Print

Robin Michael's Twitter Address Was Blocked By Court Decision

 

 

TURKISH REPUBLIC

ISTANBUL

1. MAGISTRATE COURT

DIFFERENT ISSUES DECISION

DIFFERENT ISSUES DECISION: 2019/2267 DIFFERENT ISSUES.

JUDGER: Zafer DAŞKIN 153128.

CLERK: Yusuf Kenan YABANTAĞ 229062.

PLAINTIFF: SADAT A.S. International Defense Consulting.

DEFENCE COUNSEL: Ahmet Cengiz Tangören - Ahrnet Taylan.

COUNTERPART: www.twitter.com.

DEMAND: Access blocking Request.

DATE OF DEMAND: 25/04/2019.

DATE OF DECISION: 25/04/2019.

The defense counsels Mr. Ahmet Cengiz Tangören & Mr. Ahmet Taylan of SADAT International Defense Consulting have submitted a petition, which was attached in above division and recorded under different issues order, to our judiciary in the date of 25/04/2019.

Documents were audited.

REQUIRED THAT:

The defense counsels Mr. Ahmet Cengiz Tangören & Mr. Ahmet Taylan of SADAT International Defense Consulting have submitted a petition which was provided in 25/04/2019 includes Access blocking Request to publications that were non-real and attacking their personal clients’ rights in accordance with article 9.1 of the Law No. 5651.

Article 9.1 of the Law No. 5651;

(1) Real and legal persons, institutions, and organizations who are alleging, that their personal rights have been violated due to broadcast content made on internet, have right to request removal of broadcast content by warning methods in case of failure to reach this content or by requesting to the judge who may block broadcast content directly.

(2) The requests providing by persons, who alleging their personal rights have been violated due to broadcast content made on internet, should be replied at most within twenty-four hours by the content and / or location provider.

(3) Due to broadcast content on the Internet and according to requests of those who their personal rights have been violated, the judge may decide to block access within the range specified in this article.

(4) The judge decides to ban access to content on the basis of this article, by blocking the access to the content (in the form of URL, etc.) only in relation to the posts, section, portion where the violation of the right to personality occurs. The decision to prevent full access to the posts cannot be given on the website unless requested. However, if the judge finds that the violation cannot be prevented by blocking access to the content by specifying the URL address, he can also decide to block accessing to the entire posts on the website, with the proviso that specify the reason."

Upon checking application Form and its attachments, it was found that the action was taken due to violating personal rights by publishing the posts in the URL: https://twitter.com/search?q=%40mrubin1971%20sadat&src=typd without consent of the requesting side, for these reasons the APPLICATION WAS APPROVED as such.

Law No. 5651 Article 9; The judge decides to ban access to content on the basis of this article, by blocking the access to the content (in the form of URL, etc.) only in relation to the posts, section, portion where the violation of the right to personality occurs. The decision to prevent full access to the posts cannot be given on the website unless requested. However, if the judge finds that the violation cannot be prevented by blocking access to the content by specifying the URL address, he can also decide to block accessing to the entire posts on the website, with the proviso that specify the reason.

With this provision and after it became clear that https:// https://twitter.com/mrubin1971 was the domain name on the mentioned webpage, the following decision was taken as to denial of the request.

TURKISH REPUBLIC ISTANBUL 1. MAGISTRATE COURT                                         D. issue. No: 2019/2267 Different Issues.

DECISION: According to the reasons clarified above;

With PARTIAL ACCEPTANCE of the request,

1. In accordance with Article 9/3 of the Law number 1-5651; Blocking access to the Internet page number URL, https://twitter.com/search?q=%40mrubin1971%20sadat&src=typd.

The decision is sent directly to the Access Provider Unity in accordance with Article 9/5 of Law No. 5651.

The decision should be executed immediately by the access provider within at most 4 hours.

2. REJECTION of demand from the Internet address of https:// https://twitter.com/mrubin1971.

As a result of checking carried out on the application Form, the petition will be submitted to our judger within 7 days from the date of notification numbered 6545, according to paragraph a-b of article numbered 268/3 amended by the number Law 5271 in Istanbul. It was decided to leave the way open for second appeal in the magistrate court.25/04/2013.

Clerk 229062                                                                        Judger 153128

E-signature                                                                            E-signature