The Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA) has filed an individual application with Turkey’s Constitutional Court, challenging the blocking of access to its official X account.
In its application, MLSA’s Legal Unit argued that the authorities had failed to specify which post was unlawful and that blocking access to the entire account violated the rights to freedom of expression, freedom of the press and freedom of association. MLSA requested that access to its account be restored.
The Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA) has filed an individual application with Turkey’s Constitutional Court, challenging a decision to block access to its official X account. The association argued that the Sept. 14, 2026, order issued by the Mersin 3rd Criminal Judgeship of Peace lacked specific justification and that blocking its entire account was a disproportionate measure.
The restrictions followed a series of legal proceedings launched on Sept. 12, 2026, under an operation dubbed “My Family Is Safe,” targeting executives and members of several LGBTQ+ organizations. The authorities also blocked access to the organizations’ websites and social media accounts. On Sept. 14, the restrictions were expanded to include accounts belonging to other individuals and organizations, including MLSA’s official X account.
At the request of the Mersin Provincial Police Department, the Mersin 3rd Criminal Judgeship of Peace ordered access restrictions on numerous social media accounts and websites on Sept. 14 under Article 8/A of Law No. 5651, Turkey’s Internet Law. MLSA’s account, @mlsaturkey, was among those targeted.
The ruling cited broad grounds such as “protecting national security and public order” but did not specify which of MLSA’s posts had prompted the restriction. Rather than targeting specific content, the order blocked access to the entire account, making the association’s news reports, research reports and announcements inaccessible.
“Blocking the entire account is disproportionate”
MLSA said it had not been formally notified of the access restriction order and had learned of the decision through news reports.
On Sept. 16, 2026, the association challenged the Mersin 3rd Criminal Judgeship of Peace’s order through its lawyers. In its appeal, MLSA argued that the authorities had failed to identify which of its posts posed a threat to national security or public order. The association stressed that blocking access to its entire account, which contained hundreds of news reports, announcements and other journalistic content, was neither necessary nor proportionate. It also noted that the decision failed to explain why the entire account had been blocked when restrictions could have been limited to specific content.
Citing Article 8/A(3) of Law No. 5651, MLSA argued that access restrictions must, as a general rule, be limited to the specific publication, section or part of a website where the alleged violation occurred. The association maintained that blocking an entire account should be permitted only under exceptional circumstances.
MLSA also cited the Turkish Constitutional Court’s rulings in Wikimedia Foundation Inc. and Others and Birgün İletişim ve Yayıncılık Ticaret A.Ş., as well as the European Court of Human Rights’ judgments in Ahmet Yıldırım v. Turkey and Cengiz and Others v. Turkey. The association argued that blocking access to entire accounts or websites on the basis of specific content has severe consequences for freedom of expression.
On Sept. 25, 2026, the Mersin 4th Criminal Judgeship of Peace rejected the appeal in a final ruling, numbered 2026/9795 (Miscellaneous Proceedings). The court stated that it had considered the reasoning of the original decision and found no grounds to overturn it.
Violations of freedom of expression, press freedom and freedom of association
In its individual application to the Constitutional Court, MLSA argued that the access restriction violated freedom of expression, protected under Article 26 of the Turkish Constitution, and freedom of the press, guaranteed under Article 28. The association also maintained that the restriction breached the safeguards governing limitations on fundamental rights under Article 13 of the Constitution.
MLSA said blocking its official account affected more than the visibility of individual posts, preventing the association from sharing news reports, coverage of court proceedings, research and statements on press freedom with the public. The measure therefore also restricted the public’s access to news and information, the association argued.
The application further argued that the decision violated freedom of association, protected under Article 33 of the Constitution and Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), by preventing MLSA from communicating with its members, supporters and the wider public.
MLSA also alleged a violation of its right to an effective remedy because the access restriction order had not been formally served on the association and its objections had not received substantive, reasoned responses. The application cited the right to an effective remedy under Article 40 of the Constitution and Article 13 of the ECHR, as well as the right to a reasoned judicial decision under Articles 36 and 141 of the Constitution.
The association argued that the Mersin 4th Criminal Judgeship of Peace had failed to conduct a substantive assessment of the necessity and proportionality of the restriction when reviewing its appeal and had not addressed its central arguments. As a result, MLSA maintained, the appeals process had failed to function as an effective mechanism for reviewing alleged violations of fundamental rights.
MLSA’s Legal Unit asked the Constitutional Court to examine the application as a matter of priority and urgency. It requested a ruling finding violations of freedom of expression, freedom of the press, freedom of association, the right to a reasoned judicial decision and the right to an effective remedy.
The association also asked the court to refer the case back to the relevant Criminal Judgeship of Peace for fresh proceedings to remedy the violations and to order the necessary steps to restore access to its X account, @mlsaturkey.
