(Turkey) Brussels Morning, In a move reminiscent of Georgia’s controversial “Foreign Influence Transparency Law,” Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) recently reintroduced its foreign agent law, sparking concerns among civil society groups and media organizations. Approved in Turkey’s Justice Committee, this legislative package contains a provision to criminalize actions “at the behest of foreign states or organizations” that undermine Turkish political or security interests. Much like its Georgian counterpart, the Turkish law introduces vague language and severe penalties that critics argue could suppress free expression and political dissent.[1]
The parallels with Georgia’s experience are striking. In early 2023, widespread protests erupted in Tbilisi when the Georgian government attempted to pass a similar law, which would have classified any organization receiving over 20% of its funding from abroad as a “foreign agent.” The law faced intense backlash, especially from youth-driven movements wary of the restrictions it could impose on civic organizations. Ultimately, the Georgian government withdrew the law, yet attempts to reintroduce it sparked further protests this year, with police responses intensifying as the streets filled again. Many Georgians feared the legislation would mimic Russia’s Foreign Agent Law, which has led to the closure of many NGOs and media outlets, including the Nobel-winning human rights group Memorial.
However, Turkish civil society fears that Turkey’s law could go even further. This iteration of the foreign agent law arrives amid a particularly chaotic political climate—regional instability is growing with the Iran-Israel conflict, Turkey’s Kurdish issue remains unresolved, and a prevailing narrative of state security dominates public discourse. By choosing this moment to push the law, critics say, the government is attempting to minimize backlash, portraying opposition to the law as a threat to national stability.
“By targeting voices critical of government policy, this law poses a severe risk to the independence of opposition media, academics, and NGOs,”
a spokesperson for a major Turkish media organization commented.
In Georgia, American international law expert Ted Jonas noted that the foreign influence law went beyond Russian regulations by including religious groups, illustrating the law’s potential to chill freedoms of speech and assembly across all sectors of civil society. Human rights organizations warn that Turkey’s proposal, if passed, would likely result in similar consequences, especially as civil society and media organizations could be scrutinized and prosecuted under the pretext of national security.
Timing and Implications
Turkey’s strategic timing has not gone unnoticed. As geopolitical pressures rise and the government pushes a “security-first” approach, critics worry that the law could reshape the boundaries of free expression, particularly for organizations with foreign affiliations or funding. With the law set to face a parliamentary vote soon, Turkey finds itself at a crossroads where the protection of civil liberties must contend with deepening concerns over national security. Observers argue that, much like Georgia, Turkey risks alienating its citizens and jeopardizing its democratic framework by stifling the dissent that has long been a cornerstone of its political fabric.
In late October, Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) moved forward with a controversial legislative package in the Justice Committee of the Turkish Grand National Assembly (TBMM). Among its 23 articles, one amendment, in particular, has set off alarms across civil society and media circles: the criminalization of “foreign agency” activities. The provision, modeled on Russia’s Foreign Agent Law, imposes jail terms for those accused of working with foreign organizations to harm Turkey’s security or political interests.
The foreign agent provision, or “influence agency,” introduces a new offense under the Turkish Penal Code (TCK). If individuals commit this offense “during war or in situations that could endanger military operations,” they could face prison terms ranging from eight to twelve years. The language is sweeping:
“Anyone who, following instructions from a foreign state or organization, commits actions against national security or political interests may face three to seven years in prison.”
Remarkably, this law requires permission from the Minister of Justice to prosecute.
Turkish media organizations have been quick to voice their opposition. In a joint statement issued on October 22, leading media associations warned that the proposed law poses a “serious threat to press freedom.” In their view, it is designed to muzzle dissent and push journalism into a realm of legal ambiguity.
“The foreign agent amendment brings new risks to press freedom. Ambiguous phrases such as ‘domestic and foreign political interests’ and ‘foreign organization’ threaten to cast a wide net over any form of journalism or civil society activity,”
the statement reads. Journalists could now face constant scrutiny and the threat of being branded as ‘foreign agents.[2]
In response, AKP members have argued that the law is necessary to protect Turkey against “new forms of espionage.” Justice Committee Chairman Cüneyt Yüksel said that the proposal aims to counteract modern espionage methods that go beyond traditional document and information leaks.
“Some countries and organizations are using novel methods to conduct operations in foreign territories,”
Yüksel claimed. The law, he said, is intended to deter similar threats to Turkey.
As evidence, officials pointed to the recent trial of Metin Gürcan, a prominent analyst who was acquitted of some espionage charges but received a reduced sentence for lesser offenses. The case, they argue, underscores the need to update Turkey’s espionage laws.
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.
