A Removal Request Has Reached My Site — What Should I Do?

First, the critical point: Article 9 of Law No. 5651 is no longer in force

The great majority of removal-request guides circulating online rest on Article 9 of Law No. 5651. That article no longer exists. The Constitutional Court annulled it in its entirety. The article heading still stands in the text of the Law, but there is not a single paragraph beneath it. The provision as currently in force reads, in full:

Removal of content from publication and blocking of access
ARTICLE 9 - (Amended: 6/2/2014-6518/93) (Annulled: by the decision of the
Constitutional Court dated 11/10/2023, E.: 2020/76; K.: 2023/172)

The annulment took effect nine months after its publication in the Official Gazette, on 10/10/2024. The legislature has not introduced a new content removal or access blocking procedure in its place. In other words, for applications made on the ground that personal rights have been infringed, Law No. 5651 no longer contains a special administrative procedure, a special deadline, or a special authority to apply to.

Identify which route the incoming request rests on

Look at the document that has reached you: who sent it, which article number does it cite, is a copy of a decision attached? The flow below is designed to be applied in the first ten minutes after you open the file.

INCOMING REQUEST  ->  Which authority and which article does the document cite?

1) A notification from BTK / the Access Providers Union?
   |- Basis: Law 5651 Art. 9/A  -> Privacy. URL-based. 4 hours.
   |- Basis: Law 5651 Art. 8    -> Catalogue offence. 4 hours.
   |- Basis: Law 5651 Art. 8/A  -> Urgent case. 4 hours.
   |- Basis: Law 5651 Art. 9    -> NO SUCH PROVISION. Annulled by the
                                   Constitutional Court, 10/10/2024.
                                   Ask in writing for the provision in force.

2) A decision of a judge / court / public prosecutor?
   -> Ask for a copy of the decision. An objection lies under the Code of
      Criminal Procedure (Art. 8(2)).

3) A direct letter from the person or their lawyer?
   -> Law 5651 contains NO procedure that processes this request. No
      administrative deadline runs. Editorial assessment + right of reply
      and correction under Press Law No. 5187 + general provisions.

4) A copyright (FSEK) request?
   -> FSEK Additional Art. 4(3): the rightholder applies to you first and
      asks that the infringement be stopped within THREE DAYS.

5) None of the above is clear?
   -> Before replying, ask in writing for the legal basis and the URL.

(a) Article 9/A — application on privacy grounds

This is the only route on which a person can apply directly to BTK without going to court, and it is still in force. Article 9/A(1) of Law No. 5651 reads: Persons claiming that the privacy of their private life has been violated because of the content of a publication made on the internet may apply directly to the Authority and request that the measure of blocking access to the content be applied.

Under paragraph 2, the request must contain the full address (URL) of the publication, an explanation of the respects in which the right has been violated, and information proving the applicant's identity. The text is explicit: If this information is incomplete, the request shall not be processed. A 9/A application without a URL, without reasons, or without proof of identity therefore cannot be taken up.

• The President notifies the request immediately to the Access Providers Union; access providers carry out the measure immediately and within four hours at the latest (para. 3).
• Access is blocked only in respect of the relevant publication, part, section, image or video, in URL form (para. 4).
• The requesting person must submit the request to a criminal judgeship of peace for decision within twenty-four hours of the hour at which the request was made (para. 5).
• The judge announces the decision within forty-eight hours at the latest and sends it directly to the Authority; failing that, the measure lapses automatically (para. 5).
• If the content subject to blocking has been removed from publication, the judge's decision becomes automatically void (para. 7).

(b) Article 8 — an allegation of a catalogue offence

Article 8(1) of Law No. 5651 provides that where there is sufficient ground for suspicion that the content constitutes certain offences, removal of the content and/or blocking of access shall be ordered. Those offences are set out in four subparagraphs as a closed, exhaustive list; Article 8 cannot be invoked for an alleged offence that is not on the list.

