1.  Turkey is a unitary, presidential, constitutional republic with a codified Constitution first adopted in 1982 and amended comprehensively in 2017.⁴ This amendment turned the country from a parliamentary system into a presidential one without mechanisms of checks and balances.⁵ Legislative power is vested in the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (GNAT), a unicameral parliament.⁶ The Assembly comprises 600 members,⁷ elected for five years,⁸ through a proportional electoral system with a threshold of 10%, the highest in the world for single parties.⁹ The Assembly has general legislative authority qualified by some restrictions by the Constitution. In practice, since the elections for the Presidency and the Assembly are on the same day,¹⁰ there is an increased likelihood of a single party holding both the Presidency and the majority of seats in the GNAT.¹¹ As party discipline is high in the GNAT, the President holds a strong position in determining the successful passage of legislative acts. The President also has the authority to issue presidential decrees, which have the power and effect of law on administrative matters not regulated by law.

2.  In response, the GNAT has, theoretically, power to make void presidential decrees by ratifying legislation on the same subject. In addition, the Assembly is expected to approve the presidential decrees issued during a state of emergency within three months; if this does not happen, the emergency decree loses effect automatically.

3.  The President is the Head of State. The President represents the Republic of Turkey and the unity of the Turkish nation.¹² They exercise and carry out executive power and functions respectively.¹³ The President is elected directly by the public for five years through a two-tier majoritarian election. A person may be elected as the President of the Republic for two terms at most.¹⁴ They appoint and dismiss the Vice-President.¹⁵ Deputies and ministers are politically responsible only before the President. The President may appoint and dismiss high-ranking executives without any approval from Parliament and may regulate the procedure and principles governing the appointment thereof by presidential decree.¹⁶ The President may issue by-laws and decisions in order to ensure the implementation of laws. The President and ministers can be investigated based on criminal allegations upon the decision of three-fifths of the total number of the GNAT by secret vote. In such a case, an investigation committee is formed by 15 members of the Assembly. The committee prepares a report on the charges within two months, which has to be approved by at least two-thirds of the members of the GNAT to allow the Supreme Criminal Tribunal to try the President.

4.  The Republic of Turkey is a unitary State. According to the Constitution, the State, with its territory and nation, is an indivisible entity,¹⁷ which the Constitutional Court generally interprets as a unitary State. Its capital is Ankara, and this cannot be changed.¹⁸ The Government is a whole with its formation and functions. Its organization and functions are based on the principles of centralization and decentralization.¹⁹ The State is divided into 81 provinces. These provinces do not have any autonomy and exercise no sovereign powers. The public elects mayors, who have rights, duties, and responsibilities relating to the management of their municipalities. Nonetheless, they remain under the administrative tutelage of the governor of the province appointed by the central Government. Legislative, executive, and legal powers are single and central.

5.  Health protection powers are vested in the central Government. Rules affecting general public health must be prepared and approved by the GNAT as law. The President can issue presidential decrees only in areas not regulated by law. Executing health-related laws and presidential decrees is a competence that belongs to the President’s cabinet, which can use this power through presidential by-laws, decisions, and circulars.

6.  The responsibility for responding to emergencies such as the Covid-19 pandemic belongs to the President as the embodiment of the executive organ. There is an advisory board, titled the Covid-19 Scientific Advisory Board (CSAB) (Türkiye Koronavirüs Bilim Kurulu) formed under the Ministry of Health (see Part III.E below). The President is not bound by the Board’s advice, which means that they can overrule them and take measures related to the Covid-19 pandemic as presidential acts.

7.  According to Article 13 of the Constitution, fundamental rights and freedoms may be restricted only by law. However, the only law relating to public health in emergencies like a pandemic is an outdated law from 1930, which is called ‘Umumi Hıfzıssıhha Kanunu’ (Law No 1593 on General Protection of Public Health),²⁰ which cites a numerus clausus of types of pandemics during which some restrictions can be enforced. Although Covid-19 is not one of them, rights and freedoms have nonetheless been restricted through some executive orders lacking legal grounding during the recent pandemic to limit the spread of the virus.²¹ The only other way to restrict fundamental rights and freedoms was to declare a state of emergency, which did not occur. Therefore, it can be said that the response has confused the constitutional arrangement.

8.  There has not been any constitutional state of emergency declared during the Covid-19 pandemic, even though according to the Constitution an outbreak of a dangerous epidemic is one reason for which a national emergency can be declared.²² The declaration of a regional or nationwide state of emergency of a maximum of six months is at the discretion of the President, though it must be submitted to Parliament to be approved by a simple majority.

9.  The President’s power is especially enlarged during a state of emergency. In such a scenario, they are able to govern through presidential decrees alone, which have the force of law during a state of emergency and can be reviewed by Parliament only retrospectively (see Part III below). Even fundamental rights and freedoms can be restricted through presidential decrees pursuant to Article 15 of the Constitution in a state of emergency. These decrees remain in force only if Parliament confirms them within three months. In this scenario, the President would hold legislative power, which would create a legal basis for the restrictions imposed during the recent pandemic.

10.  The republican form of the State,²³ its democratic, secular, and social qualities, as well as the rule of law,²⁴ cannot at any time be amended.²⁵ Article 15 of the Constitution of Turkey provides that although rights and freedoms may be partially or entirely suspended in times of war, mobilization, or under the state of emergency, some core rights are inviolable, such as the right to life and the integrity of corporal and spiritual existence. Moreover, no one shall be compelled to reveal their religion, conscience, thought, or opinion, nor be accused on account of them.

11.  Turkey is a Member State of the Council of Europe (CoE) and a party to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the United Nations Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment and Punishment. There has been no decision to derogate from the ECHR or any other international convention protecting human rights to which Turkey is a party.

12.  The CSAB was established by the approval of the Minister of Health on 22 January 2020,²⁶ before the official declaration of the pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). It started to take precautions as early as the first day to prevent the introduction of the virus to the country by ceasing direct flights from Wuhan, China, applying health checks to Chinese citizens entering Turkey, and arranging for thermal cameras and quarantine rooms in the airports. In February 2020, borders with Iran were closed. Subsequently, flights to and from Italy, South Korea, and Iraq were halted (see Part IV.A.2 below). Two days after the declaration of the worldwide pandemic by the WHO, on 13 March 2020, an emergency meeting in the Presidential Complex was organized. On the same day, the Ministry of Health published a document detailing the measures to be taken against Covid-19 and mentioning the WHO for the first time.²⁷ In the document, the Ministry announced a list of precautions while referring to the advice of the WHO. After that moment, the President, the Minister of Health, and other State officers regularly referred to the WHO’s announcements and guidelines to justify measures that included the closure of schools and the obligation to wear a face mask in public (see Part IV below).²⁸

13.  According to the Law on Provincial Administration,²⁹ duties of provincial governors include exercising preventive police patrol, providing and preserving peace, security, personal inviolability, freedom of action, and public welfare within the cities. To ensure these duties, the governor may take necessary measures. In cases where there are serious signs of deterioration or the risk of deterioration of public order or safety in such a way that ordinary life is threatened, the governor may restrict entry to and exit from the city for persons who are suspected of having the potential to disrupt public order or public security, regulate or restrict the roaming or gathering of people and the navigation of vehicles in certain places or during certain hours, or prohibit the bearing or transportation of all types of weapons and ammunition including the registered ones. These measures cannot exceed 15 days.³⁰ It is also stated that Article 66 of the law applies to those who do not comply with the decisions and measures taken and announced within the scope of Article 11/C. Article 66 states that

People who oppose or do not comply with the decisions and measures issued by general city councils, administrative councils or governors shall be punished in accordance with article 32 of the Law on Misdemeanors. However, in cases where public order and public security or safety of people and property are endangered, those who act contrary to the decisions and measures taken by the governor in order to ensure public order shall be punished with imprisonment from three months to a year.

14.  Article 32 of the Law on Misdemeanors prescribes administrative fines for people who act improperly with the orders given by competent authorities.³¹

15.  According to Article 27 of the Law on General Protection of Public Health,³² public health commissions monitor the sanitary situation of the places under their respective jurisdictions, taking measures to improve sanitary circumstances and eliminate existing defects in cities, towns, and villages. It is also their duty to assist people in their struggle against pandemics. Article 72 of the Law lists measures to be applied in cases of the epidemics and pandemics mentioned in Article 57 of the Law, covering cholera, plague, and diphtheria. Although Article 57 does not explicitly address Covid-19, Article 64 allows the Law to be applied to other epidemics and pandemics. These measures are mostly applicable to infected people, infected animals, or danger zones. They do not mention the preventive measures or restriction of rights in relation to ‘non-infected people’ explicitly.

16.  Due to the fact that this law was enacted in 1930 and has not been changed much since then, the types of diseases referred to in it are outdated.³³ In the aforementioned Article 57 of the Law on General Protection of Public Health, the diseases against which measures may be taken are listed as a numerus clausus, and Covid-19 is not one of them. Although this is the case, the Ministry of the Interior imposed sanctions under Article 282 of this Law, which refers to other diseases, for violating the restrictions imposed by circulars regarding the Covid-19 pandemic. That situation created a legal ambiguity from which rose concerns regarding the discretionary limitation of the rights and freedoms, and even some allegations on intervention to certain lifestyles emerged.³⁴ To give an example of how the law is outdated, according to it, during a pandemic such as cholera, yellow fever, or rabies, passengers entering the country through land or riverways—airways are not mentioned, since at that time flying was not a commercial transportation means—can be held, and their health can be checked.³⁵ However, only people who show symptoms can be quarantined.³⁶ Sanctions can only be imposed accordingly on people who break these rules.

17.  Despite this, the GNAT has approved no new general law to provide a legal basis for the restrictions and measures imposed to address the pandemic. Parliament has approved only two legal norms regarding the pandemic. One is a law to lessen the economic impact of the outbreak by providing some temporary support, including a ban on the termination of labour contracts and an allowance for unpaid leave without consent (see Part V below).³⁷ The other is merely a provision to halt most of the procedural time limits until a certain time.³⁸

18.  Faced with the lack of a constitutional and legal framework to contain the spread of the Covid-19 outbreak, the executive organ—essentially the President—filled this gap through presidential decrees, decisions, and circulars, as well as circulars of the Ministry of the Interior. Governors have a duty to implement and enforce the measures taken by administrative decisions. The inaction of Parliament and the active role of the executive organ in tackling the pandemic can be considered a reflection of the new political regime adopted in 2017, which puts the President above all the other powers. ³⁹

19.  Under the new presidential system of government, the President can issue decrees on matters regarding executive power. Nonetheless, Presidential decrees may not regulate fundamental rights or individual rights and duties. No presidential decree may be issued on matters to be regulated or which are explicitly regulated by law. In the case of any discrepancy, provisions of law prevail over decrees.⁴⁰ Therefore, one can say that where a matter has not been regulated by parliamentary legislation, the President is able to regulate a matter by a general and abstract normative decree, which has the power of law until Parliament decides to manage this matter by law. This power of decree has not been used in relation to Covid-19 measures.

20.  The President also has the power to issue decisions in relation to individuals, like their appointments. During the pandemic, this power was also used to issue some general measures to mitigate the economic and social impact of the outbreak, such as new general regulations on value-added tax⁴¹ or the prolongation of the short-term employment allowance.

21.  Under the new presidential system of government approved in 2017 through a referendum organized during a state of emergency declared after the attempted coup d’état on 15 July 2016, the President has the power to issue three different types of acts. The highest in the hierarchy of norms is the presidential decree regulated by Article 104(17) of the Constitution. As mentioned above, presidential decrees have a legal effect if a law has not regulated that matter, but they lose their regulative power once a law is passed—so, they are just under the law in the hierarchy. Secondly, the President may issue by-laws. Regulated by Article 124 of the Constitution, the President, ministries, and public corporate bodies may issue by-laws in order to ensure the implementation of laws and presidential decrees relating to their jurisdiction, as long as they are not contrary to them. Finally, at the bottom of the hierarchy, the President may also issue circulars, directives, notifications, and decisions of principle as regulative acts to implement higher regulations. ⁴²

22.  Presidential decrees, like laws, regulate matters as long as they are in effect, unless they provide a deadline or until the President or Parliament regulates the matter by a new decree or law. The duration of by-laws and other lower regulative acts of the President depends on the life of the laws and decrees they are implementing unless, again, there is a deadline contained within them. Circulars issued by ministries or governorships are usually intended to tackle a specific matter or event. Therefore, they expire automatically with the end of that specific matter or event.

23.  Presidential decrees can be challenged before the Constitutional Court. At least one-fifth of the members of the GNAT or the two biggest parties in the Parliament may apply to the court for an annulment action within 60 days after their publication in the Official Gazette.⁴³ In addition, if one of the parties to a case in front of a court claims the unconstitutionality of a presidential decree to be used in that case, the judge can submit the claim to the Constitutional Court as well.⁴⁴ Other presidential, ministerial, and governmental regulations can be challenged before administrative courts. For example, there have been some applications to these courts for the annulation of fines given due to the violation of circulars issued by the Ministry of the Interior, some of which were successful (see Part IV below).

24.  Executive authorities have used their powers to and even sometimes beyond the limit during the Covid-19 pandemic. In the absence of action from the GNAT, in which the President’s party holds the highest number of seats, the Government has played a dominant role in tackling the crisis. Starting from early March 2020, the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of Family and Social Services, the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, and the Ministry of Commerce issued hundreds of circulars to implement precautions and impose bans such as those on gatherings, as well as obligations such as wearing a face mask in public (see Part IV below).

25.  On 1 October 2020, the Ministry of Health published a guide on managing the Covid-19 pandemic and the precautions to be taken in the labour market prepared by the CSAB.⁴⁵ Executive regulations such as ministerial circulars and decisions, and the decisions made by this Board, have been issued according to this guide, right after approval by the President. In the absence of a legal basis, these circulars and decisions affecting rights and freedoms gave rise to concerns of rule of law violations.⁴⁶ The absence of an institutionalized structure to fight the pandemic and, correspondingly, the confusion of powers among governmental units have been criticized as well (for details of this confusion see Part IV.A below).⁴⁷

26.  Article 13 of the Constitution stipulates that rights and freedoms shall be restricted only by law. However, the only law that contains some provisions on the matter of pandemics, as mentioned above, does not provide a legal basis for the restrictions imposed thus far to limit the spread of Covid-19. Therefore, since precautions such as quarantine measures, the obligatory wearing of face masks, and physical distancing rules were impossible to mandate under that law (see Part IV.B.1 below), they have instead been taken through executive acts following the guidance of the CSAB working under the Ministry of Health.

