Events
The applicant is under arrest in the penitentiary institution for membership in an armed terrorist organization.
The General Directorate of Prisons and detention houses dated 10/10/2016 Circular (Circular) with the detainees and convicts in penal institutions or authorities given to the counsel for the defence in a sealed envelope in the mail and faxes, all except for letters, faxes, and scanning of a petition by the National Judicial Network Computing System (UYAP) should be saved through penal institutions throughout the country that has been submitted to the Public Prosecution Office. The execution institutions have also initiated an application in accordance with the contents of the Circular. The letters sent by the applicant and received by him were also registered with UYAP within the scope of the aforementioned Circular.
The applicant applied to the execution judge with the request to terminate this application and delete the records. The execution judge is responsible for the execution of Article 68 of the Law No. 5275 on the Execution of Criminal and Security Measures. in paragraph (2) of article (2), the commission for reading letters, faxes and telegrams sent and received by the convict, emphasizing that in the absence of a commission, it is regulated that the institution will be supervised by the highest supervisor, stated that this practice is not contrary to the Constitution. The appeal of the applicant to the aforementioned decision was also rejected by the criminal court.
Count
The applicant claimed that the right to respect for private life and the freedom of communication were violated due to the fact that all the letters sent to him in the penitentiary institution where he was detained and which he wanted to send were registered with UYAP.
Evaluation of the Court
The practice of registering prisoners’ letters in the UYAP is regulated by Article 38 / A of the Criminal Procedure Code No. 5271, Article 68 of the Law No. 5275. according to Article 122 of the Charter (Charter) on the Management of Penitentiary Institutions and the Execution of Criminal and Security Measures. and 123. it is based on the Circular with its clauses.
First of all, it is necessary to limit the correspondence of convicts and detainees in penitentiary institutions by auditing Law No. 68 of Law No. 5275. it has been seen that the regulation is regulated in the article and the details of the procedures and results of the audit are included in the regulation-based Regulation. It is understood that the penitentiary institution is given the authority to inspect the letters when the aforementioned regulations are observed, in this context, the letters that are not considered objectionable should be delivered or sent to the addressee, and those that are considered objectionable should be kept in the execution institution.
On the other hand, Article 38 / A of the Law No. 5271 also regulates that all kinds of data, information, documents and decisions related to criminal procedure procedures can be processed, recorded and stored through UYAP. Considering both laws and the relevant legislation together, it can be said that there is a legal regulation that allows prisoners’ correspondence to be recorded in the UYAP, as a rule, within the scope of the supervision authority granted to the execution institution. However, it is not enough that laws on the limitation of fundamental rights and freedoms exist in some form. The criterion of legality also requires a material content, and at this point the nature of the law becomes important.
In this case, the prisoners ‘ correspondence with the topics you want to keep private life private, which may contain information that will remain within the scope of personal data when the law that is given on the subject of the prisoner’s fundamental rights and freedoms be restricted should be able to determine the principles and basic fundamentals that should also be stressed. In this context, legislation based on the law or the relevant law is expected to determine the principles related to the scope of systematic recording of correspondence and the protection of private information and personal data in the letter and its contents, in particular. However, prisoners ‘ correspondence, the duration of the eclipse, this correspondence of the data with third-party access content, use, disposal, and in relation to the issues of ensuring the confidentiality of the data of the respondents and against the arbitrariness of the authority must contain a clear and detailed rules to ensure we have enough security.
It has been assessed that the regulation on the concrete event allows the prisoner’s correspondence, which is not objectionable, which includes personal information and has nothing to do with judicial processes, to be stored by registering it with the UYAP, resulting in a departure from the procedure determined by the legislation in accordance with whether the letter is objectionable or not.
However, it should be emphasized that with the application subject to the application, all correspondence is systematically registered with the UYAP, regardless of whether it is objectionable or not, without providing for a difference in accordance with the nature of the crime subject to conviction or the status of the detainee and the convict in the context of criminal law. In addition, it was understood that there is no clear regulation on how long the prisoner’s correspondence will be stored in the system, under what conditions it will be opened for access and use by third parties, with which authorities it can be shared by the execution institution, how to protect personal data and privacy, and there is uncertainty in terms of the issues mentioned in the application. It has been concluded that there is no legal basis for the intervention in the context of these statements.
The Constitutional Court has decided that the right to respect for private life and the freedom of communication have been violated on the grounds described.
You can read our other articles and petition examples by clicking here