The world’s largest interactive digital encyclopedia Wikipedia, after the Constitutional Court (AYM) decision, a local court today after receiving a positive decision of the Information Technologies and Communications Authority as a result of not refusing, access has been opened in the night 22:30 in Turkey The Constitutional Court evaluated the ban on access to the site as a “violation of freedom of expression” on December 26, 2019, upon the individual application made on behalf of the Wikipedia Foundation legal entity. Despite the decision of the Supreme Court on the same day in accordance with official procedures, Wikipedia was still not open access in Turkey.
As the local court deems it appropriate to wait for the reasoned decision of the AYM to be published in the Official Gazette, the process has dropped today and its reasoned decision was published in the Official Gazette today. However, the version of Wikipedia in all languages began to be provided access from Turkey appeared to expectations. However, it was necessary to take a decision on the Supreme Court banned by the local court’s decision in accordance with legal regulations in Turkey. Ankara 1st Criminal Court of Peace, which is the local court in question, announced its decision just before the end of the shift. Ankara 1st Criminal Court of Peace decided to provide full access to www.wikipedia.org. In order to fulfill this requirement, it was also decided to send the decision sample to the Information and Communication Technologies Authority (BTK) immediately through the National Judicial Network Project (UYAP).
However, since the decision was made minutes before the end of the working hours, it was necessary to upload it to UYAP and forward it to BTK. On the other hand, BTK had to prepare an instruction letter to send it to Wikipedia and send it to the companies that provide internet service, namely the Union of Access Providers. BTK installed the judgment UYAP and sent the instructions after 22:30 P.M Wikipedia, after the 2 years and 9-month period was accessible again. At this stage, BTK has no objection to the judicial process, which has resulted in favor of Wikipedia.
Prof. Dr. Akdeniz: Professor Dr. Akdeniz: “An embarrassing course happened”
Founder of Freedom of Expression Association and faculty member of Bilgi University Prof. Dr. Yaman Akdeniz evaluated blocking access to Wikipedia until the end from the beginning, as a shameful process. Commenting on the latest situation in VOA Turkish, Akdeniz said, “We are already talking about a platform that should never be blocked. (In 2017, when the decision was made to ban) Since the legal process started with the request of the Prime Ministry, political blocking was made.
This file waited two and a half years before the Constitutional Court. This is another topic of discussion. Because it took 10 days for Twitter, 45 days for YouTube, while it took two and a half years for Wikipedia. You ask why? Because our judgment is not independent, our judgment is not independent, and the Constitutional Court is not independent. They refrained from looking at the file. So why now? Because the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) would decide within a few months. All correspondence with the ECtHR was completed. Retrieved on priority review Last May, he was asked to defend Turkey in July. If the ECtHR judgment was expected, this would be a severe criticism because the domestic remedy was not completed. They tried to prevent this, in my opinion, ” said he. Dr. Yaman Akdeniz , Wikipedia’yla Türkiye’de yaşanan erişim engellemesini “Başından sonuna kadar utanç verici bir süreç” olarak değerlendirdi.
Akdeniz noted therefore that just like the blocking decision, has now been decided to lift the ban in a political way, said, “The decision of the Constitutional Court is not a surprise decision, the majority of votes is not surprising. In democratic societies, it should not be waited to make such platforms run. If it weren’t waited two and a half years and a decision was made to open quickly, this would be a step towards democratization. But a very delayed decision took place. Moreover, there is no legal improvement that will prevent the closing of Wikipedia again after an objection to a court for example in Erzurum tomorrow. No guarantee that this process will not happen once again ”
Wikipedia lawyer is not content to AYM waiting two and a half years
Twitter’s lawyer in Turkey, recognized by the public attorney’s assume the affluent Gurkaynak, opting for the attorney in Wikipedia and therefore had not commented until now, but he explained that he felt compelled to include in the statement today. In his statement made via Twitter, Gürkaynak said, “As being a Wikipedia lawyer, a short pause to my sensitivity: I should not have to go to the Constitutional Court or to go to the ECtHR in such a matter. In order to obtain executive and judicial sensitivities that will reach those days faster, more freedom of expression is required in our country. Despite recent Constitutional Court rulings in different files, including client companies YouTube and Twitter, this entire decision, which we can only make after 2.5 years for Wikipedia, is not a celebration. In the counter vote letter given, I couldn’t find the law. ”
AYM ruled that there was a violation of rights for the Turkish people
In the meantime AYM reasoned decision, which fulfilled considerably the demands of Turkey Wikipedia “Wikipedia, may include subjective information, or even system data inputs of noting can be exposed everyone to malicious attempts from time to time due to open; It explicitly warns its users that the information it provides may not be accurate and immutable truths. Wikipedia states that the items in its content have turned into a neutral item only after long discussions and over time, and this process can take months or even years. Following the decision to block access in the subject matter, the amendments were made by independent, voluntary Wikipedia editors, and the articles were tried to be rewritten in a more neutral and elaborate style, and some of the less reliable and unverifiable sources were cited. In this context, a significant proportion of allegations that Turkey’s support for radical formation has also been deleted “emphasized the words.