How Many Hours Do You Have to Enforce an Access Blocking Decision?

The short answer: immediately, and within four hours at the latest

Article 8(5) reads: The requirements of a decision on removal of content and/or blocking of access shall be carried out immediately and within four hours at the latest from the moment the decision is notified. That period was originally twenty-four hours; it was reduced to four hours by Article 127 of Law No. 6552 of 10/9/2014.

When the clock starts: notification of the decision

The Law ties the period not to the moment the decision is issued but to the moment it is notified. The wording of Article 8(5) is unambiguous: from the moment the decision is notified. Article 8/A(1) uses the same formula. The critical data point to record in your file is therefore not the date of the decision but the date and hour on which it reached you.

Where does the notification come from? Article 8/A(1) provides that the decision is notified by the President immediately to access providers and to the content and hosting providers concerned. Under Article 6/A(7), access blocking decisions are sent for implementation to the Access Providers Union, and service effected on the Union shall be deemed to have been effected on the access providers. The most critical provision is Article 6/A(11): the Union may notify decisions to the electronic mail addresses identifiable from the internet pages of the content or hosting provider concerned.

Article 8 — the timetable for catalogue offence decisions

Under Article 8(2), the decision is issued by a judge at the investigation stage and by the court at the prosecution stage. In urgent cases the public prosecutor may also issue the decision. In that event the text lays down two periods: the prosecutor submits the decision for the judge's approval within twenty-four hours, and the judge gives a decision within twenty-four hours at the latest. If the decision is not approved within that period, the measure shall be lifted immediately by the public prosecutor.

Art. 8 - THE PROSECUTOR'S URGENT-CASE DECISION (timeline)

T+0h    Public prosecutor orders removal of content / blocking of access
        |- The decision is notified
T+0..4h THE DECISION IS CARRIED OUT                       (Art. 8(5) - 4 hours)
T+24h   Prosecutor SUBMITS the decision for the judge's APPROVAL
                                                          (Art. 8(2) - 24 hours)
T+48h   Judge gives a decision (within 24 hours at the latest)
                                                          (Art. 8(2) - 24 hours)
        |- IF APPROVED     -> the measure continues
        |- IF NOT APPROVED -> the measure is lifted IMMEDIATELY by the prosecutor

ALSO
  Art. 8(2), last sentence : An OBJECTION lies under the Code of Criminal
                             Procedure No. 5271.
  Art. 8(3)                : A copy of the decision is sent to the AUTHORITY
                             for implementation.
  Art. 8(7)                : Decision of non-prosecution -> AUTOMATICALLY void
  Art. 8(8)                : Acquittal -> AUTOMATICALLY void
  Art. 8(9)                : If the content is removed from publication ->
                             the blocking decision is LIFTED

Article 8/A — urgent cases

Article 8/A is the fast route resting on the grounds of the right to life, security of life and property, national security, public order, prevention of the commission of offences and public health. The last sentence of paragraph 1 reads: The requirements of a decision on removal of content and/or blocking of access shall be carried out immediately and within four hours at the latest from the moment the decision is notified.

Paragraph 2 then establishes the review, and here the sanction attaches to the decision itself: the decision is submitted by the President for the approval of the criminal judgeship of peace within twenty-four hours; The judge shall announce the decision within forty-eight hours; failing which, the decision shall lapse automatically.

Art. 8/A - URGENT CASE (timeline)

T+0h    A judge, or the President on the request of the Presidency or a
        ministry, issues the decision
        |- The President notifies the decision IMMEDIATELY to access
           providers and to the content and hosting providers concerned
                                                          (Art. 8/A(1))
T+0..4h THE DECISION IS CARRIED OUT                        (Art. 8/A(1))
T+24h   The President SUBMITS the decision for the APPROVAL of the
        criminal judgeship of peace                        (Art. 8/A(2))
T+72h   The judge announces the decision (48 hours from submission)
                                                           (Art. 8/A(2))
        |- IF NOT ANNOUNCED -> THE DECISION LAPSES AUTOMATICALLY

SCOPE
  Art. 8/A(3) : The rule is URL-based blocking. Blocking of the whole site
                only where it is technically impossible or where the
                infringement cannot otherwise be prevented.
SANCTION
  Art. 8/A(5) : Access providers, and the content and hosting providers
                concerned, that fail to comply are liable to an
                administrative fine of TRY 50,000 to 500,000 (imposed by
                the President).

Article 9/A — the privacy of private life

On this route it is not an authority but the person themselves who starts the process: under Article 9/A(1) persons claiming that the privacy of their private life has been violated may apply directly to the Authority and request the measure of blocking access. Paragraph 3, verbatim: The President shall notify this request, as it reaches him, immediately to the Union for implementation; access providers shall carry out this request for a measure immediately and within four hours at the latest.

Here the burden of the review lies on the person making the request, and this is the publisher's strongest point of defence. Paragraph 5, verbatim: the requesting persons submit the request to a criminal judgeship of peace for decision within twenty-four hours of the hour at which the request was made; the judge announces the decision within forty-eight hours at the latest and sends it directly to the Authority; failing which, the measure of blocking access shall lapse automatically.

