KÜHEYLAN HUKUK
Legal basis: Constitution, Articles 26, 28 and 148; Law No. 6216, Articles 45-50; European Convention on Human Rights, Articles 10 and 35. Prepared using legislation in force in 2026 and official sources dated November 2026.
An individual application may be made to the Constitutional Court after internal law paths are exhausted against interventions given due to a news report, such as obstruction of access, collection, prohibition of publication, notice cutting, RTÜK sanctions or arrest and conviction of the journalist. The application period is thirty days from the date of consumption of the remedies. After the decision of the Constitutional Court, it may be appealed to the European Court of Human Rights within four months from the conclusion of the resolution. The Constitutional Court is the 9th of Law No. 5651, which regulates access barriers in violations of the right to personality. The pilot first identified its substance as a structural problem with the decision, then cancelled it under norm supervision.
What Interventions May Be Subject to Individual Application?
148 of the Constitution. Article 45 of the Law No. 6216. Under its article, everyone can appeal to the Constitutional Court for alleged violations of public power by one of their fundamental rights and freedoms, which is guaranteed in the Constitution and also protected under the European Convention on Human Rights. Freedom of expression (Constitution m.26) and freedom of the press (m.28) are among the most frequently asserted rights in this scope.
Interventions that may be the subject of application in the press area include: blocking access to news content, gathering printed publications, bans on publication in investigations, notice-cutting decisions of the Press Office, administrative fine and license cancellation decisions of RTÜK, arrests and conviction decisions due to journalistic activity, and compensations due to news. The subject of the news is also the 17th Amendment, claiming that his honor and reputation are not adequately protected. He may apply on the basis of his article.
45 of Law No. 6216. According to the article, all of the administrative and judicial remedies prescribed in the law for action or negligence that are alleged to have caused the violation must be pre-consumed. 47. According to paragraph five of the article, the application must be made within thirty days from the date on which the application paths are consumed, if the application path is not foreseen, from the date on which the violation was learned. Those who cannot apply on time due to a just excuse may apply with evidence documenting their alibi within fifteen days of the date the excuse was removed.
The applicant must be current and personally affected by the intervention. The journalist and the owner of the site, the author of the news in access-block decisions, has a separate application license. The claim of infringement on the application form must be clearly shown, the relevant right, which public power process is based on and how the application paths are consumed; the decision and notification documents should be added. The application is subject to expenditure; a request for judicial assistance may be made.
In Keskin Kalem Yayıncılık ve Ticaret A.Ş. and Others, application no. 2018/14884, dated 27.10.2021, the Plenary of the Constitutional Court used the pilot-judgment procedure. It identified a structural problem in Article 9 of Law No. 5651, which treated blocking access as virtually the only remedy for personality-rights violations without providing an adversarial review, and notified the legislature. After no legislative amendment followed, the Court annulled the provision in case E.2020/76, decision K.2023/172. This approach continued in judgments including AND Gazetecilik Yayıncılık Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş., application no. 2021/61788, dated 10.12.2024.
In terms of broadcasting bans, the Court, Public Radio and Television Publishing Inc. In his decision (B. No. 2014/19270, 11.7.2019) Press Law 3. It has ruled that its article does not provide sufficient legal basis for the prohibition of publication. In the decision of Hasan Kaya Cemal and others dated 16.12.2025 regarding the collection of published works (B. No. 2016/1845) The General Assembly ruled that freedoms of expression and press were violated. In terms of journalists' detention, the Şahin Alpay rulings resulted in a violation before both the Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights.
The European Court of Human Rights regards an individual application to the Turkish Constitutional Court as an effective domestic remedy that must normally be exhausted. Applicants should therefore generally apply to the Constitutional Court first. Under Article 35 of the Convention, following the entry into force of Protocol No. 15, the application period was reduced from six months to four months for domestic decisions becoming final after 1.2.2022.
In press freedom disputes, the ECHR, 10 of the Convention. It examines whether interference is foreseen by law under its article, whether it is based on a legitimate purpose, and whether it is necessary in a democratic society.
The court places special emphasis on the "public watchman" function of the press and takes into account the deterrence effect of criminal sanctions against journalists in its assessment of moderation.
Event Summary Form: Fictional example: About the news published on an internet news site, which relays allegations of irregularities in a public tender based on documents, the Press Announcement Agency has decided to cut off advertisements on grounds of violation of press moral principles. Decision, 49. It is given according to the former state of matter. The site has resorted to the way of appeal envisaged by law, and the objection has been rejected in a simple trial manner and definitively. Process: Within thirty days of the notification of the final decision on the rejection of the objection, an individual application was made to the Constitutional Court. 49 on which the decision is based. It has been suggested that the sentence on the finality of the article provision and the appeal decision was abrogated by the Constitutional Court's decision E.2023/168, K.2025/132, in violation of the principle of law and freedom of rights-seeking, the news bears public good and the sanction is unmeasured. Conclusion: Intervention based on a provision found to be contrary to the principle of law in norm supervision may not meet the requirement of law in the individual application. In this case, breach detection, retrial and compensation are expected to be decided. According to the Constitutional Court's decision, within a four-month period, the option of applying to the European Court of Human Rights is also assessed.
Can an individual application for detention be made while the criminal case is ongoing?
Yeah. When the way of appeal is exhausted against the arrest and decisions regarding the continuation of detention, an application may be filed for freedom of person and freedom of expression before the original case is concluded.
What happens if the Constitutional Court decides to violate it?
The court rules the matters necessary to eliminate the violation and its consequences. If a retrial is required, the file is sent to the relevant court; it can also be ruled on non-pecuniary damages (Law No. 6216 Art. 50).
What date does the application period start?
As a rule, from the date when the final decision was delivered or learned. In cases where the decision is learned through UYAP, the learning date is also evaluated.
Can I apply directly to the ECHR?
Not as a rule. Individual application to the Constitutional Court is considered an internal law path that must be consumed. If this path is omitted, the ECHR application may be found unacceptable.
Can the person who is the subject of the news also apply?
Yeah. In the event that the request for the protection of honour and reputation is rejected by the courts of degree, the 17th Amendment The application can be made under the article.
• The thirty-day application period is not calculated from the notification of the final decision, but from the date of the decision or its abduction. • The claim of freedom of expression in domestic law should not be put forward at all, and therefore the application is deemed unacceptable. • Non-discrimination of infringement claims on a right basis in the application form. • Failure to rely on pilot decision and norm control decisions. • Reliability of the ECHR to the old six-month period instead of the four-month period.
The individual application is the final assurance in domestic law in interventions to press freedom. The pilot decision and norm control of the Constitutional Court has drunk, showing that this path can go beyond individual files and also bring about changes in legislation. The result of the application is often determined by whether the claim for freedom of expression has been consistently put forward from the degree courts, and whether the deadlines have been complied with. The Küheylan Law Office provides legal support for journalists, broadcasters and individuals whose personality rights have been undermined in the preparation of applications of the Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights.
Important Legal Notice: The legal statements contained in this guide are prepared by the Küheylan Law Office for general informational purposes and do not qualify as legal counsel. Arrangements on the application date should also be checked, as application fees and procedural rules can be updated. Legal support from a lawyer is recommended prior to application. © 2026 Küheylan Law Office. All Rights Reserved.
KÜHEYLAN HUKUK