ARTICLE
15 September 2021

Turkish Constitutional Court Rules That Absent A Legitimate Purpose Recognized By The Data Protection Law Numbered 6698, Nonconsensual Publication Of A Parliamentarian Applicant's Personal Data Via Twitter Violated Constitutional Privacy Right

MA
Moroglu Arseven

Contributor

“Moroglu Arseven is a full-service law firm, with broadly demonstrated expertise and experience in all aspects of business law. Established in 2000, the firm combines a new generation of experienced international business lawyers, who hold academic, judicial and practical experience in all aspects of private law.”
In a decision numbered 2018/24439, dated 15 June 2021, the Turkish Constitutional Court Ruled that absent a legitimate purpose recognized by the Data Protection Law numbered 6698 (the "DP Law")...
Turkey Privacy

In a decision numbered 2018/24439, dated 15 June 2021, the Turkish Constitutional Court Ruled that absent a legitimate purpose recognized by the Data Protection Law numbered 6698 (the “DP Law”), the nonconsensual publication via Twitter of a parliamentarian applicant's (the “Petitioner”) data including T.C. Number and signature (collectively, the “Data”) violated his constitutional right to privacy.

Respondent (the “Respondent”), a former mayor of Ankara, on his public Twitter page alleged that Petitioner participated in an illegal water supply network, and posted images of certain general assembly minutes displaying the Data. Petitioner sued.

The Court of First Instance ruled against Petitioner, finding that publication of the Data via Twitter constituted severe criticism only, and being a public figure Petitioner must tolerate severe criticism. The first instance court was silent on the issue of whether Data's publication violated Petitioner's constitutional right to privacy. Thereupon, Petitioner appealed to the Constitutional Court.

The Court of First Instance ruled against Petitioner, finding that publication of the Data via Twitter constituted severe criticism only, and being a public figure Petitioner must tolerate severe criticism. The first instance court was silent on the issue of whether Data's publication violated Petitioner's constitutional right to privacy. Thereupon, Petitioner appealed to the Constitutional Court.

The Constitutional Court decided to send a copy of the decision to the court of first instance for a retrial by stating it had erred when it failed to explicitly find that the Data constituted personal data under the DP Law, that its nonconsensual publication lacked a legitimate purpose under the DP Law and was, therefore, done in violation of Petitioner's constitutional right to privacy.

The full text of the Constitutional Court's decision is available at this  link. (Only available in Turkish).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More