Art. 9/A - PRIVACY OF PRIVATE LIFE (timeline)

T+0h    The person applies DIRECTLY TO THE AUTHORITY           (Art. 9/A(1))
        MANDATORY in the application: the full address (URL) + an
        explanation of the violation + information proving identity.
        If incomplete, "the request SHALL NOT BE PROCESSED".   (Art. 9/A(2))
T+0h    The President notifies the request IMMEDIATELY to the Union
                                                                (Art. 9/A(3))
T+0..4h Access providers APPLY the measure                      (Art. 9/A(3))
        Scope: only the relevant publication, part, section, image,
               video (URL)                                      (Art. 9/A(4))
T+24h   THE REQUESTING PERSON submits the request to a criminal judgeship
        of peace for decision (from the HOUR the request was made)
                                                                (Art. 9/A(5))
T+72h   The judge announces the decision and sends it directly to the
        Authority
        |- IF NOT ANNOUNCED -> THE MEASURE LAPSES AUTOMATICALLY (Art. 9/A(5))

ALSO
  Art. 9/A(6)   : The President may object to the judge's decision under
                  the Code of Criminal Procedure.
  Art. 9/A(7)   : If the content has been removed from publication, the
                  judge's decision becomes AUTOMATICALLY VOID.
  Art. 9/A(8)-(9): In urgent cases blocking is applied directly on the
                  President's instruction; that decision is submitted for
                  the judge's approval within 24 hours, and the judge
                  announces the decision within 48 hours.

What the Law does NOT say about the periods

The most valuable part of a guide is sometimes to point at the gap. The text of Law No. 5651 does not use the notions of weekend, public holiday, working day or office hours. There is no provision in the text suspending the periods, extending them, or carrying them over to the next day where they fall on a holiday. The Law says only immediately, four hours, twenty-four hours and forty-eight hours.

• Set up an on-call rota that monitors the imprint and contact mailbox 24/7; a notification arriving in that box may count as official notification under Article 6/A(11).
• Make sure the person receiving the notification has authority to close a URL in the content management system on their own; do not design an approval chain that eats up the four hours.
• Record in the system the hour at which the decision was received and the hour at which it was carried out; keep a log record, not a screenshot.
• Define a channel and a back-up number through which on-call staff can reach legal counsel.
• Publish the on-call list in advance for public holidays and long breaks.

What happens if it is not carried out in time

As to routes of challenge, a twofold distinction applies: under Article 8(12), administrative fines are challenged in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act No. 2577; against blocking and removal decisions, by contrast, an objection is lodged under the Code of Criminal Procedure No. 5271 pursuant to the last sentence of Article 8(2). The amount in Article 8(11) is a nominal figure written in the Law in "new Turkish liras"; the current amount is determined by the revaluation rate.

When the measure falls away automatically

In four separate places the Law provides that the measure lapses or becomes void without any application being needed. Tracking these is the most productive part of your file:

• Art. 8/A(2): if the criminal judgeship of peace does not announce its decision within 48 hours, the decision lapses automatically.
• Art. 9/A(5): if the requesting party does not submit the request to the judge within 24 hours, or the judge does not announce a decision within 48 hours, the measure lapses automatically.
• Art. 9/A(7): if the content subject to blocking has been removed from publication, the judge's decision becomes automatically void.
• Art. 8(7) and Art. 8(8): where a decision of non-prosecution or an acquittal is given, the decision becomes automatically void; the authority concerned sends a copy of the decision to the Authority, stating the internet address.
• Art. 8(2): if the prosecutor's decision is not approved by the judge within 24 hours, the measure is lifted immediately by the prosecutor.

A four-hour on-call plan

ACCESS BLOCKING ON-CALL PLAN (COMPRESSED INTO 4 HOURS)

00:00  NOTIFICATION RECEIVED
       -> Time-stamp record: date, hour, channel, sender
       -> Document archived as PDF

00:10  IDENTIFY THE LEGAL BASIS
       -> Art. 8 / Art. 8/A / Art. 9/A / court order / other
       -> Scope of the decision: a URL, or the whole site?

00:20  TECHNICAL PREPARATION
       -> The relevant URL(s) located in the system and listed
       -> Version and archive copy taken (for evidence)

00:40  NOTIFY LEGAL COUNSEL
       -> File no + hour + copy of the decision sent

01:30  COMPLIANCE DECISION
       -> If it is an administrative/judicial decision, carry it out
       -> The hour of compliance entered in the system record

02:30  ASSESS AN OBJECTION AS TO SCOPE
       -> Is the decision URL-based? If not, start preparing an objection
          under the Code of Criminal Procedure relying on Art. 8(17) and
          Art. 8/A(3)

03:30  WRITTEN NOTIFICATION
       -> Confirmation of compliance sent to the notifying authority

04:00  PERIOD EXPIRED - closing note on the file and follow-up dates written
       Follow-up: hour 24 (submission to the judge) / hour 72 (judge's decision)

The scope of the decision matters to you as much as the period itself. The rule is URL-based blocking; we have set out its exact counterpart in the text of the provisions in our article on URL-based blocking, and the possibility of a block on the whole site in what to do if the whole site is blocked. To identify the type of notification, see the removal request flow.