27.  Presidential decrees issued in a state of emergency can be reviewed by the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (GNAT) retrospectively. These decrees can remain in force only if Parliament affirms them within three months.⁴⁸ However, there is no ongoing parliamentary oversight over ordinary presidential decrees, by-laws, and circulars, all of which are the main legal instruments in the Covid-19 response. The GNAT therefore cannot terminate these powers and the powers do not come up for renewal before it. These legal instruments may however be subject to legal oversight as explained in Part II.C above. One-fifth of the members of the GNAT and the two largest parties in Parliament are entitled to apply to the Constitutional Court for the annulment of presidential decrees.⁴⁹

28.  The President, deputies, and ministers are not politically responsible to the GNAT. However, it is enshrined in the Constitution that the GNAT exercises the power to obtain information and supervision by means of parliamentary inquiry, general debate, parliamentary investigation, and written question.⁵⁰ Apart from parliamentary investigation which may give rise to the criminal liability of the executive, these methods do not invoke any responsibility on the part of members of the executive. According to Article 98 of the Constitution, a parliamentary inquiry is an examination conducted to obtain information on a specific subject and a general debate is the consideration of a specific subject relating to the community and the activities of the State at the plenary of the GNAT. From the beginning of the pandemic, parliamentarians have issued motions to initiate general debates and parliamentary inquiries relating to Covid-19 measures.⁵¹

29.  According to Article 98 of the Constitution, a written question is a question asked by parliamentarians to the deputies of the President or ministers in a written form, which is to be answered within 15 days. Parliamentarians have thus far directed numerous written questions at ministers. Submission of answers to written questions after the 15-day legal period is a regular occurrence.⁵² Submission of belated answers to written questions have also been seen during the pandemic concerning questions related to Covid-19 measures.⁵³ According to the Speakership of the GNAT, from a total of 14,245 written questions submitted in 2020, 17,445 in 2021, and 20,502 in 2022: only 2,552 written questions in 2020, 2,101 in 2021, and 3,461 in 2022 were answered within the 15-day period; 4,867 written questions in 2020, 6,691 in 2021, and 7,192 in 2022 received belated answers; and 6,606 written questions in 2020, 7,067 in 2021, and 8,423 in 2022 have not been answered.⁵⁴ Thus, most questions in 2020, 2021, and 2022 have received either belated answers or none at all. It is worth noting that a similar situation occurred concerning written questions submitted in the first and second legislative years of the 27th legislative period, ie 2018 and 2019, before the Covid-19 pandemic.⁵⁵ Thus, most questions received either belated answers or none at all. A similar situation occurred concerning written questions submitted in the first and second legislative years of the 27th legislative period, ie in 2018 and 2019.⁵⁶

30.  Parliament can amend the laws on which regulatory instruments such as by-laws and circulars are based. Furthermore, according to Article 104(17) of the Constitution, presidential decrees will be deemed null and void when a law regulating the same subject matter is enacted.

31.  The GNAT has been able to meet throughout the pandemic. Several circulars of the Ministry of the Interior have named parliamentarians and employees of the GNAT in the list of those exempted from curfews.⁵⁷ Although some parliamentarians have expressed the view that virtual meetings are necessary,⁵⁸ there has been no report, announcement, or decision showing that the GNAT has resorted to virtual meetings.

32.  After the pandemic hit Turkey, the GNAT published on its website several of its decisions to suspend the operations of Parliament. The GNAT decided to take a ten-day recess as of 5 May 2020.⁵⁹ Thereafter, a decision of prorogation from 29 July 2020 until 1 October 2020 was made.⁶⁰ It was then decided for Parliament to take a ten-day recess as of 12 January 2021.⁶¹ Similar decisions of prorogation were taken in the following months of 2021 and 2022.⁶² The GNAT mentioned neither the Covid-19 crisis nor any other reason for the suspension of the operations of Parliament in these decisions. It should also be noted that these decisions would not have been out of the ordinary even prior to the Covid-19 crisis. For example, in 2019, the GNAT decided on a ten-day recess and a prorogation that lasted for more than two months.⁶³

33.  Moreover, parliamentary committees are continuing to meet. As a matter of fact, the GNAT has issued decisions enabling parliamentary committees to work during periods of recess and prorogation.⁶⁴

34.  The activities of courts in Turkey have been significantly affected by the Covid-19 pandemic. Various measures have been taken in accordance with the progress of the pandemic. On 13 March 2020, two days after the announcement of the first Covid-19 case in Turkey, the Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSK) recommended that hearings be postponed except for those concerning arrests and other urgent proceedings.⁶⁵. It also recommended in the same document for the courts to make use of the Audio-Visual Information Technology System (SEGBİS) if necessary. SEGBİS allows, among other things, for defendants to attend court hearings through a link rather than in person. This system finds its statutory basis in Criminal Procedure Law No 5271,⁶⁶ and the by-law which was promulgated in 2011.⁶⁷ In several judgments concerning an individual application in 2018, the Constitutional Court concluded that the automatic use of SEGBİS without a search for alternatives and an endeavour to make possible a personal appearance before the court violated the right to a fair trial.⁶⁸ The use of SEGBİS is not seen as a violation per se—the Court sees an objection to the use of SEGBİS necessary to find a violation.⁶⁹ Furthermore, not resorting to SEGBİS for hearing witnesses has also contributed to the judgment of violation in an individual application.⁷⁰

35.  In line with the recommendation of the HSK, hearings in all court houses except those concerning the matters identified by the HSK were postponed.⁷¹ It was however expressed by the Ministry of Justice that there remained the possibility of filing a suit through the online services provided by the National Judiciary Informatics System (UYAP).⁷² In the ensuing days, the HSK announced that the courts would operate according to a flexible working arrangement similar to that of holiday periods.⁷³

36.  On 26 March 2020, Law No 7226 was published in the Official Gazette.⁷⁴ According to the first provisional clause of this law, procedural time limits including those for bringing a claim before a court were on hold until 30 April 2020 and restarted thereafter, in order to prevent legal proceedings from being compromised during the Covid-19 pandemic. This clause did not prevent the bringing of a claim before a court or the initiation of an appeal procedure.⁷⁵ The limitation periods for criminal punishment, among other matters, were deemed exceptions. In accordance with the power granted by the same clause, the President decided to extend this date to 15 June 2020 with a presidential decision published on 30 April 2020.⁷⁶ Additionally, the Constitutional Court announced that the time limit for individual applications was also within the scope of this provision and was therefore extended first until 30 April 2020 and thereafter 15 June 2020.⁷⁷

37.  The first provisional clause of Law No 7226 authorized the HSK to take necessary measures with respect to civil and criminal proceedings in first instance and divisional courts, including the postponement of hearings within the extended time limits. The Court of Cassation and the Council of State were empowered to take measures concerning appeal procedures and the Ministry of Justice was authorized to take other necessary measures with respect to judicial services. In accordance with the power granted to it by way of this law, the General Assembly of the HSK decided on 30 March 2020 that all hearings in first instance and divisional courts would be postponed to 30 April 2020.⁷⁸ However, urgent proceedings and the review of detention were excluded from this decision. The HSK stated that arrestees and attorneys had to be heard by way of SEGBİS. It was emphasized that the procedures which had not been postponed by this decision were to be executed through remote and flexible working methods and by way of the services provided by UYAP. The HSK decided to prolong this decision until 15 June 2020.⁷⁹ Additionally, the Court of Cassation decided to postpone appeal hearings in its jurisdiction first to 30 April 2020⁸⁰ and thereafter to 15 June 2020.⁸¹

38.  Starting from 16 June 2020, the time limits for bringing a claim before a court started running once more and courts started to hold hearings.⁸² The Ministry of Justice issued guidelines concerning the operation of courts and judicial services, to be applied during the normalization period.⁸³ This document recommended, among others, an obligation to wear masks in courthouses and physical distancing measures to be imposed. The Ministry of Justice also stated its intention to extend and increase the use of SEGBİS during the pandemic period.⁸⁴ Judicial operations in this period were carried out in accordance with the guidelines. The Ministry of Justice suggested for procedural requests on files to be sent through the online portal of UYAP in order to prevent possible crowds as a result of backlog of procedures, especially in public debt collection offices.⁸⁵

39.  Flexible working arrangements were recommended for the public sector in a presidential circular promulgated on 14 April 2021.⁸⁶ Therewith, the HSK advised courts to operate in a flexible manner, making use of the UYAP services to the fullest extent, while at the same time stating that planned hearings should take place.⁸⁷ However, the HSK subsequently published a decision on total lockdown measures urging the courts to consider once again postponing the hearings in first instance and divisional courts with the exception of urgent matters and proceedings concerning arrestees, during the period of total lockdown between 29 April and 17 May 2020.⁸⁸ The HSK emphasized that courts should consider holding the hearings concerning arrestees by way of SEGBİS and executing other proceedings through remote and flexible working methods as well as by way of the services provided by UYAP. The Ministry of Justice announced that this was a recommendation to courts rather than a binding decision.⁸⁹ On 30 June 2021, the HSK decided to end the total lockdown measures it announced through its decision of 27 April 2021,⁹⁰ and the flexible working hours were put to an end.

40.  The use of online court proceedings with respect to criminal cases has been available nationwide during the pandemic. This was obligatory with regards to detention reviews when hearings were not held and recommended in several phases of the pandemic.

41.  The possibility of holding hearings through audio and visual systems with respect to civil proceedings was introduced by Article 149 of Civil Procedure Law No 6100 before the pandemic.⁹¹ However, a system enabling the use of online platforms in civil cases was initiated only after the pandemic and is not actively used nationwide. This began with a law amending Article 149 of the Civil Procedure Law No 6100, which was published on 28 July 2020.⁹² With this amendment the judge can, through the request of one party or ex officio, decide to carry out an online hearing without having to obtain the consent of both parties. This amendment was criticized by some legal scholars as possibly enabling violations of the right to a fair trial in concrete cases.⁹³ Others expressed concerns regarding problems it might cause in practice given its hasty introduction.⁹⁴ Moreover, the amendment has been deemed by some as contrary to Article 142 of the Constitution, which mandates the regulation by law of court proceedings, given that the amendment does not itself set out the rules and procedures of online hearings but rather leaves this to other regulatory instruments.⁹⁵ However, the Ministry of Justice has, to the contrary, regarded the amendment as a fortification of the legal basis for online hearings in civil cases.⁹⁶ Accordingly, a system enabling attorneys to participate in hearings for civil cases online upon their filing of an online request was established.⁹⁷ This system was put into practice on 15 September 2020 in several civil courts in Ankara.⁹⁸ As of a December 2022 announcement, the online hearing system is accessible to attorneys in civil proceeding in 2619 courts operating in all 81 provinces of Turkey. According to this announcement, 515.440 online hearings have been conducted since 15 September 2020.⁹⁹

42.  Whether judicial review concerning declarations of states of emergency is possible is disputed among Turkish scholars. There are those who claim that the decision of the President to declare a state of emergency is subject to the review of the Council of State due to Article 125 of the Constitution.¹⁰⁰ However, it is widely accepted that neither the decision of the President, nor the decision of Parliament approving this decision, is subject to review by courts.¹⁰¹ The Constitutional Court ruled in 1970 that it could not review a decision of Parliament concerning this very matter.¹⁰² The Council of State has also ruled in the same year that reviewing the decision of the executive organ regarding the declaration of emergency is not within its competence.¹⁰³

43.  No information has been reached concerning whether there was a digital divide between users having online skills and those without. For further information on the role of courts with regard to enforcement see Part IV.B.1 below.

44.  The Covid-19 pandemic has not led to the postponement of elections on the national level in Turkey. However, it has affected the electoral calendar for elections that take place in the event of vacancies within the electoral period at the local level. According to Law No 2972 on the Elections of Local Administrations, Neighbourhood Mukhtars, and the Board of Aldermen, elections to fill vacancies for mukhtars and a certain number of the members of the board of aldermen are to take place every year in June.¹⁰⁴ Although the Supreme Election Committee of Turkey (YSK) had announced, on 17 March 2020, that these elections would take place in June 2020 in accordance with Law No 2972,¹⁰⁵ Law No 7244, which was promulgated on 17 April 2020, ordered that no such elections would take place in 2020.¹⁰⁶ Subsequently, the YSK announced a decision in the same vein.¹⁰⁷ In March 2021, the YSK decided for the postponed elections to take place on 6 June 2021¹⁰⁸ and published a list of these elections on its website.¹⁰⁹

45.  Apart from this, elections for bar associations were postponed as part of the Covid-19 measures. General assemblies of the bar associations that elect the governing bodies of the bar were originally slated to take place in October 2020 in accordance with the Attorneyship Law No 1136.¹¹⁰ However, on 2 October 2020, the Ministry of Interior issued a circular urging public health commissions of each province to take decisions to postpone meetings organised by multiple institutions, including bar associations, between 2 October and 1 December 2020.¹¹¹ Public health commissions followed accordingly.¹¹² The YSK decided that elections of bar associations could not take place if public health commissions had decided to postpone their meetings. However, assemblies of political parties could still take place.¹¹³

46.  The decisions of the Ministry as well as the YSK were criticized by the majority of the bar associations for, among other things, being contrary to Law No 1136 in which the electoral calendar is expressly determined and arbitrarily interfering with the right to vote and stand for election.¹¹⁴ Postponing the elections of bar associations while permitting some other organisations such as political parties to hold their general assemblies was seen to have underlying political motives rather than being aimed at protecting public health.¹¹⁵ These decisions were asserted to be linked to the elections for the leadership of the Union of the Turkish Bar Associations and the recent amendment to Law No 1136.¹¹⁶ This amendment changed the single-bar system where affiliation to a bar association was based on geographical criteria and made it possible to voluntarily form multiple bar associations in large provinces.¹¹⁷ This amendment also reduced the voting power of large bar associations and granted voting powers to the second bars that may be formed in large provinces for the leadership of the Union of the Turkish Bar Associations. Critics voiced concern that this law will reduce the power of large bar associations which raised criticism and dissent toward the executive.¹¹⁸ The Istanbul Bar Association asserted that the postponement of elections for bar associations would give time to the second bars to complete their formation and send delegates to the Union of the Turkish Bar Associations.¹¹⁹

