law No. 5651 for catalog crimes. The success rate of a legal application depends on directing the request to the correct authority, clearly identifying URLs and content, reliably gathering evidence, and establishing the requested measure in proportion to the violation.

---

About Us – Contact Information

Atty. Batın YILMAZ

Bar Association Information:

• Istanbul Bar Association No. 1: 77008
• Union of Turkish Bar Associations: 187392

Address:
Yakuplu Mahallesi, Hürriyet Bulvarı Skyport Residence Kat:12 No:133
Beylikdüzü, İstanbul

Contact:
📞 Telephone: 0 532 669 34 90
📞 Alternative Phone: 0 532 732 34 90
🌐 Criminal Lawyer Service