Big brother

Expats are up in arms, and some even say that they will leave the country they have come to love so much if such dictatorial controls over Internet access are set in stone here. What is this all about? Absolute power corrupts absolutely as was said, so when a political party has hegemony over what does and doesn’t happen in a country, questions are raised about where democratic principles actually lie.

If the Information Technologies and Communications Authority (BTK) regulation, due to come into effect on Aug. 22, is enforced it would align Turkey with China and Iran as the most restrictive censoring regimes in the world. The Stalinist sounding authority proposes that all Internet subscribers will have to choose between categories of: “family” (catering to families in which everyone uses the web); “child” (catering to families wherein only children use the web); “domestic (inland),” (catering to those looking to filter child porn and online gambling, of which 99.9 percent is rooted abroad, according to the BTK); or “standard,” (catering to those who do not wish to filter their access and continue as is).

The news has caused a major public outcry -- and rightly so -- and it brought thousands out in protest in Taksim Square in İstanbul and in other provinces in Turkey last Sunday. Thousands of people have also joined Facebook campaigns against the imposition of the filters.

Reactions to the decision

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has already reacted strongly to the news. Posting a number of articles on its website (htpp//www.rsf.org) one affirms: “With Turkey already blocking thousands of sites with content that is considered sensitive, the consequences of such keyword filtering could be disastrous for online freedom of expression.” Yaman Akdeniz, a law lecturer at İstanbul Bilgi University, has asked the High Council for Telecommunications (TIB) to explain the presence of certain words on the banned list such as “etek” (skirt), “baldiz” (sister-in-law) and “hayvan” (animal) along with “free” and “pics” among an alleged 138 proscribed words. Turkey already blocks 7,000 websites. Remember the blocking of YouTube due to sensitivities over references to Mustafa Kemal Atatürk? Remember the temporary closure of Google’s blog site because of live football matches hacked from Digitürk? No wonder that Turkey is on a list of “countries under surveillance” in the latest “Enemies of the Internet - Countries Under Surveillance” report published by the RSF earlier this year.

The TIB has now backed down and abandoned its plan to introduce keyword filtering. That is the good news. However, plans to force Internet users to choose a filter package continue to cause concern and fierce opposition. Lawyers representing the Turkish human rights website bianet.org have asked the Council of State to overturn the measure. Access to Bianet was blocked in many Internet cafes in June 2007 by filtering software using a blacklist compiled by government security officials. The blocking was finally lifted after Bianet approached the company that made the software. Bianet Editor-in-Chief Erol Önderoğlu said, “We don’t want to experience the same problem again as a result of new measures targeting independent, alternative or free initiatives.”

In the face of rising anger and indignation, BTK President Tayfun Acarer announced that Internet users in Turkey will not be obliged to choose one of the filtering options proposed but could continue to browse the Internet as today. He went on to explain: “If we define the current Internet profile as ‘standard,’ the ‘Secure Internet Profile’ is an addition brought to the current system. This regulation emerged upon demands from many users. We made this regulation after negotiating with many Internet service providers. Any subscriber who wants the current profile will continue to use it, while those who want to have filters can choose the ‘Secure Internet Profile’.”

Expats are not convinced. This proposal to impose filters on Internet users is considered hard evidence that far from becoming more democratic, Turkey is becoming more autocratic. In response to this new perceived threat to freedom of expression, an online campaign has been set up by Avaaz (www.avaaz.org/en) -- a web movement which aims to include people powered politics to decision-making throughout the globe --  to build “the biggest petition in Turkish history.”

I was forwarded the original email from them, and it was sent in both English and Turkish. According to Avaaz no computer in the country will have access to the Internet without signing up for this “censorship” package. The email goes on to state: “The new system is a violation of our right to freedom of expression and access to information, and it has absolutely no legal basis under Turkish law. The BTK is under enormous pressure already, facing a backlash across the country.” Additionally, they note that “BTK’s Internet censorship violates the European Convention on Human Rights and the Turkish constitution.” Furthermore, they are skeptical of the BTK’s president’s attempts at reassuring Internet users in Turkey: “The BTK claims they are providing families with an important service, and that if we choose the “standard” filter, our Internet access won’t change. But this is clearly a lie to generate support for censorship. The filters are already available for download by anyone who wishes to install them -- this regulation will make filters mandatory. The BTK would have total control over which Internet sites are blocked under the filters and could add or remove sites without our knowledge -- giving them the power to ban thousands of new websites without any good reason.”

The expat community is deeply concerned at the implications of the proposed obligatory filter options. It is all too much “Big Brother” for their taste. Even Ümit Boyner, head of the Turkish Industrialists and Businessmen’s Association (TÜSİAD) has weighed in when she tweeted: “We are all concerned over Internet bans. The criteria and the legal process in this field should be reviewed.” It remains to be seen therefore whether Acarer is being sincere or just flannelling when he asserted that the proposed options in no way replaced the existing standard profile, which all users currently have. However, experts suggest that any regulations designed to “protect the customer” usually turn out to be censorship systems.

In the meantime, the expat community remains suspicious and skeptical. While not denying the major improvements in the country over the last decade, this government has not convinced them of its democratic sincerity, and this latest apparent threat to personal freedom is just adding fuel to the fire.