The consequence depends on the source of the ban and on the type of publication. In broadcasting an administrative ladder operates; breach of the closed hearing prohibition gives rise directly to criminal liability.
Radio and television: the Article 7/4 ladder
“Where broadcasting is carried out contrary to the publication bans and restrictions imposed under this article and Press Law No. 5187 of 9 June 2004, the broadcasting of the media service provider’s programmes shall be suspended for one day by the Supreme Council, and in that case the fourth paragraph of Article 32 shall apply. Within one year, on repetition of the contravention the undertaking’s broadcasts shall be suspended for up to five days, on a second repetition for up to fifteen days, and on a third repetition the broadcasting licence shall be revoked.”
| Step | Sanction | Measure of time |
|---|---|---|
| First contravention | Broadcasting of programmes suspended for 1 day | — |
| Repetition within one year | Broadcasts suspended for up to 5 days | Within one year |
| Second repetition | Broadcasts suspended for up to 15 days | Within one year |
| Third repetition | The broadcasting licence is revoked | Within one year |
The paragraph was added by Article 17 of Decree Law No. 680 of 2 January 2017 and enacted as it stood by Article 16 of Law No. 7072 of 1 February 2018.
What is broadcast during the suspension
Through the reference in Article 7/4 to Article 32/4 of Law No. 6112, programmes supplied by RTUK on subjects of public benefit are broadcast in place of the suspended programmes, in the same broadcasting band and containing no commercial communication.
Under the same paragraph the producer of the programme, or its presenter where there is one, responsible for the act giving rise to the sanction, may not make or present any other programme, at the same or a different media service provider undertaking, under any name, for the duration of the suspension.
Breach of the closed hearing prohibition: criminal liability
Article 285/3 of the Criminal Code: “A person who publicly breaches the confidentiality of statements or images made at a hearing that must be held in closed session under the Law, or that has been ordered to be held in closed session, shall be punished in accordance with the first paragraph.” The penalty in the first paragraph is one to three years’ imprisonment or a judicial fine.
The second sentence of that paragraph contains an exception: “However, for this offence to be constituted, publicity need not be established as regards a breach of a confidentiality order taken in relation to the protection of a witness.” Under Article 285/4, where the offence is committed by a public official abusing the convenience afforded by their office, the sentence is increased by up to one half.
Influencing the administration of justice
Publication contrary to a ban may also fall within Article 288 of the Criminal Code: a person who, with the aim of unlawfully influencing a person performing a judicial function, an expert or a witness so that they take an unlawful decision, perform an unlawful act or make a statement contrary to the truth in a case being heard or an investigation being carried out, makes a public oral or written statement is punished with a judicial fine of not less than fifty days.
Summary
| Breach | Type of publication | Consequence | Basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| Broadcasting contrary to a publication ban | Radio, television | 1 day → up to 5 days → up to 15 days → licence revocation | Law No. 6112, Art. 7/4 |
| Disclosing the content of a closed hearing | Any type of publication | 1–3 years’ imprisonment or a judicial fine | Criminal Code, Art. 285/3 |
| The same act committed by a public official | Any type of publication | The sentence is increased by up to one half | Criminal Code, Art. 285/4 |
| A public statement aimed at influencing the administration of justice | Any type of publication | A judicial fine of not less than 50 days | Criminal Code, Art. 288 |
| Breach of a ban arising under the Press Law | Print press, online news site | Assessed by reference to the offence the content constitutes | Law No. 5187; Criminal Code |
Challenging an administrative sanction decision
Under Article 32/9 of Law No. 6112 recourse against RTUK’s administrative sanction decisions is had under Law No. 2577 on Administrative Procedure; an action in the administrative court must be brought within fifteen days of notification, and bringing an action for annulment does not suspend enforcement. Under Article 47/3 the Ankara administrative courts have jurisdiction in actions against the Supreme Council.
By contrast, actions for annulment against decisions taken under Articles 7/1 and 7/2 are brought directly before the Council of State, which rules on requests for a stay of execution within forty-eight hours (Art. 7/3).
What to do when a decision arrives is covered in the publication ban guide and the closed hearing regime in the closed hearing guide.