CHP MP Okan Konuralp questioned the access ban on Instagram

(ANKARA) -CHP Ankara Deputy and TBMM Digital Media Commission member Okan Konuralp asked Minister of Transport and Infrastructure Abdulkadir Uraloğlu, “What are the catalogue crimes within the scope of Article 8 of Law No. 5651, which are cited as the reason for blocking access to Instagram? What specific content was warned about to Instagram in this context? What did Instagram do in response to this request? What kind of communication took place between BTK and Instagram (Meta) on which dates, about which content? What are the details of these communications?”

CHP Ankara Deputy Okan Konuralp brought the access ban imposed by the Information Technologies and Communication Authority (BTK) on the social media platform Instagram to the agenda of the Turkish Grand National Assembly with a parliamentary question. Konuralp noted the following:

““The catalogue is being used as an excuse for crimes”

“The Information and Communication Technologies Authority (BTK) has imposed an access ban on the social media platform Instagram. The reason for this access ban has been put forward as ‘catalog crimes’. However, this situation has led to widespread public debate and raised various questions. There are serious concerns about the transparency and legal basis of the access ban regarding this process. It is thought that the access ban imposed on Instagram has been implemented in order to slow down legal processes and objections by clamping down during the judicial recess and to put pressure on Instagram. Catalog crimes are both used as an excuse in this process and are seen as a tool to complicate legal processes. BTK’s authority is limited to catalog crimes, which include 10 different types of crimes included in Article 8 of Law No. 5651, such as obscenity, prostitution, sexual abuse of children, insulting Atatürk and some crimes included in the MIT Law. It is unclear what specific content Instagram is warning about, and this raises suspicion in the public.

According to the information shared with the public by information technology lawyer and faculty member Prof. Dr. Yaman Akdeniz, the transparency reports published by Meta Company (which includes Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp) every 6 months through its representative in Turkey play an important role in the evaluation of this process. According to the latest published report, between January 1, 2024 and June 30, 2024, a total of 1849 content removal requests were sent from BTK to Instagram and Facebook and 2580 content was complained about. As a result of these requests, 504 content was completely removed and 1941 content was made invisible from Turkey. However, the fate of 135 content is unknown and this situation has raised questions in the public. In light of all these developments, the reasons and legal basis for BTK’s access ban on Instagram need to be clarified. In addition, it should be kept in mind that this access ban has caused the victimization of millions of Instagram users in Turkey.

Konuralp asked the following questions to Minister Uraloğlu:

“What are the catalogue crimes within the scope of Article 8 of Law No. 5651, which are cited as the reason for blocking access to Instagram? What specific content has Instagram been warned about in this context?

Why is BTK’s administrative measure decision not shared with the public?

What did Instagram do in response to this demand?

What kind of communication took place between BTK and Instagram (Meta) on this issue, on what dates, and about what content? What are the details of these communications?

The latest transparency report published by Meta lists 1,849 requests and 2,580 content complaints sent by BTK. How many of these content were related to Instagram and how many content were removed as a result of these requests? What happens to the content that was not removed?

Is BTK’s access ban on Instagram based on any other demands of Turkey other than ‘catalog crimes’? What other issues are included among the government’s demands regarding Meta?”