
Turkey pushes through new raft of 'draconian' Internet restrictions - wolfgke
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/06/turkey-internet-law-censorship-democracy-threat-opposition
======
eknkc
Summary:

They created a new office that has the authority to block any website url /
domain / ip address without prior notice or court order. All ISPs are required
to apply restrictions within 4 hours. Plus, all ISPs are required to log HTTP
access + IP + Date pairs and store them for two years for government access
(again, no court involvement)

~~~
throwaway_yy2Di
_Plus, all ISPs are required to log HTTP access + IP + Date pairs and store
them for two years..._

So Turkey's finally getting serious about its EU candidacy.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Retention_Directive](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Retention_Directive)

~~~
joering2
-1. Did you read his last sentence? Or Wiki you citing:

 _A permission to access the information will be granted only by a court._

~~~
dba7dba
Like a court permission means anything?

~~~
sentenza
It is not a secret or military court, but a civil one. And yes, we're fighting
against it.

Also, the European Court of Justice is currently in the process of deciding
whether the data retention directive violates basic rights. From what has been
heared from the court lately, things look as if the directive will be shot
down at least in part.

------
aytekin
"any bureaucrat can now decide to take down a certain website without having
to apply for a court order, but you will need to take that decision to court
in order to get it reversed."

This is going to be used/abused by the Islamic government to silence
opposition or to cover up corruption news. That's the main goal of the law.

------
atmosx
I wrote a couple of articles about Turkey in 2007. I never expected Recep
Tayyip Erdoğan to deteriorate so much, of course I'm not referring to this
specific law, but to his reactions and his unwillingness to step down after
pretty much the most successful decade a politician could reach for
(2000-2010).

Regarding the law, with all these new technologies floating around, I think
censorship will become more and more difficult for the government to enforce
it on geeks but I firmly believe that people of Turkey should rely mostly on
overturning the part where the _ISP blocks whatever website without court
order_ and not on tech to circumvent it. That might turn nasty and jails in
Turkey are not fancy.

Given recent events, I think the law is going to be used in order to fight
anti-establishment (as in anti-current-government) websites mostly and not
pedophilia (surprised no one mentioned pedophilia yet...), copyright, etc.

~~~
waps
What exactly did you expect an islamist to do, other than declaring himself
caliph and start to act like an islamist ? This has barely begun. This is only
really about removing content. The last actual caliph in Turkey would get
people summarily executed for criticism.

Plus they're kind of right. It's plainly true that islam means criticism of
the government = criticism of the religion = punishable by death. The prophet
executed people for that, and if you believe in islam, clearly that's the
right thing to do.

~~~
mh_
Your statement: "islam means criticism of the government = criticism of the
religion = punishable by death" is patently untrue (and is really better saved
for clan meetings than HN). Do you have citations for: "The prophet executed
people for that"? (Its kinda interesting that with all the recent
documentation of states using the Internet to infringe on peoples rights, the
moment Turkey does it, the response is: "see.. islam!")

~~~
waps
Oh great an ad hominem. Now google "Asma Bint Marwan" (hardly the only
one[1]), and if you have any integrity whatsoever, apologize.

[1] Others executed for criticism ("poetry" about muhammad as it's generally
called in the hadith) include "Abu Afak", "Al Nadr ibn al-Harith", "Uqba bin
Abu Muayt", "Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf", "Abu Rafi' ibn Abi Al-Huqaiq", "Fartana" and
I doubt this is anywhere near the full list.

Note that this was most definitely NOT common practice during those times. You
should read some of the texts that survive from Roman fora in the same area.
Let me tell you Romans are not afraid -at all- of calling the head of the army
a coward, and comparing them to dog entrails (I assume that's not a
compliment). Same sort of things are regularly said about the governors and so
on. And in at least one instance that did not even lead

~~~
mh_
I'm assuming that when you point towards the story of Asma Bint Marwan you
acknowledge that classical scholars have rejected this story? It also pretty
amazing that you would complain about an ad hominem when your comment led with
"what did you expect an islamist to do?" (I also note your silence on the fact
that draconian Internet silliness seems ok when done by non-"islamists")

 __Again: There is certainly a lot in the OP 's post relevant to HN, but i
would submit that sweeping statements on religions are not

~~~
waps
I wasn't aware of any such rejection. Nor you, nor a google search, nor my
local library can find any reference to such a rejection. Furthermore it's
easy to find fatwas agreeing with this. Care to point out at least one paper
(that isn't on an obviously political site) ? To be honest I've read the
sources on the story and several of the others and I'd find it hard to
believe.

And what about all the other ones ? It's not like executing people for
criticism is something islam's prophet did once. Well, compared to the
thousands of people he ordered executed (e.g. the massacres he ordered around
Mecca) it may not be that much.

This is not a sweeping statement about a religion. It is a simple statement of
fact. Just because a statement is currently policitally inconvenient or
"sweeping" doesn't affect my opinion of it at all. As you very well know,
there are far more damning sweeping statements one can make about islam that
are equally true.

Frankly, islam was created through a protracted and bloody war. Everyone,
including muslims, agree on this. Do you find it all that surprising that
atrocities happened on both sides ? The problem I have, of course, is that one
side claims to be the definition of good, and went on to commit massacres
elsewhere in the world on a scale never seen before.

Why do you feel the need to reject historical fact ?

------
Nux
Well, if Britain can do it, why not Turkey? Sure, the details differ, but the
story is the same essentially.