47.  On 27 November 2020, the Ministry of the Interior issued another circular extending the postponement to 1 March 2021.¹²⁰ On 2 March 2021, a circular determined that meetings of multiple institutions, including bar associations, could take place in certain provinces, albeit capped at 300 participants.¹²¹ Consequently, the general assemblies of bar associations with more members could not take place.¹²² It has been announced by major bar associations that the elections are planned to be held in June 2021.¹²³ However, a circular issued by the Ministry of the Interior on 1 June 2021 further postponed events of organisations with broad participation, including general assemblies of bar associations, until 15 June 2021. General assemblies of sports clubs were exempted from the measure.¹²⁴ As a result of this circular, public health commissions took decisions accordingly.¹²⁵ Thus, the planned elections of bar associations could not take place before 15 June 2021. Another circular issued on 11 June 2021 was aimed specifically at general assemblies of bar associations. This circular announced that the general assemblies of bar associations with less than 400 members could take place as of 15 June 2021, while the general assemblies of bar associations with more than 400 members could take place as of 26 June 2021.¹²⁶ Accordingly, the elections of bar associations started to take place nationwide.¹²⁷ The Istanbul Bar Association held its election on 17 October 2021.¹²⁸ The Istanbul Bar Association No 2 completed its first ordinary general assembly on 4 July 2021.¹²⁹

48.  The Covid-19 Scientific Advisory Board (CSAB) was the main source of scientific advice for the Covid-19 response in Turkey. It consists of specialists and academics in various fields such as public health, epidemiology, infectious diseases, and clinical microbiology.¹³⁰ The number of experts was increased in time and subgroups were added in accordance with the emerging needs uncovered by the pandemic.¹³¹ The Turkish Medical Association recommended in March 2020 for itself and other expert organizations as well as health trade unions to be included in the composition of the CSAB.¹³² However, it later stated that this recommendation was not taken up.¹³³

49.  The CSAB has met regularly since its establishment to make evaluations concerning the Covid-19 situation in Turkey and to guide the Covid-19 response with its recommendations. There is no requirement for the recommendations to be published. Consequently, no such practice has been adopted. Usual practice has simply consisted of the Minister of Health holding a press conference or issuing a press release concerning the general topics discussed following these meetings.¹³⁴ The Turkish Medical Association found the lack of transparency in this regard to be a significant failure¹³⁵ and announced that it was crucial for the advice of the CSAB to be disclosed to the public, especially for the purpose of determining any possible mismanagement.¹³⁶

50.  Moreover, there is no express mention of an obligation on the part of the executive to abide by the recommendations of the CSAB. Nonetheless, throughout the pandemic, decisions relating to Covid-19 measures made by various authorities, including, among others, the Ministry of Interior,¹³⁷ the HSK,¹³⁸ and the President,¹³⁹ were described as being taken in consideration of the recommendations of the CSAB, albeit mostly as part of a general formulation. It was even expressly stated at times that a certain measure had been expressly recommended by the CSAB and that certain criteria within measures were determined by it.¹⁴⁰ The Minister of the Interior also asserted that the executive has abided by all the recommendations of the CSAB.¹⁴¹ This was however deemed highly questionable, especially due to the lack of disclosure of CSAB recommendations¹⁴² and the criticisms raised as to their lack of transparency.¹⁴³

51.  Further to its advisory role, the CSAB has assumed the role of informing the public about the pandemic. It published its first guideline in January 2020,¹⁴⁴ which was subsequently followed by many others in the following months, on working conditions, health institutions, diagnosis, treatment, contact tracing, and isolation, among other things. Individual members of the CSAB have also been actively providing information to the public through media outlets.¹⁴⁵ Although rare, some members have levelled criticism against the executive.¹⁴⁶ Thus far no information on a negative response or backlash on the part of the executive concerning the public appearances of members and their statements has been available.

52.  On 7 January 2020, another advisory board was formed.¹⁴⁷ The Board of Social Sciences is composed of experts in fields such as sociology, communication, psychology, religious sociology, and statistics.¹⁴⁸ It is tasked with, among other things, evaluating the efficiency of Covid-19 measures in view of the social behavioural patterns of the public and the psychological effects of the pandemic. It was announced that the Board’s recommendations will only be published when necessary. Whether this board has had a significant effect on actual Covid-19 measures is unknown.

53.  Finally, it is worth mentioning that scientific advisory boards have not only been convened at the level of central Government, for example, the municipality of Istanbul has also formed a scientific advisory board. This board has published various reports and recommendations relating to the Covid-19 response in Istanbul and Turkey.¹⁴⁹ The scientific advisory board’s advice in these reports has mainly addressed the measures taken by the central Government. It has at times found the measures taken by the central Government positive, while it has also put forward criticism toward and recommendations diverging from the central Government’s measures.¹⁵⁰ The scientific advisory board has criticized the central Government for not sufficiently involving municipalities in the Covid-19 decision-making process. It has stated that more financial resources should be allocated to municipalities in this period.¹⁵¹ It has also highlighted and criticized the fact that very limited data, specifically on Istanbul, is accessible.¹⁵² The scientific advisory board has also presented concrete recommendations for the central Government. In a statement, it has openly criticized the current measures taken by the central Government and recommended a four-week total lockdown to be implemented nationwide.¹⁵³

54.  Laws on access to information have not been modified or suspended in 2020 and 2021 in Turkey. However, the transparency of the Covid-19 response has been questioned and there has been controversy surrounding the accuracy of the data conveyed by the Ministry of Health about the pandemic in Turkey.¹⁵⁴

55.  Several measures devoted to supporting the press throughout the Covid-19 crisis have been taken. The Press Institution of Turkey decided to discharge the debts of reporters, if requested, and to ease to some extent several legal requirements for periodicals.¹⁵⁵ Tax liabilities of those working in the publishing sector, among many others, were postponed for a limited period.¹⁵⁶

56.  Furthermore, media organizations, namely newspapers, radio and television, journals, as well as printing houses for newspapers, and those working in these institutions, were exempted from Covid-19 curfews.¹⁵⁷ The circulars for the curfews also specified how newspapers would be distributed throughout the restriction period.¹⁵⁸ The Ministry of the Interior announced in May 2021 that the possession of a media card would be required for exemption from the total lockdown measures¹⁵⁹ and the curfew measures for nights and weekends taken right after the total lockdown period.¹⁶⁰

57.  It has been reported that journalists have been taken into custody by reason of their reporting on the Covid-19 pandemic.¹⁶¹ More than one instance of journalists being taken into custody and arrested following to their reporting on Covid-19 incidences and measures have been reported in international and national media outlets. There were reports that reporters in such a situation had been released shortly after.¹⁶² According to the International Press Institution, there have been 13 violations of press freedom in Turkey linked to Covid-19 in 2020.¹⁶³

58.  No public official has been appointed to review legislation or to monitor the public response to Covid-19 in Turkey. According to Law No 6328¹⁶⁴ and Article 74 of the Constitution which establishes it, the Ombudsman Institution of Turkey receives individual complaints and issues recommendations to the executive via reports. Individuals can file complaints to the Ombudsman after the exhaustion of administrative remedies.¹⁶⁵ The Ombudsman Institution does not render binding decisions. Subsequently to its examination and investigation, the Ombudsman Institution can submit its recommendations to the complainant and the relevant administrative body.¹⁶⁶ If the relevant authority does not find the action or the solution proposed by the Institution feasible, it shall notify the reasons for it to the Institution within 30 days.¹⁶⁷

59.  In June 2020, the Ombudsman Institution of Turkey published a special report concerning the Covid-19 response of the executive. This report compiled, explained, and evaluated the Covid-19 measures taken until June 2020. The Institution found the Covid-19 response to be successful,¹⁶⁸ though it did mention a limited number of problems.¹⁶⁹ The recommendations presented at the end of the report did not address specific problems but rather expressed general suggestions on combating outbreaks.¹⁷⁰

60.  Apart from this, the Ombudsman Institution has also received complaints during the Covid-19 crisis.¹⁷¹ The number of complaints received increased considerably in 2020, most of which had Covid-19 measures as a subject matter.¹⁷² In particular, the number of complaints on the Covid-19 bank credit aids was so high that a special review method had to be applied for these complaints.¹⁷³ Complaints on bank credit aids have been dealt with directly by the Office of the Chief Ombudsman and the decisions have been given by the Chief Ombudsman.¹⁷⁴

61.  The Human Rights and Equality Institution of Turkey, another institution tasked with overseeing the operation of the executive with a focus on human rights and equality,¹⁷⁵ did not publish a general report or announcement devoted to scrutinizing the response to the Covid-19 pandemic. The Institution published a few announcements with regard to the Covid-19 pandemic. It reminded authorities of the relevant United Nations (UN) standards and constitutional provisions, as well as several announcements of UN bodies with regard to the measures that should be taken during the pandemic.¹⁷⁶ It also held workshops on several topics with regard to the Covid-19 pandemic. The Institution announced that it had continued its regular visits to facilities such as prisons, immigration removal centres, and facilities for those under State protection, and stated that it oversaw the Covid-19 measures implemented in such facilities and that it is evaluating applications.¹⁷⁷ The Covid-19 measures in such facilities were not evaluated in detail in most of the reports it published regarding these visits.

62.  The Turkish response to the pandemic can be categorized into six consecutive stages. During the first stage, which began with the announcement of the first confirmed case of Covid-19 in Turkey on 11 March 2020, severe restrictions were taken with the aim of reducing general mobility. Most facilities, including schools and universities, were closed. General curfews were imposed in big cities during weekends, inter-city voyages and travels were limited, and persons over the age of 65, suffering from chronic diseases, or under the age of 20 were banned from leaving their homes.¹⁷⁸ The second stage, ‘the new normal’, commenced on 1 June 2020 and saw most restrictions being eased.¹⁷⁹ Concerned by the rising numbers of infected people by the end of October 2020, Turkey entered the third stage, namely the ‘second period of tightening’, on 4 November 2020, with similar precautions as those of the first stage being taken again.¹⁸⁰ On 1 March 2021, the measures were progressively relaxed and Turkey transitioned into the fourth stage, which was called ‘the process of local decision-making’.¹⁸¹ In this stage, cities were categorized into four groups in accordance with their risk factors, allowing for measures to be applied on a local basis rather than nationwide. With cases reaching a record level in March 2021, a fifth stage began on 14 April 2021, during which the usual heightened measures were taken, including a total lockdown between 29 April and 17 May 2021.¹⁸² Turkey moved into a sixth stage, which envisages the gradual lifting of restrictions, on 1 June 2021.¹⁸³

63.  Almost all public health measures were adopted and declared by ministerial circulars addressing provincial governors. Most of these circulars were issued by the Ministry of the Interior.¹⁸⁴ These circulars are lower regulative acts and must be based on primary legislation accepted by Parliament. The contents of the circulars in question show that they were generally grounded in Article 11(C) of the Law on Provincial Administration and Articles 27 and 72 of the Law on General Protection of Public Health, highlighted in Part II.B above.

64.  One of the most significant issues with ministerial circulars is their lack of clarity and predictability. Since they are not published in the Official Gazette, but rather are addressed to provincial governors appointed by the central Government and only accessible via websites of the respective ministry or broadcasts by television and radio channels, confusion arises frequently as to their contents and the obligations they create. In some instances, full texts and photographs of circulars were also shared on the websites of ministries. However, this practice is rare, and the ministries generally preferred to publish the contents of the circulars. This problem has manifested itself in many ways, most frequently with incomplete declarations of the scale of limitations and their exceptions. Subsequent press statements and additional explanations have been used widely as a means of fixing the problem. Consequently, most of the rules are made known on governmental websites under the heading of ‘Frequently Asked Questions’ following ministerial circulars.¹⁸⁵

65.  Since Turkey is a unitary State, provincial governors who are appointed by the central Government are subordinate to the Ministry of the Interior. Under this hierarchy, they do not possess the competence to act contrary to the orders of the ministries. On the other hand, despite their autonomy and their possession of a legal personality, municipalities did not play important roles in formulating the measures and could merely act to the extent permitted by the central Government. These units cannot take extra restrictive measures that were not adopted or mandated by the central Government as well.

66.  On 5 March 2020, the Ministry of Health recommended that the elderly remain in their homes as far as possible.¹⁸⁶ However, there was no legal mandate or sanction imposed. After the number of cases had risen, persons over the age of 65 and persons with chronic diseases were forbidden from going outside by the ministerial circular issued on 21 March 2021.¹⁸⁷ An additional circular which was issued the following day introduced exceptions to the prohibition.¹⁸⁸

67.  Persons who were born after 1 January 2000 were also prohibited from leaving their homes with the ministerial circular dated 3 April 2020.¹⁸⁹ Two days later, some exceptions to the prohibition were likewise promulgated by an additional circular.¹⁹⁰ According to this circular, a certain category of young persons who were born between 1 January 2000 and 1 January 2002 were allowed to leave their homes. In particular, public servants, regular private sector employees, and seasonal agricultural workers were allowed to go out, provided that they carried documents proving their status. Any official reason was not provided for singling out this group but when we look at the exceptions, it seems that the Government was trying to reduce mobility as much as possible. In this regard, the group of non-working young persons that was not contributing to the economy directly and was receiving distance education was a good target for imposing mobility restrictions.

68.  The first general curfew was imposed in the second weekend of April 2020. A ministerial circular dated 10 April 2020, imposed a curfew starting Friday night and ending early morning on Monday in 31 cities.¹⁹¹ According to the circular, people who were working at health facilities, pharmacies, bakeries, permanent community services, the energy sector, courier companies, farms, the media sector, or security and emergency services were exempt from the curfew. The curfew was announced three hours before it started, and the unexpectedness of the measure caused panic among the people: thousands rushed into markets, bakeries, and other stores just after the announcement, resulting in crowds that severely compromised social distancing. After receiving heavy criticism, the Minister of the Interior Süleyman Soylu declared his resignation, but President Erdoğan declined to accept it.¹⁹² Similar curfews were imposed in the same cities on weekends in April 2020. On 6 May 2020, the number of cities was reduced to 24, though similar curfews and exceptions were applied during those weekends as well.¹⁹³

69.  With the ministerial circular dated 6 May 2020, persons above the age of 65, with chronic diseases, and persons under the age of 20 were allowed to go out for a limited time.¹⁹⁴ Persons above the age of 65 and people with chronic diseases were allowed to go out on Sunday 10 May 2020 between 11am and 3pm. Persons under the age of 20 were allowed to go out on Friday 15 May 2020 between 11am and 3pm. Similar circulars were issued in the following days in May 2020. These circulars also expanded the scale of exemptions to be applied during the curfews,¹⁹⁵ though ‘weekend curfews’ continued in 15 big cities of Turkey in May 2020. A general curfew was also imposed during the Ramadan Feast (Eid al-fitr) all over Turkey between 22 May and 26 May 2020.¹⁹⁶ After May 2020, a curfew was imposed only partially in the last weekend of June 2020 in order to prevent large crowds during the university qualifying exams.