• Offences in the Turkish Penal Code No. 5237: incitement to suicide (Art. 84), sexual abuse of children (Art. 103(1)), facilitating the use of narcotic or stimulant substances (Art. 190), supply of substances dangerous to health (Art. 194), obscenity (Art. 226), prostitution (Art. 227), and providing a place and facilities for gambling (Art. 228).
• Offences in Law No. 5816 on Offences Committed Against Atatürk.
• Offences in Law No. 7258 (betting and games of chance) — added by Law No. 7226.
• Offences in the first and second paragraphs of Article 27 of the National Intelligence Organisation Law No. 2937 — added by Law No. 7418.

The decision must be complied with, under Article 8(5), immediately and within four hours at the latest from the moment the decision is notified. In addition, Article 8(17) requires such decisions to be issued on a URL basis as a rule — we have opened this up together with the text of the provision in our article on URL-based blocking.

(c) A court or prosecutor's decision

Under Article 8(2), removal of content and/or blocking of access is ordered 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 order; in that event the prosecutor submits the order for the judge's approval within twenty-four hours, and the judge decides within twenty-four hours at the latest. If the order is not approved within that period, the measure is lifted immediately by the prosecutor. The last sentence of the same paragraph is the most important one for you: An objection may be lodged, in accordance with the Code of Criminal Procedure No. 5271, against a decision on removal of content and/or blocking of access issued as a protective measure. Complying with the decision does not extinguish your right to object.

Article 8/A, by contrast, rests on the grounds of the right to life, security of life and property, national security, public order, prevention of the commission of offences, or public health. On this route the decision may be issued by the President of BTK, is submitted for the approval of the criminal judgeship of peace within 24 hours, and the judge announces the decision within 48 hours; failing that, the decision lapses automatically.

(d) A direct letter from the person or their lawyer

This is the type most often met in practice: a formal warning notice from a law firm, stating that personal rights have been infringed and asking for the content to be taken down within a stated period. Law No. 5651 contains no functioning procedure for this request. Article 9, on which such a demand rested, has been annulled; and no provision has been enacted to take its place.

The only remnant still standing in the Law is the definition of the warning method in Article 2(1)(r): ...the method of notification to be made, by persons claiming that their rights have been infringed and with a view to having the content removed from publication, first to the content provider and, where no result is obtained within a reasonable period, to the hosting provider, through their contact addresses. But this is only a definition; the provision that operated it, tied deadlines to it and backed it with sanctions has been annulled. In your capacity as a hosting provider, Article 5(2) imposes a removal obligation where it is notified pursuant to Articles 8 and 9 of this Law; that cross-reference to Article 9 has likewise been left without an object. To establish which capacity you hold in which part of your site, see the distinction drawn in hosting provider or content provider.

This does not mean ignore the request. The requesting party retains routes, and they lie outside Law No. 5651: the right of reply and correction under Press Law No. 5187, an action before the general courts under the Turkish Civil Code and the Turkish Code of Obligations, Article 9/A where the privacy of private life is at stake, and Article 8 where a catalogue offence is made out. These routes have their own procedures and their own deadlines in their own statutes; Law No. 5651 does not regulate them.

(e) A copyright request under FSEK

A request alleging that a photograph, a video or a text has been used without permission falls not under Law No. 5651 but under the Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works No. 5846 ("FSEK"). Additional Article 4(3) of FSEK establishes the following procedure verbatim, and the period there is three days:

FSEK Additional Article 4, third paragraph
(verbatim quotation, unofficial translation):

"...upon the applications of rightholders, the works subject to the
infringement shall be removed from the content. For this purpose, the
natural or legal person whose rights have been impaired shall first
apply to the information content provider and request that the
infringement be stopped within three days. If the infringement
continues, then, upon an application made to the public prosecutor, the
service provider shall be requested to suspend, within three days, the
service provided to the information content provider that continues the
infringement. If the infringement is stopped, service is provided again
to the information content provider."

