Turkey (Brussels Morning Newspaper) – In a move that has garnered significant attention and controversy, the Turkish government recently banned Instagram, citing various legal infractions as the reason. This decision has raised questions about the legal justifications behind such actions and highlighted the country’s substantial economic repercussions. Let’s delve into the multifaceted impacts of the Instagram ban, examining the financial costs and the legal intricacies surrounding the issue.
The legal rationale provided for the Instagram ban involves “catalog crimes,” as outlined in Article 8 of Law No. 5651. These include offenses such as obscenity, prostitution, sexual exploitation of children, insults to Atatürk, and certain crimes specified under the National Intelligence Organization (MIT) Law.
Unclear Justifications
The specific content on Instagram that allegedly led to warnings from the government remains undisclosed. However, Meta (the parent company of Facebook and Instagram) does have a representative in Turkey. They publish transparency reports every six months, which are submitted to the Information and Communication Technologies Authority (BTK). The most recent report, released on July 31, 2024, indicates that BTK made 1,849 content removal requests, removing 504 pieces of content for violating Meta’s policies and restricting visibility for 1,941 pieces of content within Turkey.[1]
Of the 2,580 content pieces reported between January 1 and June 30, 2024, actions were taken on 2,445, with 135 remaining unaddressed. Whether these remaining items cause Meta’s warning or subsequent actions is unclear. The BTK’s authority to impose such bans was nullified by the Constitutional Court in January, with the ruling set to take effect in October. This raises questions about the legal basis for the current ban.
The Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA) and Hakkını Savun[2] have taken legal action against the Instagram ban, arguing that it violates freedoms of expression, press, access to information, and communication. They have demanded that BTK’s decision be suspended and ultimately annulled. They stress that 57 million users’ rights are infringed upon without sufficient justification, leading to daily economic losses of 1.9 billion lira and a daily VAT loss of 400 million lira.
Government’s True Intentions
It is speculated that the Turkish government’s demands are not genuinely related to “catalog crimes.” Instead, these crimes serve as a pretext to exert pressure on Meta and enforce compliance with demands outside the legal framework. This strategy is evident from the critical statements of government officials like Fahrettin Altun, Director of the Directorate of Communications.
For instance, criticism arose when Instagram removed condolence messages regarding the death of Hamas Political Bureau Chief Ismail Haniyeh. While potentially justifiable under Meta’s policies, such actions have sparked debates over the platform’s content moderation practices.
The broader question remains: Should millions of users in Turkey bear the consequences of every contentious decision made by platforms like Instagram, Facebook, or YouTube? These platforms often face criticism for removing content excessively. However, penalizing users collectively by banning the entire platform seems disproportionate.
Economic Impact
The daily cost of the Instagram ban to the Turkish economy is a staggering 1.9 billion lira. To put this into perspective, the “Public Savings Package” introduced by the government totaled 100 billion lira to ease inflation and save Turkey from one of the most destructive economic crises in its history. If Instagram remains inaccessible for 52 days, the financial loss will equal the entire savings package.
The prohibition on Instagram significantly affects the economies of major cities like Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir, Bursa, and Antalya. These cities are hubs of e-commerce activity, and the restriction severely hampers businesses that rely on social media for marketing and sales.
Key Findings
- E-commerce Projections: According to the Ministry of Trade, the e-commerce volume in Turkey is expected to reach 3.4 trillion lira in 2024, with 6.67 billion transactions anticipated. In 2023, the share of e-commerce in the gross domestic product (GDP) was 6.8%, surpassing the construction sector’s share of 5.6%.
- Regional Business Impact: Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir, Bursa, and Antalya host the majority of e-commerce businesses. Istanbul, in particular, has the highest volume of cargo deliveries related to e-commerce, followed by Ankara, Izmir, Bursa, Antalya, and Kocaeli.
- Effect on SMEs: Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are the most affected by the Instagram ban. In 2023, many SMEs turned to e-commerce to grow their businesses through increased advertising and marketing activities. Continued restrictions could force SMEs with limited capital to shut down.[3]
The Instagram ban in Turkey appears to be both economically damaging and legally questionable. The daily economic loss and the broader impact on SMEs and e-commerce suggest that the country is paying a high price for this decision. Legally, the lack of clarity and transparency regarding the justifications for the ban further complicates the situation.
Ultimately, this ban is not just a penalty imposed on Instagram but a significant blow to the Turkish economy and businesses. The steps taken without proper legal grounds and due process affect businesses and impinge on millions of users’ freedoms and rights. In democratic societies, such drastic measures should be carefully weighed against their long-term consequences, ensuring they serve the public interest rather than undermine it.
[1] Prof. Yaman Akdeniz “https://x.com/cyberrights/status/1819751409975214123”
[2] https://x.com/hakkinisavuncom/status/1820030630974890146 and https://x.com/mlsaturkey/status/1819657621517001188
[3] Dr. Buğra Gökçe, “https://x.com/gokcebugra/status/1820027453521178872”
Dear reader ,
Opinions expressed in the op-ed section are solely those of the individual author and do not represent the official stance of our newspaper. We believe in providing a platform for a wide range of voices and perspectives, even those that may challenge or differ from our own. We remain committed to providing our readers with high-quality, fair, and balanced journalism. Thank you for your continued support.