70.  Due to the rising number of cases in November 2020, partial curfews were again imposed. A ministerial circular forbade people over the age 65 from going out except between 10am and 4pm daily.¹⁹⁷ In the next week, a new circular was issued and weekend curfews were imposed all over the country again. Freedom of movement for the elderly and young persons on weekdays was again limited. Persons above the age of 65 were allowed to go out between 10am and 1pm, while persons under the age of 20 were allowed to go out between 1pm and 4pm. As the number of cases rose again, weekend curfews started to be imposed regularly, from 1 December 2020 until 2 March 2021.¹⁹⁸ Apart from the exceptions, it was also possible to go to markets, bakeries, and similar places until 5pm on Saturdays and Sundays. Crucially, it was forbidden to use cars or other means to go shopping. It was also forbidden to go out on weekdays between 9pm and 5am. Exceptions to the curfews on weekdays and weekends were determined in a similar manner as before.

71.  On 2 March 2021, the measures were relaxed and Turkey entered a fourth stage which was called ‘the process of local decision-making’. During this stage, provinces were categorized into four groups—low risk, medium risk, high risk, and very high risk—in accordance with the ratio of the number of infected persons to the population of each province.¹⁹⁹ Weekend curfews were accordingly imposed on a local rather than nationwide basis.²⁰⁰ However, the nationwide prohibition on going out on weekdays between 9pm and 5am continued to apply. In provinces with low and medium risk, the prohibition on going out on weekends was envisaged in a similar manner with weekdays: it was forbidden to go out between 9pm and 5am on Saturdays and Sundays. However, it was only possible to go out on Saturdays between 5am and 9pm in provinces categorized as high and very high risks. In these provinces, Sunday bans on going out remained in force. Special prohibitions for the elderly and young persons were also lifted in provinces with low and medium risks. In the last week of March 2021, the situation in most of the provinces worsened and the number of provinces labelled ‘high risk’ and ‘very high risk’ proliferated considerably. For this reason, curfews starting on Friday and ending early on Monday were imposed in ‘high risk’ provinces again, while limitations in other provinces remained the same.²⁰¹

72.  From 14 April to 28 April 2021, the prohibition on going out on weekdays was expanded to between 7pm and 5am. Weekend curfews were also imposed all over the country. Additionally, the freedom of movement of the elderly and young persons on weekdays was limited nationwide once more. Persons above the age of 65 were allowed to go out between 10am and 2pm, while persons under the age of 20 were allowed to go out between 2pm and 6pm.²⁰² Between 29 April and 17 May 2020, a nationwide total lockdown was imposed, essentially a blanket curfew without temporal exceptions. However, similar categories of exceptions as before were still accepted. People were allowed to go shopping by foot only for basic needs.²⁰³ In the second half of May 2021, curfews were imposed on weekends and after 9pm on weekdays. Turkey moved into a sixth stage, which envisages the gradual lifting of restrictions, at the beginning of June 2021, which saw an easing of restrictions including curfews once again. During this period, curfews were imposed all day long on Sundays and on weekdays between 10pm and 5am. On 21 June 2021, President Erdoğan declared that all the restrictions on going out would be lifted from 1 July 2021 onwards.

73.  Finally, foreign visitors who were present in Turkey for touristic reasons were mostly exempted from curfews.²⁰⁴

74.  On 29 February 2020, flights from and to Italy, South Korea, and Iraq were suspended.²⁰⁵ A ministerial circular directed at provincial governors on 13 March 2020 halted travel from and to certain European countries the following day. Citizens of these countries could still leave Turkey and repatriation of Turkish citizens from these countries likewise remained possible. It was also decided that people coming from these countries would undergo medical examinations and could be isolated if necessary.²⁰⁶ On 14 March 2020, the border with Georgia was also closed.²⁰⁷ In the ensuing days, the number of countries on which travel restrictions were imposed gradually rose.

75.  From the beginning of the pandemic until June 2021, restrictions have not been uniform. As of 1 June 2021, passengers arriving from certain countries were subject to a mandatory quarantine for 14 days. Passengers arriving from certain countries had to present PCR test reports as well. For the rest, if a passenger was able to prove that they had been vaccinated at least 14 days prior to their arrival to Turkey with international vaccine certificates or that they had been infected in the last six months with official medical reports, they did not have to present a PCR test report before entering Turkey.²⁰⁸ After these non-uniform measures were implemented in different ways until the first months of 2022, the measures regarding people entering Turkey were slowly eased and lifted as of the end of May 2022.²⁰⁹

76.  With the ministerial circular dated 28 March 2020, inter-city travel via bus in Turkey was subject to the approval of provincial governors. The following day, airline transportation was subject to the same requirement. It was stated that people who wished to travel with buses and planes had to receive a ‘voyage allowance document’ for bus travel between provinces from competent authorities.²¹⁰ On 3 April 2020, inter-city travel via any kind of means was restricted for 31 provinces in Turkey. A ministerial circular dated 3 April 2020 prohibited travel to and from the 31 most populated provinces for 15 days.²¹¹ The following day, exceptions to the travel ban were introduced with an additional circular. People who were released from hospitals or prisons, people who wanted to attend funerals of their close relatives, people who had arrived in a place in the last five days and had no place to stay, people who completed their military service, as well as people who came from abroad and resided in compulsory quarantine facilities were allowed to apply to ‘travel allowance boards’ to receive a travel permit.²¹² Afterwards, the inter-city travel ban for the 31 provinces was prolonged twice until 4 May 2020. In the ensuing days, travel limitations were prolonged until 1 June 2020, though the number of provinces with travel bans had already been reduced to 24 and then to 15. During this period, a ministerial circular also enabled persons above the age of 65 to travel wherever they wanted with one person, provided that they would stay at least 30 days in the place they travelled to.²¹³ In order to use this opportunity, an application for a travel allowance document via the internet or phone was required.

77.  With cases reaching record levels in March 2021, new restrictions were accepted with regards to internal travel. From 14–28 April 2021, the use of private cars to travel between cities was prohibited but travel with public transportation was not.²¹⁴ The circular admitted similar exceptions to this ban as before. As the most restrictive measures were imposed all over the country between the dates of 29 April and 17 May 2021, inter-city travel was banned nationwide during this period apart from compelling reasons and other justified exceptions.²¹⁵ Like the restrictions on going out, all the restrictions regarding internal travel were lifted from 1 July 2021 onwards.²¹⁶

78.  While the capacity of public transportation was reduced from the beginning of the pandemic, inner-city transportation for people above the age of 65 and under the age of 20 was banned during the peak times of the pandemic.²¹⁷

79.  Since March 2020, serious limitations on gatherings and events have been introduced in Turkey due to the pandemic. On 16 March 2020, the Ministry of the Interior issued a circular which prohibited general assemblies and all collective activities of non-governmental organizations.²¹⁸ The circular also suspended activities of condolence houses. These houses are places in which people offer their condolences to the relatives of newly deceased people. In Turkey, they are generally established and operated by local municipalities. With the same circular, activities of wedding celebration halls were also suspended until further notice. On 17 April 2020, Law No 7244, which postponed general assemblies until 31 July 2020, was published in the Official Gazette.²¹⁹ Authority for further postponement was granted to the Minister of Internal Affairs by this law and was prolonged through Law No 7256.²²⁰ Soon after the circular of 16 March 2020, it was also forbidden to receive guests at official marriage ceremonies. This limitation lasted until 15 June 2020.²²¹ Wedding celebration halls started to receive guests as of 1 July 2020.²²² However, limitations on the number of guests and length of celebrations were imposed in 14 provinces after the rising number of cases in late August 2020.²²³ In those 14 provinces, it was also completely prohibited for people above the age of 65 and under the age of 15 to attend these ceremonies. On 2 September 2020, similar restrictions were introduced in all provinces in Turkey.²²⁴

80.  On 21 March 2020, the Ministry of the Interior also ordered provincial governors to clamp down on mass celebrations on streets which are traditionally carried out by people in Turkey before joining the army to fulfil their compulsory military service.²²⁵ With a circular dated 26 March 2020, the Ministry of the Interior also ordered local municipalities to postpone their ordinary meetings in April, May, and June 2020.²²⁶

81.  As the Holy Month of Ramadan started in April 2020, special precautions were taken to ensure physical distancing and prevent people from gathering. Along with the ministerial circular issued one day prior to Ramadan,²²⁷ activities including collective meals eaten just before fasting and collective fast-breaking meals were prohibited. The Directorate of Religious Affairs in Turkey also decided that taraweeh prayers could not be carried out collectively in mosques. In spite of a nationwide curfew on International Workers’ Day on 1 May 2020, trade unions were allowed to organize an event in cities with limited persons for a limited time period. In adherence with the laws mentioned above, activities of nongovernmental organizations, public profession associations, and unions were postponed between October and December 2020.²²⁸ This postponement was prolonged until 1 March 2021.²²⁹ It was also forbidden to smoke in public places such as areas closed to traffic and bus stations, as stated in a circular dated 11 November 2020.²³⁰ In order to prevent crowds on New Year’s Eve, entrances to major avenues, boulevards, and squares which were famous for gatherings were out of bounds between 9pm on 31 December 2020 and 10am on 1 January 2021.²³¹ Although a curfew was in force during this period, such a prohibition was imposed to prevent the gathering of foreign tourists who were exempt from the curfew.

82.  As stated above, the measures were relaxed and a fourth stage called ‘the process of local decision making’ started at the beginning of March 2021. According to a circular issued on 2 March 2021, wedding ceremonies were allowed in cities categorized as low and medium risk for one hour with a maximum of 100 persons provided that a minimum of eight square metres of space was allocated for each person. The same conditions were also accepted in cities categorized as high and very high risk, as long as the number of guests did not exceed 50. Activities of non-governmental organizations, public profession associations, and unions were also allowed with a maximum of 300 persons in cities categorized as low, medium, and high risk, provided that eight square metres of space was allocated for each person and governors were informed about—and thus could effectively supervise—the meetings. In this regard, district officials made visits to these meetings without notices and controlled the implementation of rules. However, the prohibition remained in force in cities categorized as very high risk.²³² Activities of non-governmental organizations, public profession associations, and unions were also prohibited from 14 April to 1 June 2021.²³³ Wedding ceremonies were also halted during the total lockdown period.

83.  After the ‘Covid-19 Virus Summit’ headed by President Erdoğan on 13 March 2020, primary, elementary, and high schools were closed as of 16 March 2020 for one week. It was subsequently decided that they would continue remote learning from 23 March 2020 onwards. During this summit, it was also decided that universities should be closed for three weeks.²³⁴ On 25 March 2020, the Minister of National Education and Minister of Health jointly declared that schools would be kept closed until the end of April 2020 and remote learning would continue during this period.²³⁵ In late September 2020, after the summer holiday, pre-school students and first-year primary school students started face-to-face teaching.²³⁶ They were joined by other levels in the second week of October 2020. Most of the primary, secondary, and high school students attended their classes. In small towns which lacked advanced internet infrastructure, all students of all levels—except those in universities—returned to their schools. In the ensuing days, a hybrid system was adopted. Under this system, students of different levels went to school on different days and would use remote learning platforms on the days they stayed at home.²³⁷ After the number of infected people rose in November 2020, all the schools except kindergartens returned to complete remote learning.²³⁸ In the spring semester of 2021, certain schools were opened again according to their cities’ risk level, in line with measures being applied on a local rather than nationwide basis. In April 2021, all students across Turkey except for kindergarteners and those in the final grades of elementary and high school resumed remote learning.²³⁹ By the end of the April 2021, all schools except for kindergartens had adopted remote learning completely, though schools were opened for students of certain levels once again on 17 May 2021.²⁴⁰

84.  In short, from the start of the pandemic until the end of the 2021 spring semester, all universities engaged in remote learning, with some exceptions related to medical training and engineering in particular, kindergartens remained open except for a few weeks, and different levels of primary, secondary, and high schools adopted hybrid systems in the periods when case numbers were low, but mostly remained closed and principally used remote learning tools.