What to do in the first four hours

Article 8(5), Article 8/A(1) and Article 9/A(3) all give the same period: immediately and within four hours at the latest. That period runs from the moment the decision is notified to you. In addition, under Article 6/A(11) the Access Providers Union may notify decisions to the e-mail address identifiable from the pages of your site. In other words, the contact box in your imprint is an official service channel.

A NOTIFICATION HAS ARRIVED - FIRST 4 HOURS CHECKLIST

[ ] 00:00  Record the date and the HOUR the notification arrived
           (including the e-mail headers)
[ ] 00:05  Archive the document as a PDF, together with its annexes
[ ] 00:10  Identify the legal basis: Art. 8 / 8/A / 9/A / court order /
           FSEK / no basis given
[ ] 00:15  List the URLs demanded one by one; verify each exists on the site
[ ] 00:20  Measure the scope: is a single URL, a category, or the whole
           site being sought?
[ ] 00:30  Send to legal counsel (with file number + time stamp)
[ ] 01:00  Take a screenshot + an HTML capture + a record of the
           publication date of the content
[ ] 02:00  If the decision is administrative or judicial, comply with it
           and record the hour of compliance
[ ] 03:00  Decide on the challenge: an objection under the Code of Criminal
           Procedure, or an application under the Administrative
           Procedure Act No. 2577?
[ ] 04:00  Send the written reply to the requesting party / the authority

NOTE: The text of the Law contains NO provision suspending the period at
weekends or on public holidays. Build your on-call rota accordingly.

Template reply to a request

[SITE LETTERHEAD / IMPRINT DETAILS]

Date    : ....../....../..........
Ref. no : 2026/............

Re      : Your request dated ....../....../.........., no. ..........

1. Your request reached us on ....../....../.......... at ....:.... .

2. Full address (URL) of the content referred to in your request:
   https://..................................................

3. The legal basis given for your request is
   "..............................".

4. [OPTION A - asking for the legal basis]
   Your request refers to Article 9 of Law No. 5651. That article was
   annulled by the decision of the Constitutional Court dated 11/10/2023,
   E.: 2020/76, K.: 2023/172, the annulment having taken effect on
   10/10/2024. We kindly ask you to state the provision IN FORCE on which
   your request rests, and the procedure applicable to the action sought.

5. [OPTION B - incomplete information]
   Under the second paragraph of Article 9/A of Law No. 5651, an
   application must contain the full address (URL) of the publication, an
   explanation of the respects in which the right has been violated, and
   information proving identity. Your request does not contain the
   ................ information.

6. [OPTION C - the content has been reviewed]
   Your request has been assessed by our editorial board; the report
   dated ....../....../.......... has been corrected/updated as to
   ................ and a dated update note has been added to the page.

7. [OPTION D - the request is not granted]
   Your request has not been granted, because the report satisfies the
   criteria of truthfulness and topicality and there is a public interest
   in it. Our reasons are annexed.

8. Should you wish to exercise your right of reply and correction under
   Press Law No. 5187, you may send your text to
   .......................... .

Responsible Editor / Authorised Officer
Name Surname - Signature

Keep records: a file cannot be built after the event

In removal requests, what proves decisive is usually not the content itself but time-stamped records. These records are what you will rely on in an objection, in a damages action, and in an action against an administrative fine.

• The date and hour the notification arrived, and the channel it came through (including e-mail headers).
• The list of URLs demanded and what each corresponds to on the site.
• The publication date of the content, the author/editor record, and any source and verification notes.
• The date and hour the decision was complied with — proof that you stayed within the four-hour period.
• The text of the reply given and the record of its dispatch.
• Any subsequent decisions lifting the measure, declaring it void, or acquitting.

Your content management system can already produce most of these records: a publication log, version history, a URL redirect record, and the ability to close access with a single click. Test what your system does under these four headings today; when a request arrives you will not have four hours to spare for testing. To see the overall compliance position of your site you can use the news website legal compliance checklist, and if you are considering refusing the request, see what happens if I refuse a removal request for the consequences.