11 Apr Application declared inadmissible in the case concerning a blocking of Wikipedia website

In its decision in the case of Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. v. Turkey (application no. 25479/19, 24.03.2022) the European Court of Human Rights has, by a majority, declared the application inadmissible.

The case concerned a request by the Telecommunications and Information Technology Directorate for the removal of certain pages from the applicant’s website and the subsequent order blocking access to the entire website as it was not technically feasible to block only certain pages.

In the present case the measure complained of by the applicant foundation, namely the order blocking access to the Wikipedia website made initially by the Telecommunications and Information Technology Directorate (TİB), an administrative body, and subsequently upheld by the competent magistrate’s court, had been lifted on 15 January 2020 following notification of the Constitutional Court judgment of 26 December 2019. The 1st Magistrate’s Court had decided to lift the order blocking access to the entire Wikipedia website without delay. In particular, the Constitutional Court had held that the blocking of access to an entire website was an exceptional measure, and it had enumerated the criteria to be applied in deciding on such measures. After examining the case it had also found that the measure ordered by the administrative and judicial bodies had not been based on a pressing social need, that insufficient reasons had been given for it and that it amounted to disproportionate interference with the right to freedom of expression

The Court observed that it had found, in numerous cases concerning freedom of expression, that an application to the Constitutional Court was to be regarded as a remedy to be exhausted for the purposes of Article 35 § 1 of the Convention in respect of such complaints. The Court took note of the systemic nature of the problem raised in the present case. Nevertheless, it did not have sufficiently relevant information to suggest that the Turkish Constitutional Court was not capable of remedying the problem. That court had delivered several judgments concerning the blocking of websites, establishing numerous criteria to be followed by the national authorities and the courts called upon to examine blocking orders.

The Court found that in ruling on the individual application before it the Constitutional Court had acknowledged in substance the violation of Article 10 of the Convention and had afforded appropriate and sufficient redress for the damage sustained by the applicant foundation. It therefore held that the applicant foundation could no longer claim victim status and that the application was incompatible with the provisions of the Convention.

Reference from the official website of the European Court of Human Rights