85.  On the other hand, in accordance with the ministerial circular issued by the Ministry of the Interior, bars, discotheques, and night clubs were closed on 16 March 2020 until further notice.²⁴¹ With an additional circular issued the next day, theatres, cinemas, concert halls, ceremony halls, restaurants, cafes, bistros, internet cafes and similar game centres, playgrounds, amusement parks, swimming pools, spas, and sport centres were also closed.²⁴² Four days later, hairdressers, coiffeurs, and beauty salons were also closed via ministerial circular.²⁴³ On 21 March 2020, restaurants, patisseries, and similar places were allowed to sell take-away foods.²⁴⁴ The ministerial circular issued on 27 March 2020 also prohibited outdoor activities such as walking near the shores or in forests, fishing, and having picnics during weekends. It was also stated that the prohibition could also encompass weekdays depending on the situation in cities and smaller areas.²⁴⁵

86.  At the beginning of May 2020, restrictions began to be loosened. From 11 May 2020, hairdressers, coiffeurs, and beauty salons were opened under strict rules such as limited operating hours as well as physical distancing and mask requirements. Certain activities such as those involving skincare also remained forbidden in these facilities.²⁴⁶ Between 16 March and 29 May 2020, mosques were also closed to worship all over the country.²⁴⁷ This measure was criticized as an excessive restriction on the constitutional freedom of worship and religion.²⁴⁸ After 29 May 2020, mosques were opened with some restrictions, such as limiting collective prayer to three times in a day. Friday prayers had to be conducted in open fields. The ban on performing ablution in mosques remained in effect and people were advised to do it in private places before coming to mosques.²⁴⁹

87.  Other restrictions were similarly eased at the beginning of June 2020. Restaurants, cafes, and bistros were allowed to serve customers indoors until 10pm every day; swimming pools, bathhouses, and similar places were also opened under the same conditions. Sport centres were allowed to open until 12am as well. With effect from 1 June 2020 onwards, outdoor activities—except for barbecues in residential areas—were also allowed.²⁵⁰ In the next month, internet cafes and similar game centres were also opened with strict physical distancing conditions attached.²⁵¹ Lastly, all restrictions on operating hours were lifted on 21 July 2020.²⁵²

88.  In conjunction with the rising case rate, limitations started to be imposed again on 4 November 2020. First of all, most of the aforementioned premises and facilities were made to operate until only 10pm again.²⁵³ On 20 November 2020, restaurants, patisseries, and similar places were only allowed to sell take-away foods as serving indoors was once again forbidden. On the same date, cinemas, internet cafes and similar game centers and football fields were also closed again.²⁵⁴ On 1 December 2020, swimming pools, bathhouses, and amusement parks were closed and the operating hours of shops that were allowed to open were also subjected to further restrictions, such as operating until 8pm on weekdays.²⁵⁵

89.  Along with the ‘process of local decision making’ which started at the beginning of March 2021, the closure of premises and facilities started to be applied on a local basis. Within this framework, cafes, restaurants, and similar places were allowed to serve indoors until 7pm in cities categorized as low, medium, and high risk. In cities categorized as very high risk, the status quo was not changed, but cafes, restaurants, and similar places in these cities were allowed to sell food for take-away until 12am. In cities categorized as low and medium risk, football fields and swimming pools were also opened, provided that they operated only between 9am and 7pm.²⁵⁶ In the last week of March 2021, cafes and restaurants in cities categorized as high risk were also allowed to serve indoors with the same conditions as other cities.²⁵⁷ With the ministerial circular issued on 30 March 2021, it was re-emphasized that internet cafes, game centres, amusement parks, public bathrooms, and similar places were allowed to operate in cities categorized as low, medium, and high risk between 7am and 9pm under strict conditions. It was also stated that the public health commissions of provinces are competent to determine the status of these places in cities categorized as very high risk.²⁵⁸ Between 14 April and 16 May 2021, restaurants, cafes, and similar places were forbidden to serve indoors. Football fields, swimming pools, sport centres, beauty centres, public bathrooms, amusement parks, as well as internet cafes and similar game centres were also closed during this period.²⁵⁹

90.  From the beginning of the pandemic until June 2021, markets, butchers, grocers, and bakeries were kept open but operating hours were generally restricted to seven hours between 10am and 5pm on curfew days. Restaurants and cafes were also allowed to sell take-away foods on curfew days. On 1 June 2021, restrictions regarding premises and facilities started to be eased, and restaurants and cafes started to serve their customers indoors again. In this context, the bans on hookah cafes took a little longer to ease, but the ban on music after midnight continued despite normalization. During the period when the pandemic measures were extended, it was decided that the music broadcast in venues could continue until midnight. Afterward, said period was extended until 1 am. However, although all the measures have now been lifted, restrictions on music broadcasts after midnight are still maintained today, which has attracted serious criticism.²⁶⁰

91.  Rules regarding physical distancing were generally imposed by circulars issued by the Ministry of the Interior. In addition to these circulars, many ministries and other administrative units also issued similar instructions regarding physical distancing. From 24 March 2020 to the time of writing, the number of customers at supermarkets has been restricted. A minimum space of 10 square metres was to be allocated for each person. There was to be a mandatory one-metre distance between persons queuing at the entrance to enter the markets as well.²⁶¹ Similar restrictions were also applied to bazaars, making it necessary to impose at least a three-metre separation between stands.²⁶² Several of the aforementioned bans on outdoor activities could be considered measures to guarantee physical distancing between people as well. Within the ministerial circular issued on 3 April 2020, law enforcement officers were ordered to warn people who were walking together on streets, avenues, and squares without paying attention to physical distancing rules, and to apply legal action if these people insisted on not maintaining a distance.²⁶³

92.  Hairdressers, coiffeurs, and beauty salons were also obliged to impose strict physical distancing when they were open. On 11 May 2020 these facilities were opened but obliged to operate on an appointment basis and within their premises one of two adjacent seats had to be left empty. Prohibitions on activities which required close contact such as skincare services remained in force as well.²⁶⁴ Similar physical distancing rules were also applied in internet cafes and similar game centres: a minimum of four-square metres of space had to be allocated for each person, there had to be at least a one-metre distance between playing units, and if a playing unit was occupied by more than one person, there had to be a distance of at least one metre between the players.²⁶⁵

93.  Taxis were ordered to take a maximum of three people and to offer payment types which allow for minimum contact such as contactless credit cards.²⁶⁶ Within this scope, administrative fines were imposed on taxi drivers who took more than three people at once.²⁶⁷ The number of passengers to be allowed on public transportation was also reduced as of March 2020. Inter-city and urban transportation systems were generally obliged to accommodate passengers at half capacity. On small transportation such as minibuses, people were not allowed to stand. Local decision-making bodies such as public health commissions of provinces were enabled to decide on restrictions on urban transportation as well. On 1 June 2021, as with other types of restrictions, those regarding physical distancing started to be eased.

94.  A ministerial circular issued on 3 April 2020 introduced an obligation to wear masks in bazaars, markets, and other workplaces in which more than one person was present.²⁶⁸ However, the sale of masks was forbidden by the President on 6 April 2020 in a live press release and masks were instead distributed by public authorities free of charge.²⁶⁹ Because of the problems arising from the distribution of free masks, the sale of surgical masks was allowed from 6 May 2020 onwards provided that each mask could be sold at a maximum of 1 Turkish Lira.²⁷⁰ On 19 June 2020, the obligation to wear a mask in open spaces was imposed in many cities in Turkey.²⁷¹ The ministerial circular dated 8 September 2020 extended the obligation to wear a mask in all public spaces to the whole country.²⁷²

95.  In March 2022, the obligation to wear masks in the open air was lifted.²⁷³ A ministerial circular issued on 27 April 2022 lifted the obligation to wear masks totally except in hospitals and public transportation.²⁷⁴ However, the obligation to wear masks in public transportation was also lifted one month later.²⁷⁵

96.  On 7 February 2020, the Ministry of Health demanded that China’s embassy and Ministry of Labour grant 14 days day off to Chinese workers coming from China to Turkey.²⁷⁶ Turkish citizens coming from China and Iran were also placed into quarantine for 14 days after their arrival into Turkey.²⁷⁷ On 9 March 2020, the Ministry of Health also recommended that citizens who had returned to Turkey in the last 14 days ‘to isolate themselves’ at their homes.²⁷⁸ This advice was optional. With the ministerial circular directed at provincial governors on 13 March 2020, it was ordered to examine people coming from abroad and if necessary to place them into quarantine.²⁷⁹ More than 5,000 citizens were also placed into dormitories in March 2020 after their arrival from ummah, Saudi Arabia.²⁸⁰ Persons who did not want to be put into quarantine or tried to escape from the dormitories were forced to abide by the rules effectively by law enforcement officers.

97.  As stated above, with the ministerial circular dated 28 March 2020, inter-city travels with buses in Turkey were subjected to the approval of provincial governors. The same circular also ordered provincial governors to regulate the entry of people who were allowed to travel into the provinces under their respective control. If there was a valid reason to put someone into quarantine, provincial governors were enabled to do so.²⁸¹ At the end of March 2020, the Ministry of the Interior declared that 39 settlements and residential areas of different scale were under quarantine as a result of the decisions of province and district public health commissions.²⁸² On 8 April 2020, the number of settlements and residential areas under quarantine rose to 156.²⁸³

98.  According to the ministerial circular issued on 11 September 2020, people who violated isolation requirements would be forcibly placed into dormitories or guesthouses. Criminal complaints would also be filed against them pursuant to Article 195 of the Turkish Criminal Code, which provides for imprisonments from two months to a year for persons who do not comply with the measures taken by competent authorities regarding quarantines.²⁸⁴ In the same circular, it was also indicated that provincial governors would designate dormitories and guesthouses for people who should be isolated but were unable to do so.²⁸⁵

99.  On 8 December 2020, the quarantine period for close contacts of a person confirmed to have Covid-19 was decreased to ten days, or to seven days with a negative PCR test result.²⁸⁶ On 29 May 2021, this quarantine duration was increased back to 14 days or ten days with a negative PCR test result.²⁸⁷ In the following months, quarantine requirements were reduced gradually in line with other restrictions.

100.  Covid-19 tests are free in State hospitals in Turkey but, in order to be tested, it is necessary to fall within the ‘probable case definition’, meaning that persons who want to be tested must exhibit some symptoms. This definition is made by the Ministry of Health.²⁸⁸ In private hospitals, it is possible to be tested for a fee without this condition. The Ministry of Health has imposed a price ceiling on the fee for a Covid-19 test in private hospitals by declaring and sending an official circular to all health institutions and organizations, so that it cannot exceed 250 Turkish Liras (approximately 20 euros). If it is a pre-departure test for overseas travel that is required, it is also priced as such in State hospitals.

101.  Treatment for Covid-19 disease is offered free of charge by State hospitals in Turkey regardless of whether it is carried out in the hospital. By virtue of the presidential order dated 13 April 2020, people without social security are also treated free of charge.²⁸⁹ Private hospitals are subsidized by the State but also charge a fee for hospital stays for Covid-19 patients. After testing and an assessment of their condition, patients are treated at home or in the hospital based on the severity of the disease. For home treatments, medicines are brought to patients’ homes and patients are monitored by mobile health workers.

102.  Vaccination is not compulsory in Turkey. The Turkish Health Minister insisted that one of the Health Ministry’s most important objectives is ‘persuading reluctant people to get vaccinated’. With this aim, ‘persuasion teams’, consisting of local governors and healthcare workers who visit the homes of non-vaccinated people, were established.²⁹⁰ However, practices favouring vaccinated people gained the most attention. For example, a ministerial circular dated 16 May 2021 granted people over the age of 65 who were fully vaccinated the same privileges that the rest of the population had been enjoying. According to the same circular, people who were not vaccinated despite being over the age of 65 were only allowed to go out of their homes between 10am and 2pm during weekdays.²⁹¹

103.  The Ministry of Health designated a special website for vaccinations. The website offers information and statistics regarding the vaccination. The first vaccination against Covid-19 in Turkey was on 13 January 2021 and the Minister of Health was eager to be the first person to encourage others to get vaccinated. The Ministry of Health came up with a national implementation strategy for the Covid-19 vaccine consisting of four general phases. In the first phase, healthcare workers and persons over the age of 65 were vaccinated. In the second phase, people working in important sectors for the continuation of services such as teachers, judges, and soldiers, as well as people over the age of 50, were vaccinated. The third phase includes the vaccination of persons with chronic diseases and people over the age of 18. Afterward, the vaccine was made available for all people. As of 9 June 2023, 57,958,236 persons had received their first dose of the vaccine, while 53,193,957 persons have had their second dose. In addition, 28,235,714 persons have had their third dose.²⁹²

104.  A filiation method was used for contact tracing in Turkey.²⁹³ The Ministry of Health issued a mobile application named ‘Life Fits Home’ (Hayat Eve Sığar) (HES) in March 2020,²⁹⁴ which all people in Turkey were able to download. The application informed users of Covid-19 risk areas in their neighbourhoods and beyond.²⁹⁵ Furthermore, it allowed users to create codes containing information on their risk status for Covid-19 infection.²⁹⁶ The HES codes were designed as singular codes which could be deleted and repeatedly created by the user, with safeguards to prevent the disclosure of official identification data.²⁹⁷ Understandably, these personal codes were and are used to track people. If users of the application check in at places they visit, it is also possible to receive close contact warnings from the application. For example, if person A visits the same place as person B, A will receive a notification from the application if B’s subsequent PCRtest result is positive. It is also possible to notify competent authorities about enterprises’ violations of Covid-19 measures via the application.²⁹⁸

105.  As travel restrictions began to be eased on 1 June 2020, the presentation of a HES code was made compulsory for inter-city travel via buses, trains, planes, etc. In September 2020, the Ministry of Health began coordinating with municipalities to integrate the HES code application with urban transportation cards.²⁹⁹ In the same month, it also became mandatory to submit HES codes before entering State institutions and organizations.³⁰⁰ Consequently, public institutions and workplaces with a certain number of workers were integrated to the system and enabled to scan HES codes.³⁰¹ The ministerial circular issued on 30 September 2020 ordered the integration of HES codes with urban transportation cards in all municipalities throughout the country.³⁰² According to the circular, if a person who should have been under quarantine or isolation boarded public transportation, the individual would be reported to the competent governorate for administrative and/or criminal sanctions. It was also made compulsory to present HES codes before entering hotels, guesthouses, and similar places.³⁰³ Subsequently, this requirement was also envisaged for entry into shopping malls.³⁰⁴ Lastly, it was made mandatory for people coming from abroad to present their HES codes as of 15 March 2021.³⁰⁵

106.  The use of HES codes mainly served as a measure to contain the spread of the virus in the public sphere. The Turkish Medical Association expressed its misgivings about this application and emphasized the risks it bears.³⁰⁶ In this regard, the Association especially warned against the risk of misuse of personal data and insisted on the necessity for detailed legal guarantees for the collection of it.

107.  As the pandemic began to wane, a ministerial circular issued on 4 March 2022 ended the obligation to present HES codes all over the country.³⁰⁷

108.  The primary measure taken in long-term care facilities and homes for the elderly has been a prohibition on visits. In compliance with other measures, this measure was tightened and loosened in accordance with the pandemic situation. Generally, these prohibitions were imposed and lifted by circulars issued by the Ministry of the Interior.³⁰⁸ Workers in these facilities and homes for the elderly were exempted from curfews since the beginning of the pandemic.³⁰⁹ The Ministry of Family and Social Services also issued various regulations regarding the operation of these facilities and homes, including detailed directives for their protection and cleanliness.³¹⁰

109.  As stated above, most of the measures were taken through circulars issued by the Ministry of the Interior. These circulars were generally grounded on Article 11(C) of the Law on Provincial Administration and Articles 27 and 72 of the Law on General Protection of Public Health.