~~~
BugBrother
Uh, you don't think it is relevant when you compare that Turkey is the world
champion in imprisoning journalists? (Just to take one data point.)

There are no absolute black/white situations, but that doesn't mean there
aren't lots of very different gray levels...

~~~
dpatru
Britain held journalist Glen Greenwald's partner on terrorism grounds,
suspecting he was carrying Snowden files.
[http://www.advocate.com/politics/media/2013/11/03/british-
go...](http://www.advocate.com/politics/media/2013/11/03/british-govt-accuses-
glen-greenwalds-partner-terrorism)

~~~
notahacker
Britain detained someone for nine hours to question him over material he
arguably shouldn't have had in his possession. He's now suing through the
British courts for wrongful arrest, and he return of the allegedly infringing
material.

Turkey is responsible for about 1/5 of known jailed journalists _worldwide_
[1] and routinely jails them for many years. It deported a journalist for
criticizing the Prime Minister - "a blunt assault on Erdogan's honor" \-
_yesterday_
[1][https://www.cpj.org/imprisoned/2013.php#turkey](https://www.cpj.org/imprisoned/2013.php#turkey)

~~~
morsch
There is no reason to trust the government of Turkey with those kinds of
powers. There is also no reason to trust the government of the UK with them.

------
middleclick
Something this article does not cover [1]:

"The law requires service providers to take down objectionable content within
four hours and any page found in violation by the country's telecom authority
or face fines up to $44,500."

[1] [http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2014/02/06/turket-
interne...](http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2014/02/06/turket-internet-
censorship/5252253/)

------
jotm
I guess they're quitting the Internet... Cold Turkey!

------
harunurhan
Normally you spend a week of your time to report an insulting content. This
regulation speed these kind of processes up. Also They have right to block for
only 24 hours, If you do not go to law for it, the content is unblocked again.
In addition, they are keeping record of everything we do on the internet
already no court involvement. Actually as you know it is much worse in other
countries(USA,UK...). In short I think the regulation is exaggerated. Moreover
funny but pathetic most turkish who complain about it don't know what even
changed. They just complain to complain, they complain because they don't like
government.

~~~
fsniper
People complain because these are not rules destined for a democratic
republic. They are as draconian as it can get and just aiming to silence
opposing ideas and evidence exposing government of corruption.

~~~
fsniper
By the way how any democratic republic can materialize a rule of "immunity for
TIB precidency for any dispute over it's ruling taken without court orders"?

------
bediger4000
I'm surprised that this didn't come about in the guise of "protecting
intellectual property". That seems to be the usual beard when imposing
internet censorship in western countries.

------
alionfalcon
Some kind of legal NSA, more honest than US way isn't it? But it's nonsense
anyway!

~~~
x0054
I love to bitch about NSA as much as the next guy, but you have to admit, it's
one thing to spy, and its a totally different when you start to block content.

~~~
alionfalcon
right on that!

------
ebiester
There were protests in Istanbul yesterday over the law, and as usual they were
met by police brutality and tear gas.

I'm not hopeful for the next decade for them.

------
yawz
Unfortunately this is just one of the current oppressions in Turkey. This pro-
Islamic government has limited individual freedom by every step taken,
ironically in the name of "advanced democracy". Scare tactics such as putting
people through trials because of tweeting anti-government ideas or sharing
something on Facebook have become common practice.

------
adventured
I wish this sort of behavior, _by any government_ , would draw immediate,
global, and severe economic sanctions. Repression is repression, whether
online or off. I feel like most of the governments around the world are
intentionally refraining from considering rights to fully or properly
translate to the online sphere, so they can all first figure out in which ways
they want to restrict or abuse their own domestic populations.

~~~
nova
Well, they only have to say it's "to protect intellectual property" and the
other governments would be happy to help.

------
d0ugie
What's the status of uproxy? Wasn't a release projected for April? Can't pull
up their site uproxy.org, ssl error..
[http://www.google.com/ideas/projects/uproxy/](http://www.google.com/ideas/projects/uproxy/)

------
throwwit
I wonder if news coverage of the restrictions is restricted in Turkey.

It'd be nice if SOME country started leading by example. 'Safegaurds' like
these are gambling on the premise that they will -never- be abused, which is
always a lofty bet if not flat out disingenuous.

~~~
afsina
No. There is pro-government press and they restrict such news willingly. But
there are slew of other media quite open about this.

------
dombili
Previous discussion:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7189178](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7189178)