110.  In enforcing these measures, the Ministry of the Interior collaborated with municipalities and municipal personnel, especially with regards to the supervision of workplaces.³¹¹ In most of the circulars, it was stated that non-compliance with the decision taken by competent authorities could lead to administrative action pursuant to Article 282 of the Law on General Protection of Public Health. It was also stated that Article 195 of the Turkish Criminal Code could be triggered as well if the act in question constituted a crime.³¹²

111.  Criminal complaints were filed against business owners who violated these rules.³¹³ Administrative sanctions were also imposed on businesses: warnings, administrative fines, and the termination of activities were applied.³¹⁴ There were also investigations conducted against persons who manipulated and incited others by sharing fake news and images regarding Covid-19 on social media.³¹⁵ It is not possible to find coherent criteria on what was considered to be ‘fake news and images’, but certain regulations in the Turkish Criminal Code were used as justifications for investigations,³¹⁶ such as acts of threats committed to spread fear and panic among the public (Article 213) and acts provoking the public to hatred (Article 216). Transportation companies who accepted passengers without asking for their HES codes were also subjected to administrative fines and a termination of activities for ten days.³¹⁷

112.  Unlike most other European countries, high courts in Turkey have not issued important judgments regarding the legality of or other important matters surrounding the measures in the first year of the pandemic. There had been some decisions issued by first instance courts invalidating administrative fines imposed on citizens for acting contrary to the measures, but these judgments were made due to procedural deficiencies. From March 2020 until the end of July 2021, the most important decision regarding the measures was given by the Court of Cassation in Turkey. According to this decision, the breaking of face-covering rules must be punished pursuant to the Law on General Protection of Public Health rather than the Law on Provincial Administration, which means that citizens consequently have to pay higher administrative fines.³¹⁸ Criticisms raised by academics,³¹⁹ regarding the legality and proportionality of the measures, were not answered by the courts until 2023.

113.  In January 2023, in its individual application decision, the Turkish Constitutional Court ruled that the administrative fine imposed on the grounds of non-compliance with the curfew was contrary to the principle of legality.³²⁰ It was the first judgment issued by a high court in Turkey that shared the criticisms on the legality of Covid-19 measures.

114.  The second important decision by the Constitutional Court was issued after a concrete norm review concerning the rule on the payment of fines imposed because of violation of Covid-19 measures. According to the law accepted by the Grand National Assembly of Turkey in November 2022, payment of administrative fines that had been imposed due to non-compliance with Covid-19 measures were waived, but it had also been regulated that fines paid before the adoption of the law will not be refunded—thus, an inequality was created with those who had paid their fines on time. In its norm review, the Court annulled the last part of the rule which prevented the reimbursement of fines already paid on the grounds of violation of the principle of equality in the context of the right to property.³²¹

115.  For general statistics on compliance with the measures, it is best to turn to declarations made by the Ministry of the Interior, where it shares these statistics at regular intervals. It is not possible to provide all the statistics here, but two in particular might be helpful in understanding the general trend regarding compliance with the measures. According to a statement made on 3 May 2020, 27,828 persons faced administrative and criminal sanctions for breaching the curfew between 30 April and 3 May 2020.³²² The following week, the numbers for breaching the curfew imposed between 8 and 10 May 2020 dropped to 13,716.³²³ Pursuant to the order of the Ministry of Interior, nationwide inspections were carried out on several dates. For example, as a result of one of these inspections on 15 May 2020, 2,171 persons were sanctioned.³²⁴ According to the announcement of the Ministry of Interior, another nationwide inspection was executed on 6 November 2020. On that day, operating permissions of 105 public transportation means including inner/inter-city buses and taxis were terminated for breaching the rules, 4,336 working places were warned, the operation of 13 working places were terminated, 6,412 persons were sanctioned for breaching the rules regarding mask-wearing, and 12 persons who travelled without HES codes were detected—585 criminal complaints were filed against enterprises or persons as well.³²⁵

116.  Looking at the statistics at the beginning of 2021, one encounters similar numbers. According to the official press release of the Ministry of the Interior, ‘curfew rules are generally observed’. At the beginning of 2021, from 11–18 January 2021, 24,755 persons were sanctioned for breaching the curfews.³²⁶ Unfortunately, there is no coherent empirical data regarding the compliance covering the entire process, at least at time of writing.

117.  Most of the social and employment protection measures, as with public health measures, were taken through ministerial circulars. On the other hand, many amendments of the current legislation were made by the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (GNAT). According to the Constitution, the principle of legality is much more important for ‘traditional (meaning first generation)’ rights and freedoms when compared with social rights and freedoms. For example, primary legislation concerning ‘traditional, first generation’ rights and freedoms only takes effect once Parliament has approved it, whereas primary legislation regarding social rights and freedoms could also be enacted by the executive branch. During the Covid-19 pandemic, this situation seems to have been reversed: the principle of legality was observed to a greater extent in the context of social rights. In this regard, changes to labour law attract particular attention.

118.  The first few months of the pandemic saw many social protection measures being enacted in Turkey, including the Social Protection Shield program. This was a new program aimed at reducing the negative effects of the pandemic and facilitating the fight against it. For these purposes, it has four dimensions: working life, social security, social services, and social aids. It includes new laws and regulations, measures, and activities.³²⁷ Most of the measures regarding working life are discussed under Part V.B below. Social protection measures are the other dimension of the Social Protection Shield.

119.  Grants given under the Social Protection Shield program can be summarized as follows:³²⁸

120.  In the context of the ‘Social Protection Shield’, significant social assistance was aimed at those in need. Applications for household aid were processed through the e-government platform. A dedicated section for ‘Pandemic Social Support’ was established on the e-government platform, where applicants were asked comprehensive questions about their employment status, social situation, monthly income, number of children, whether they rented their home, their latest water, gas, and electricity bills, as well as bank and savings details. Households were assessed based on this information. Many municipalities also initiated fundraising campaigns and collected donations to assist the people. However, the central government obstructed these campaigns citing conflicts with related legislation.³²⁹ Subsequently, Ankara declared a national solidarity campaign (Biz Bize Yeteriz Türkiyem) to centralize donations. Consequently, approximately 1.161 billion USD was raised under the social support program and national solidarity program from donations and state resources. In this context, 2,111,000 families received 1,000 Turkish Liras (approximately 150 USD) as social aid in the first week of April 2020 following President Erdoğan’s directive.³³⁰ Similar payments were made in the subsequent months (see the chart in Part V.A above).

121.  In order to reduce the effects of the pandemic, housing and accommodation were provided to homeless people as well. State guesthouses were allocated for this purpose. In cities where adequate or sufficient guesthouses were lacking, homeless people were placed in hotels, hostels, and similar places. Before and during the stay, the health of these people were regularly monitored. The basic needs of these people were satisfied without charge and were paid for by the State.³³¹

122.  Since people above the age of 65 and people with chronic diseases were forbidden from leaving their homes, the central Government established local units covering their needs where necessary. These ‘fidelity social support groups’ were established under the presidency of the city or district governors. The groups were formed by public servants including police officers, gendarmeries, representatives of public institutions and organizations, municipalities, representatives of the Red Crescent, and non-governmental organizations. According to the circular of the Ministry of the Interior, people above the age of 65 and people with chronic diseases could phone special call centres designated by these groups and demand that their basic necessities be met.³³² Within this context, 121,388 demands were met between 22 and 24 March 2020.³³³ According to the statistics published on 5 May 2020, 4,284,529 demands were met and 119,216 workers have been involved in social support groups since March 2020.³³⁴

123.  Within the scope of the Social Protection Shield program, workers and employers in Turkey availed themselves of different types of benefits, payments, and advantages. First, the state provided short-term employment allowances between March 2020 and 1 July 2021 to employees who were unable to work full-time or employees whose working hours were seriously reduced. Applications to the short-term employment allowance were made by employers to the competent authorities.³³⁵ Secondly, cash wage support was granted to workers who were unemployed or on leave without pay specifically as a result of the pandemic. Normally, unemployed workers have the opportunity to receive money through unemployment insurance in Turkey (according to the Turkish Employment Agency, the number of people who applied for unemployment insurance was 1,326,967 in 2017, compared to 1,520,282 in 2016, however data for subsequent years were not disclosed).³³⁶ However, in order to be paid, certain conditions, such as paying the insurance premium for a certain period of time, have to be met. Conversely, cash wage support was given to workers who did not meet the requirements of the unemployment insurance. This support also covered workers who were on leave without pay and unable to benefit from short-term employment allowance.³³⁷ Cash wage support was granted from the early months of the pandemic and was granted for as long as the dismissal of workers was prohibited. This prohibition was in force until 1 July 2021.

124.  Moreover, most of the debts of citizens relating to general health insurance were restructured. Some of them were erased and general health insurance premiums were paid by the state.³³⁸ As long as specific conditions were met, unemployment insurance covered workers during the pandemic just as it had before.

125.  Lastly, medical reports can be mentioned. People with chronic diseases must renew their medical reports periodically by attending medical appointments for check-ups in order to receive medicines from pharmacies free of charge. Owing to several regulations during the pandemic, the validity periods of these reports was prolonged automatically without the need to go to a hospital.³³⁹

126.  Owing to a regulation issued by the Ministry of Treasury and Finance in March 2020, the deadline for income tax was extended by three months and the payment deadline was extended by six months. In this regard, the pandemic was accepted as a force majeure.³⁴⁰ The Ministry of Treasury and Finance also issued a similar regulation in January 2021. In this regulation, the pandemic was once again described as a force majeure and the deadline for the declaration of income tax was prolonged for the enterprises who had to shut down their doors until the end of this force majeure.³⁴¹ For similar reasons, declaration periods of ad valorem taxes were also prolonged in 2020 and 2021.³⁴² The minimum retirement pension was also raised to 1,500 Turkish Liras (around EUR 150) as a social measure in the first few months of the pandemic.³⁴³

127.  Different employment protection measures have been introduced and applied in Turkey from the beginning of the pandemic until today. However, they are generally accepted to be part of the Social Protection Shield program. Non-refundable grants were paid to employers, insurance payments of employers and workers were covered to a certain extent, and some contractual obligations of both employers and workers were changed.

128.  Several amendments were made by the GNAT to the Law on Unemployment Insurance in July 2020.³⁴⁴ According to these changes, when workers who benefited from cash wage support or short-term employment allowance return to their regular working hours, their employers would benefit from insurance premium supports. Moreover, amendments to the tax law meant that the payment of most of the insurance debts of employers was postponed until the end of 2020.³⁴⁵

129.  According to provisional articles added to the Law on Social Insurances and General Health Insurance in March 2020, the premium payment of employers, specifically for each employee working at minimum wage, was reduced (2.5 Turkish Liras per working day). This measure was applied from January to December 2020.³⁴⁶

130.  In December 2020, in order to compensate the revenue loss of small and medium-sized enterprises, these businesses were each granted 3,000 Turkish liras, to be paid in three equal parts in January, February, and March 2021. They were also granted rent support which amounted to between 1,500 and 2,250 Turkish liras.³⁴⁷ After a cabinet meeting on 17 May 2021, President Erdoğan declared that small and medium-sized enterprises would be given non-refundable grants again. Small and medium-sized enterprises were categorized into two groups for this purpose. The first group was comprised of cafes, tea houses, public bathrooms, wedding ceremony venues, private student dorms, and similar places, totalling almost 235,000 enterprises which were seriously affected by the pandemic. Enterprises in this group were granted 5,000 Turkish Liras (around EUR 480). Musicians, shoemakers, mechanics, and several other professions constituted the second group, and they were granted the same amount of money. Enterprises including restaurants and hair salons, which had already been granted non-refundable money before, were granted 3,000 Turkish Liras this time. In this way, more than 1,384,000 small and medium-sized enterprises benefited from the grants, which amounted to around 4,622,000,000 Turkish Liras (around EUR 441.5 million).³⁴⁸

131.  Worker protection from dismissal was accepted as one of the most important employment protection mechanisms in Turkey during the first few months of the pandemic. According to provisional Article 10, added to the Labour Law by the GNAT, the dismissal of workers was prohibited for three months with some exceptions and the President was allowed to prolong the duration of this prohibition.³⁴⁹ Breaches of this rule were sanctioned with administrative fines. President Erdoğan prolonged this period several times with presidential decisions, with the last period ending on 1 July 2021. During the prohibition, employers were still allowed to impose unpaid leave on workers. Fortunately, owing to the short-term employment allowance and cash wage support, the income losses of workers were partially mitigated. The operation of this cash wage support and short-term employment allowance were prolonged correspondingly to the prolongation of the ban on worker dismissal.

132.  In March 2021, a by-law regarding remote work was issued by the Ministry of Labour and Social Security with the intent of protecting workers from potential abuses. To this end, the by-law regulated in detail the duration of remote work, health and safety conditions resulting from remote work, the types of work excluded from remove work, and similar issues.³⁵⁰

133.  During the pandemic, illness and incapacity reports of workers were prepared and uploaded to an online system. If the worker was being cared for at a hospital, the report was to be uploaded on the system by the respective doctor. If the worker was being treated at home, the report was to be uploaded by the family doctor. Subsequently, contact tracing teams (see Part VI.B below) were enabled to give incapacity reports, provided that they had at least one medical doctor on the team.³⁵¹ Workers were also enabled to do compensatory work for the hours during which they could not work. The Labour Law had already allowed for compensatory work. However, with the amendments of March 2020, the President was authorised to prolong the duration of compensatory work.

134.  No major amendments to work safety laws were enacted in Turkey. Instead, the Government preferred to issue recommendations regarding work safety during the pandemic. Circulars of the Ministry of the Interior, however, imposed several obligations regarding the health and safety of workers. Most of them concerned face coverings, physical distancing, and the disinfection of workplaces. Fever controls also became regular practice for workers.³⁵² Flexible working hours within the private sector were also ‘encouraged’.³⁵³

135.  Flexible working hours were adopted in the public sector, especially during times in which the pandemic was at its peak. Due to this change, the number of public servants working in offices was reduced as they were allowed to work from their homes. Special measures were taken with regards to public servants above the age of 60, those with chronic diseases, pregnant women, and female personnel with infants.³⁵⁴ Working hours in the public sector were reduced several times and generally hovered between 10 am and 4 pm in order to reduce crowds in traffic and to prevent ‘rush hours’, thus ensuring better physical distancing.

136.  During the pandemic, professional and vocational training programs were introduced by several public authorities. However, the activities of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security attracted particular attention. According to a declaration made by the Ministry, between June and September 2020, 119,122 citizens benefited from training programs aiming to impart theoretical and practical experience, and also to facilitate their entry into the labour market. By virtue of this program, citizens received training while working. They were paid around 90 Turkish liras daily and their general health insurance fees, as well as insurance fees relating to occupational accidents and diseases, were also covered during this period.³⁵⁵

137.  There are many national and local relief agencies in Turkey. Most of them help the poor, disabled, homeless, etc. These associations are established at a province or district level and help poor people meet their basic needs. They benefit from state aid and tax privileges in ordinary times. The central Government also contributed regularly to these social help and solidarity associations during the pandemic.³⁵⁶ On the other hand, we can say that trade unions and employer associations did not play a significant role in terms of providing pandemic-specific aid.

138.  In addition to the aforementioned measures, other legal measures were also taken with the purpose of fighting Covid-19 while maintaining social and economic order. In March 2020, an administrative order issued by the Ministry of Health imposed a three-month prohibition on the resignation of health workers.³⁵⁷ This prohibition was lifted on 7 June 2020 making it ‘legally’ possible to resign as of the following day.³⁵⁸ Following the rising infection rates at the end of October 2020, Turkey entered a third stage known as the ‘second period of tightening’ and similar restrictions were introduced again. According to a circular issued by the Ministry of Health on 27 October 2020, the resignation of health workers was once again prohibited until further notice. Furthermore, health workers’ right to annual leave and right to retirement were also limited. These restrictions on annual leave and retirement were lifted in January 2021, but the prohibition on resignation remained in force. In late June 2021, the Minister of Health declared that all the restrictions on health workers’ rights would be lifted as of 1 July 2021.³⁵⁹ There were serious criticisms regarding the legality of these bans,³⁶⁰ because forced labour is explicitly prohibited by the constitution (Article 18), but during the pandemic no public court judgment has been made regarding these bans. Extra remuneration was paid to health workers in order to compensate them for their dedication and to encourage their efforts.³⁶¹

139.  There have been several restrictions on civil liberties as part of the Covid-19 pandemic response. Apart from the limitations enforced on general assemblies of different types of organisations as expressed in Part IV.A.3 above, decisions to ban assemblies and demonstrations were taken in various provinces to prevent the spread of Covid-19.³⁶² There were allegations that the ban in Ankara was aimed at restricting demonstrations rather than fighting the virus.³⁶³ A decision of the Public Health Commission of Istanbul banned entry to and exit from the province for those with the aim of participating in demonstrations.³⁶⁴

140.  Decisions to restrict all gatherings for months as part of the Covid-19 pandemic response in the Province Tunceli by the provincial governorship was subject to an individual application to the Constitutional Court. An individual claimed that the administrative fine he received as a result of his incompliance with the restrictions violated his freedom of assembly. The Court ruled that the restriction of all gatherings within the province as a whole and the fine lacked legality. It stated that Law No 1593 on General Protection of Public Health which gives authority to restrict gatherings in order to prevent outbreaks did not give explicit authority to provincial governorships, but rather to the Ministry of Health.³⁶⁵

141.  Moreover, the Ministry of the Interior announced that accounts sharing provocative and false information on social media regarding Covid-19 were being examined and that some suspects had been taken into custody.³⁶⁶

142.  It was reported by an NGO that, as of February 2022, 496 people had been taken into custody and 10 had been arrested.³⁶⁷ A new legal measure specifically allowing a scrutiny of and restriction to personal liberty due to remarks about and during the Covid-19 pandemic was not taken. The aforementioned decisions were based on the legal framework that was already in force. The offence ‘creating fear and panic among the public’ (Article 213 of the Turkish Criminal Law)³⁶⁸ and ‘inciting the public to hatred and hostility’ (Article 216 of the Turkish Criminal Law) were reportedly perceived as the legal bases for some of these decisions.³⁶⁹

143.  An individual application provides an insight in this matter. The applicant was taken into custody and then detained on remand due to some of his social media posts on the basis of the offence of incitement to hatred and hostility. He had strongly criticised a statement of the Directorate of Religious Affairs (Diyanet) concerning the religious character of donations to nationwide solidarity campaigns during the pandemic. The Constitutional Court expressed that the posts of the applicant did not demonstrate any imminent danger to the public and that there wasn’t a ‘strong indication of criminal guilt’ which was seen as a requisite for detention on the basis of incitement of hatred and hostility.³⁷⁰ Thereafter, the Constitutional Court found a violation of the right to personal liberty.

144.  Moreover, the right to property has also been subject to an annulment judgment of the Constitutional Court with regard to the Covid-19 pandemic response. Provisional Article 4 of Law No 7420 issued on 3 November 2022 regulated that the administrative fines for infringement of Covid-19 measures given as of 11 March 2020 until the entry into force of this law would not be collected.³⁷¹ These were the fines given on the basis of Law No 1593 on General Protection of Public Health³⁷² and Law No 5326 on Misdemeanours.³⁷³ The preamble of the law stated the reason for this provision to be the intention to make up for the inconvenience caused by the general public’s the lack of knowledge of and difficulty adapting to the Covid-19 measures, which were of a precipitous nature. The law also enacted in the second paragraph of Provisional Article 4 that fines that have already been paid would not be returned to individuals. This last aspect was the focus of the annulment action for this provision brought before the Constitutional Court by parliamentarians of the opposing party. In its decision, the Constitutional Court firstly determined that those who had paid their fines before the Law’s date of entry into force and those who had not yet paid had been treated differently by way of this law.³⁷⁴ Since the precipitous nature of the Covid-19 response had the same effect on both groups, the Court found that there had not been an objective and reasonable justification for the different treatment. It ruled that the law was in contrary to the principle of equality (Article 10 of the Constitution) in this sense and thus annulled the phrase enacting this inequality in the second paragraph of Provisional Article 4 of the Law.³⁷⁵

145.  Furthermore, restrictions were imposed on the sale of several products. The President announced on 6 April 2020 in a press conference that it was forbidden to sell masks.³⁷⁶ However, express mention of these restrictions could be found in laws or even circulars and announcements of the Ministry of the Interior. Although an express ban was not present in the relevant circular,³⁷⁷ reports of the alcohol restriction which applied during the total lockdown period appeared in the media.³⁷⁸ On 4 May 2021, a circular expressly banned the sale of products that are not basic necessities.³⁷⁹ It was stated in this circular that alcohol sales had previously been banned. Thereafter, it was announced on 16 May and 1 June 2021 through circulars that the alcohol ban on curfew days was to be continued.³⁸⁰ This alcohol ban was regarded as an extreme restriction on the right to private life.³⁸¹ It was also subject to criticism due to the legal uncertainty surrounding it and its lack of a legal basis.³⁸²

146.  The Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSK) recommended that hearings be postponed during the Covid-19 pandemic.³⁸³ However hearings concerning detention and other urgent proceedings were expressed as exemptions. Hereby hearings in all court houses were postponed while hearings concerning detention and other urgent proceedings continued. For example, the HSK decided that detainees and their attorneys had to be heard by way of the Audio-Visual Information Technology System (SEGBİS) when a review of detention was necessary according to the Criminal Procedure Law (see Part III.C above).³⁸⁴ Furthermore, Law No 7226, which was published on 26 March 2020, regulated that the procedural time limits—including those for bringing a claim before a court—were on hold. Nevertheless, the time periods that were to be applied to detainees, including those subject to pretrial detention, were to continue as is regulated in the Criminal Procedure Law in Articles 90–144.³⁸⁵ For example, the rules that pretrial detention cannot principally exceed 24 hours (Article 91), that detention on remand cannot as a rule be longer than one year (Article 102), or that a judge should evaluate the continuation of detention in maximum 30 day intervals (Article 108) remained untouched.

147.  The Constitutional Court explicitly stated that Law No. 7226 did not affect the time limits for the evaluation of the continuation of detention on remand during the Covid-19 pandemic.³⁸⁶ In the individual application of a prisoner whose detention status was not evaluated by a judge via a hearing for more than nine months, the Court reminded that it had found a violation of Article 19 of the Constitution in a previous case where this period was three months.³⁸⁷ Although this individual application was held to be inadmissible due to the fact that the applicants had not exhausted the necessary remedies,³⁸⁸ it is significant in that it shows the problems faced with regard to the right to personal liberty.

148.  The right to privacy and data protection is safeguarded by Article 20 of the Constitution, with data protection mainly being regulated under Data Protection Law No 6698.³⁸⁹ Article 6 of Data Protection Law No 6698 identifies health data as part of the special categories of personal data that are not to be processed without explicit consent. However, health data accompanied by other personal data have been processed during the pandemic.

149.  The Ministry of Health assigned filiation teams of health experts for contact tracing. These teams could use an online system (HSYS) which collected data on those who tested positive for Covid-19 such as their phone numbers, address, and contacts,³⁹⁰ as well as an application (FITAS) used by the filiation teams to access patients’ data registered in HSYS easily.³⁹¹ A clarification text for the processing of data for contact tracing in terms of FITAS has been published by the Ministry of Health.³⁹² This text clarified that during contact tracing, data processed consisted of data relating to the identification, address, Covid-19 test status, and the results of the medical CT scan (computerized tomography) of those who tested positive as well as the identification and address data of those who had been in contact with positive cases. The text also named the target institutions for data transfer as well as the rights of the data subject. Furthermore, an application (HES) for public use was developed. The use of this application was mainly optional (as explained in Part IV.A.9 above).

150.  The clarification text for FITAS expressed that the legal basis for the processing of data during contact tracing was Article 6(3) of the Data Protection Law. This paragraph allows the processing of sensitive data without the explicit consent of the data subject if other laws enable it or if it concerns health data with the aim of, among others, protecting public health.³⁹³

151.  Furthermore, Article 28(1ç) of the same law states that the law does not apply to the processing of personal data for protecting, among others, public security and public order by public bodies as part of preventive, protective, and intelligence services envisaged in law. The Data Protection Authority announced that the Covid-19 pandemic is a situation threatening public security and public order that falls within the remit of the aforementioned Article.³⁹⁴ Moreover, the Data Protection Authority announced that the processing of location and mobility data through mobile applications to ensure the isolation of infected persons and to determine risk areas falls within the scope of Article 28(1ç) of Law No 6698.³⁹⁵ The law would therefore not apply to such situations. This interpretation was subject to criticism. It was stated in a report of the Istanbul Bar Association that although Article 6(3) of the Data Protection Law could be seen as the legal basis for the processing of health data, the situations regulated in Article 28(1ç) should not be interpreted so widely.³⁹⁶

152.  The HES application also contained some mechanisms to safeguard disclosure of personal data. Thus, the application allowed users to create codes containing information on their risk status for Covid-19 infection.³⁹⁷ These singular codes could be deleted and created by the user repeatedly. It was said to prevent the disclosure of official identification data.³⁹⁸

153.  In an announcement concerning Covid-19, the Turkish Data Protection Authority emphasized the importance of data controllers and processors to abide by the principles and obligations envisaged in this Law concerning the processing and protection of health data and other types of data during the Covid-19 crisis.³⁹⁹ Institutions and companies were urged to take data security measures when implementing remote working. It was stated that the identity of workers infected with the virus should not be disclosed to their co-workers.⁴⁰⁰ It should additionally be stated that, the Data Protection Authority urged public authorities to ensure the security of such data and to erase or rectify it without undue delay.⁴⁰¹

154.  However, concerns with regard to the use of these applications were also raised. The Turkish Medical Association warned against the risk of misuse of personal data with regard to the use of such applications.⁴⁰² The transfer of the data collected through HES to the Ministry of Interior as well as the processing of location data through this application was expressed to be unproportional and, consequently, unlawful in a report published by the Istanbul Bar Association.⁴⁰³ Moreover, the obligation to present a HES code for traveling, entering public buildings, and many social activities (see Part IV.A.9 above) was seen to damage the facultative nature of the use of this application and was criticised for this reason.⁴⁰⁴ Furthermore, although the clarification text of HES specifies that the data processed through this application would be stored only until the end of the pandemic, the possibility of a limited amount of people being able to access such data even after the pandemic was expressed and thus concerns in this regard were raised.⁴⁰⁵

155.  The employment rate of women in Turkey was less than half of that of men in 2020.⁴⁰⁶ According to OECD data, women in Turkey spend more than four times on unpaid work in comparison to men.⁴⁰⁷ Although the workload in the household has increased for both women and men, women participating in a United Nations survey expressed that they experienced a larger increase in household responsibility during the Covid-19 pandemic than men.⁴⁰⁸ However, there were also indications that there was an increase in men engaging in household work during the pandemic.⁴⁰⁹

156.  The Ministry of the Interior announced that femicides and cases of violence against women decreased during the pandemic in 2020 in comparison to the previous year.⁴¹⁰ However, due to difficulties in reporting such cases and asking for help during the Covid-19 pandemic, the official data was claimed not to reflect the actual situation, which was asserted to be worse.⁴¹¹ In 2020, most femicides were announced to have taken place in households and the perpetrators were a family member or boyfriend in most cases.⁴¹²

157.  The Ministry of the Interior announced that the education given to law enforcement officers specific to violence against women influenced the decrease in cases.⁴¹³ It was also announced several times in 2020 that the preventive measures taken by law enforcement increased in comparison to the previous year.⁴¹⁴ Furthermore, it was announced that a mobile phone application that enables the urgent notification of violence against women was increasingly being used.⁴¹⁵

158.  However, the executive was criticised for not having a specific plan of action to address violence against women during the pandemic.⁴¹⁶ It was claimed that the Covid-19 pandemic deepened the already significant problems in addressing violence against women in Turkey.⁴¹⁷ Moreover, Law No 7242, which allows for the early release of prisoners and a Covid-19 leave—the release of certain categories of prisoners for a limited period of time—was seen to cause risk to victims of domestic violence.⁴¹⁸

159.  Furthermore, a presidential decision to withdraw from the Istanbul Convention on preventing and combating violence against women was published on 20 March 2021.⁴¹⁹ This attracted harsh criticism.⁴²⁰ An annulment of the decision was requested of the Council of State.⁴²¹

160.  The Council did not annul the decision. It ruled that the president has the authority to withdraw from international conventions.⁴²² Two members of the Council disagreed with the majority. A specific reason for the decision being taken during the Covid-19 pandemic could not be determined. However, there were protests against the decision.⁴²³ It could be claimed that the restrictions concerning gatherings during the Covid-19 pandemic might have had a counterproductive effect in this regard.

161.  There are reports stating that some groups like the Kurdish population suffered more during the pandemic.⁴²⁴ However, a specific and open correlation with the measures taken during the pandemic, especially in terms of race and ethnicity, in this regard could not be expressly determined. A lack of reliable studies on racial disadvantage during the Covid-19 pandemic could have contributed to this conclusion. Furthermore, the Ombudsman Institution of Turkey stated in its report concerning the Covid-19 pandemic response that Turkey’s measures did not discriminate on the ground of origin.⁴²⁵ Further official data could not be obtained.

162.  Special measures addressed towards those with disabilities were taken by the executive during the Covid-19 pandemic. On 9 April 2020, it was announced that the nationwide curfew for those born after 1 January 2000⁴²⁶ would not apply to those who are disabled and whose mental and physical health would be negatively affected by staying indoors for too long.⁴²⁷ These people were allowed to go outside accompanied by their caretakers or parents provided that they carry a report proving their illness. Furthermore, those with special needs such as those diagnosed with autism, Downs syndrome, or severe mental disability as well as their parents, guardians, or caretakers were included in the list of persons exempt from the curfew decisions throughout the pandemic.⁴²⁸ Disabled employees in the public sector were listed among those who would avail themselves of an administrative leave due to the pandemic.⁴²⁹

163.  The Covid-19 crisis caused the interruption of in-person education for those with special needs. A by-law allowing special education to be carried out online was published on 11 June 2020.⁴³⁰ Online learning methods were used for special education students.⁴³¹ A guide and program for online special education was published.⁴³² Similar to students in certain grades and those attending schools in villages, special education students were given priority in decisions to start in-person education during different phases of the pandemic.⁴³³ The Ministry of Education developed an online application, namely ‘I am special, I am in education’, which provided support during the crisis for students, their parents, and teachers through several functions which were sensitive to different special needs.⁴³⁴ This application was viewed by a commentator as having the potential to be sustained as an effective support mechanism even after the Covid-19 a report proving their illness.⁴³⁵ Nonetheless, the suspension of in-person education for those with special needs raised criticisms and it was recommended that face-to-face education continue as long as proper measures are taken.⁴³⁶

164.  Different protective measures were taken in care centres for the disabled during the Covid-19 pandemic. These included a limitation on and suspension of visits, testing and isolation measures for residents, the arrangement of long-term fixed shifts for the staff, and Covid-19 testing at the beginning of shifts.⁴³⁷ Residents and staff of such care centres were prioritised in the vaccination plan.⁴³⁸

165.  Throughout the pandemic, special measures for the protection of the elderly were taken, especially for those above the age of 65. Persons over the age of 65 were subject to long curfews. They were forbidden from going outside by the ministerial circular issued on 21 March 2020.⁴³⁹ Hotlines and Social Support Groups were formed to address their needs.⁴⁴⁰ There were also exceptions to the prohibition.⁴⁴¹ Persons over the age of 65 were at times allowed to go out during general curfews applied to the general public. In a circular dated 6 May 2020, taking into consideration that those above the age of 65 had been under curfew for 44 days, they were exempted from the two-day curfew for the general public for one day between 11am and 3pm.⁴⁴² In November 2020, partial curfews were imposed for the elderly. People over the age 65 in Istanbul and Ankara were allowed to leave their homes only between 10am and 4pm daily.⁴⁴³ From 14 to 28 April 2021, during which weekend curfews and weekday night curfews were enforced, those above the age of 65 were not allowed to go out on weekends even for grocery shopping, while on weekdays they were allowed to leave their house only between 10am and 2pm.⁴⁴⁴ These curfew decisions made with respect to specific ages were asserted to be without legal basis.⁴⁴⁵

166.  Further prohibitions specifically for those above the age of 65 included inner-city transportation bans during the peak times of the pandemic,⁴⁴⁶ and bans on attending wedding ceremonies.⁴⁴⁷ Apart from this, restrictions on visits and other measures have been taken by several Ministries with regard to care facilities for the elderly (see Part IV.A.10 above). Furthermore, special health measures concerning the elderly were taken in prison facilities. Public Prosecutors’ Offices were instructed by the Ministry of Justice to ensure the necessary coordination with relevant health institutions for the follow-up and treatment of prisoners and detainees who are over 60 years of age in a hospital environment.⁴⁴⁸ It is also notable that administrative leave has been accorded to public servants above the age of 60.⁴⁴⁹ In addition, persons over the age of 65 were prioritised in terms of vaccination. They were vaccinated in the first phase along with healthcare workers.⁴⁵⁰

167.  Children are one of the groups that have been most severely affected by the Covid-19 pandemic measures taken in Turkey, especially with respect to the right to education and the right to play. As explained in Part IV.A.1 above, children below the age of 18 were subject to curfew decisions. These decisions were subject to change, in accordance with the different phases of the Covid-19 response. Scholars have asserted that the curfew decisions made with respect to specific ages were not authorized by the Law on General Protection of Public Health.⁴⁵¹

168.  As explained in Part IV.A.4 above, schools have been closed and reopened and hybrid teaching practices have been adopted, all in accordance with the current status of the pandemic. A by-law enabling the initiation of remote learning during outbreaks was promulgated in May 2020.⁴⁵² Students attended online classes through the Educational Information Network (EBA)—the official platform set up for remote learning—with their own class and teachers.⁴⁵³ Lecture videos were also broadcasted on television and the internet.⁴⁵⁴ Additionally, participation in face-to-face education was announced to no longer be obligatory, with attendance merely in online classes sufficing.⁴⁵⁵

169.  The Ombudsman Institution of Turkey announced in its Covid-19 report that some students faced problems in accessing the online education system.⁴⁵⁶ These problems were, however, not specified. The lack of access to electronic devices, televisions, the internet, as well as a lack of technological knowledge, were reported by non-governmental organisations to be the most significant reasons for the inability of disadvantaged groups to attend online lessons and continue their education.⁴⁵⁷ To address this, the Ministry of Education initiated a project to enhance the capacity of remote learning with the aim of achieving equal access to education.⁴⁵⁸

170.  Additionally, education sets were distributed to disadvantaged groups, including migrants, who could not attend online schooling.⁴⁵⁹ Electronic tablets and internet support packages were distributed to those meeting certain criteria.⁴⁶⁰ Specified schools and other institutions in each province were used as support centres in which children in need could attend online classes and mobile support centres were formed.⁴⁶¹

171.  Legal action concerning prisoners was taken in the first few months after the pandemic hit Turkey. In March 2020, the President published a by-law providing the prisoners’ obligation to comply with measures concerning diseases.⁴⁶²

172.  More significantly, Law No 7242, which made amendments making possible the early release of certain categories of prisoners, was promulgated on 15 April 2020.⁴⁶³ This law changed the required length of the punishment that is to be served in prison from two-thirds to half of the sentence. It therefore enabled an earlier release on probation. However, those serving a sentence for certain categories of crimes such as those under the anti-terrorism Law were excluded. It was announced on 15 June that 6,834 prisoners in total availed themselves of this amendment.⁴⁶⁴

173.  Law No 7242 also extended the scope of special forms of execution of sentences, such as execution through home confinement. The same Law eased the conditions for release on probation for crimes committed before 30 March 2020. Certain categories of crimes were exempted from this clause. It was announced on 15 June 2020 that 42,736,000 prisoners in total were released on probation as part of this clause.⁴⁶⁵

174.  Moreover, Article 53 of Law No 7242 also provided a Covid-19 leave until 31 May 2020 for prisoners in open prisons, those entitled to be moved to an open prison, and those subject to probation. In accordance with the power granted by Law No 7242 and Law No 7256,⁴⁶⁶ the duration of the Covid-19 leave was extended many times.⁴⁶⁷ It was announced on 12 February 2021 that a total of 78,468 prisoners had made use of the Covid-19 leave since 15 April 2020.⁴⁶⁸ Provisional Article 10 of Law No 5275 on the Execution of Sentences and Security Measures enacted that prisoners on leave should return in 15 days as of 31 July 2023.⁴⁶⁹

175.  This categorical exemption of certain crimes, without an evaluation of the wrongfulness of each crime and the specific conditions surrounding the offence as well as the offender, was criticized. It was asserted that the Law, therefore, infringed the constitutional principle of equality.⁴⁷⁰ The fact that no mention was given to prisoners who have not yet been convicted of an offence also raised criticism.⁴⁷¹ While the Law was subject to the review of the Constitutional Court, the majority of the Court did not find the Law to be unconstitutional under a review based solely on formal requirements.⁴⁷²

176.  It was announced that incoming prisoners would be kept in separate spaces for 14 days as far as possible.⁴⁷³ This practice was maintained in 2021.⁴⁷⁴ Additionally, several isolation and testing measures concerning the prison staff were taken to prevent them from infecting inmates.⁴⁷⁵

177.  Prisoners’ right to be visited once a week by relatives is regulated by law.⁴⁷⁶ During the pandemic it was decided that all visits for prisoners would cease as of 14 March 2020.⁴⁷⁷ It was, however, stated that contact with attorneys could continue. This decision was extended until 30 May 2020.⁴⁷⁸ Non-contact visits were once again possible as of 1 June 2020.⁴⁷⁹ In the subsequent months of 2020 and 2021, non-contact visits were possible with limitations on the number of visitors.⁴⁸⁰ It was announced in September 2020 that every visitor was to submit their HES code in order to enter prison facilities.⁴⁸¹

178.  Alternative contact methods were also resorted to. Apart from decisions to increase the permitted duration of telephone calls,⁴⁸² a system enabling online contact with family and friends was developed and it was announced in May 2021 that this would be used in several prisons.⁴⁸³ However, the decisions to restrict prisoners’ right to be visited were subject to the scrutiny of the Constitutional Court by way of an individual application. The applicant, a prisoner, could not be visited by family members for nearly 3 months after the decision taken on 14 March 2020.⁴⁸⁴ He claimed that his constitutional right to respect for his private and family life had been violated by way of these restrictions. The Court stated that restriction of prisoners’ rights to be visited without determining the extent and duration of the measure in a foreseeable manner, had its basis in administrative actions which lacked an explicit legal basis.⁴⁸⁵ It was therefore concluded that the right to respect for the applicant’s private and family life had been violated.

179.  An individual application of a prisoner who claimed to have faced a violation of his right to education is also worth mentioning. The prisoner, who was facing charges of attempting to overthrow the Government and could already avail himself of the possibility to attend exams, requested to attend online university lectures during the Covid-19 pandemic. This request was rejected. The prisoner, having taken regard of the regulatory rule that every prisoner be accompanied by an officer during the use of internet and the social distancing rules of the pandemic, the Constitutional Court expressed that a large number of organisational preparations would be needed for every prisoner registered in a university to attend online lectures. The Court stated that the state has a positive obligation neither to ensure prisoners’ attendance to university education nor the use of internet for this activity. It thus concluded that the application was manifestly ill-founded.⁴⁸⁶

180.  Turkey hosts one of the largest migrant populations in the world.⁴⁸⁷ Syrians constitute the largest community among the non-citizens living in Turkey. More than 3.6 million Syrians live in Turkey under temporary protection.⁴⁸⁸ Only about two per cent of those under temporary protection live in temporary accommodation centres; the rest are registered and reside in cities throughout the country.⁴⁸⁹

181.  In 2019, an amendment to Law No 6458 on Foreigners and International Protection repealed the possibility for those under temporary protection, with the exception of those with special needs, to benefit from the universal health insurance provided to citizens, therefore obliging them to pay for their health insurance.⁴⁹⁰ During the Covid-19 pandemic, the diagnosis and treatment of pandemics was recognised as being part of an emergency situation.⁴⁹¹ It was consequently free of charge for everyone, including those under temporary protection.⁴⁹² It was also emphasized in a presidential decision promulgated on 14 April 2020 that everyone, regardless of their social security status, was entitled to personal protective equipment, Covid-19 tests, and medicine for the treatment of Covid-19, free of charge.⁴⁹³ There have, however, been obstacles in the implementation of this decision due to the challenges of adequately and swiftly informing immigrants of the fact that they can benefit from the aforementioned health care measures during the pandemic.⁴⁹⁴

182.  Family health centres and migrant health centres continued to provide primary health care to migrants of different statutes free of charge.⁴⁹⁵ These centres also helped to inform migrant groups about the disease.⁴⁹⁶ A practice of registering undocumented patients under the category of ‘stateless’ in the registration system of the Ministry of Health was enabled.⁴⁹⁷ It has been stated, however, that due to a lack of legal regulation, there is no uniform practice concerning this matter.⁴⁹⁸ There are also claims that some hospitals reported irregular migrants to authorities.⁴⁹⁹ Consequently, it has been said that some undocumented migrants abstained from receiving medical care due to a fear of being reported.⁵⁰⁰ Additionally, migrants faced difficulties in obtaining face masks for the period of time they were distributed by state authorities by way of registration.⁵⁰¹

183.  Moreover, the vaccination policy that was announced by the Ministry of Health has not expressly included or excluded non-citizens.⁵⁰² No official announcement by the authorities on the matter has been made. Written questions on this matter addressed to the Ministry of Health by several parliamentarians have not been answered.⁵⁰³ It has, however, been expressed by the director of a non-governmental organisation that registered migrants are subject to the same vaccination policy applied to nationals.⁵⁰⁴ Nonetheless, problems concerning vaccination appointments arising from language barriers have been reported.⁵⁰⁵ Similar to vaccination policies, most circulars regarding Covid-19 measures have lacked express mention of non-citizens. Nevertheless, it was remarked in several curfew circulars in 2021 that the exemption applying to foreign tourists does not include those with a residence permit and registered migrants such as those under temporary protection.⁵⁰⁶

184.  Temporary accommodation centres mainly planned their Covid-19 response themselves.⁵⁰⁷ Measures such as the isolation of infected residents were taken.⁵⁰⁸ Additionally, those living in these centres reportedly received help in the areas of healthcare and education, as well as in the form of financial support and food vouchers.⁵⁰⁹

185.  A significant number of migrants living in cities have reportedly lost their jobs during the pandemic and are in a fragile economic condition.⁵¹⁰ Several Covid-19 financial support measures for employment expressly require that the worker be a citizen.⁵¹¹ In addition to this, Covid-19 measures restricting the activities of non-governmental organisations are stated to have negatively affected support projects for non-citizens in need.⁵¹²

186.  In removal centres, the focus was on health checks and isolation measures. Health checks and 14-day isolation measures were imposed on newcomers as far as possible. Those with symptoms were sent to hospitals.⁵¹³ There have been allegations of unhealthy conditions in removal centres, but these have been denied by the authorities.⁵¹⁴

187.  Finally, although measures for informing migrant populations of the Covid-19 pandemic and the response of the executive have been taken,⁵¹⁵ a significant problem of accessing reliable information from official sources has been identified and more collaboration with civil society for removing language barriers has been recommended.⁵¹⁶

188.  There is no relevant information to be reported.

Asst. Prof. Serkan Köybaşı, Bahçeşehir University

Asst. Prof. Volkan Aslan, Istanbul University

Res. Asst. Naciye Betül Haliloğlu, Istanbul University