Abstract
In recent years the situation of internet restrictions imposed by states has noticeably deteriorated further, so it is worth examining the extent to which freedom of access to the internet can be enjoyed as a means of receiving and transmitting information and ideas. It is also worth looking at the legal avenues of resistance to the increasingly common phenomenon of states blocking their citizens’ access to information. The latest report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights 2022 sets out the situations in which malfunctions in access to key information may occur: “Hospitals being unable to contact their doctors in cases of emergency, voters being deprived of information about candidates, handicraft makers being cut off from customers, and potentially facing imminent economic ruin, peaceful protesters who fall under violent attack being unable to call for help, students missing entrance exams for academic programmes and refugees being unable to access information on the risks that they face owing to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic are just some of the situations confronted when an Internet and telecommunications services shutdown occurs.”
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
UNHRC (2022), p. 1.
- 2.
The first known internet shutdown occurred in 2007 in the Republic of Guinea. Carpenter (2021).
- 3.
UNHRC (2011), Summary.
- 4.
AccessNow (2020).
- 5.
It is worth noting that the document monitors a wide range of shutdowns, including both mobile and internet network blockages, whether total or partial. The document thus includes issues involving the blocking of IP addresses and government actions involving only the slowing down of traffic.
- 6.
AccessNow (2020), p. 1.
- 7.
Worldometer (2022).
- 8.
- 9.
AccessNow (2021b).
- 10.
Ibid., p. 2.
- 11.
AccessNow (2020), p. 12.
- 12.
Ibid., p. 13; AccessNow (2021b), p. 11.
- 13.
De Gregorio and Stremlau (2020), p. 4225.
- 14.
AccessNow (2020), p. 13.
- 15.
Bayer (2017), pp. 117–128.
- 16.
- 17.
Pogácsás (2020), p. 168.
- 18.
Note that another angle from which the issue can be examined is the question of restrictions on detainees’ access to the internet: Kalda v Estonia App no. 17429/10 (ECtHR, 19 January 2016); Jankovskis v Lithuania App no. 21575/08 (ECtHR, 17 January 2017); Ramazan Demir v Turkey App no. 68550/17 (ECtHR, 9 February 2021).
- 19.
Akdeniz v Turkey App no. 20877/10 (ECtHR, 11 March 2014).
- 20.
ECtHR (2014), p. 23.
- 21.
Ahmet Yıldırım v Turkey App no. 3111/10 (ECtHR, 18 December 2012).
- 22.
The URL of the original site was http://sites.google.com/a/ahmetyildirim.com.tr/academic, but it is no longer available.
- 23.
Hertig Randall (2016), p. 238.
- 24.
Interpretative insert by the author.
- 25.
Ahmet Yıldırım v Turkey App no. 3111/10 (ECtHR, 18 December 2012), [66.].
- 26.
Cengiz and Others v Turkey App nos 48226/10 and 14027/11 (ECtHR, 1 December 2015).
- 27.
Ibid., [64.].
- 28.
Elvira Dmitriyeva v Russia App nos. 60921/17 and 7202/18 (ECtHR, 30 April 2019); Kablis v Russia App nos. 48310/16 and 59663/17 (ECtHR, 30 April 2019).
- 29.
Kablis v Russia App nos. 48310/16 and 59663/17 (ECtHR, 30 April 2019), [97.].
- 30.
Ahmet Yıldırım v Turkey App no. 3111/10 (ECtHR, 18 December 2012), [64.]. The ECtHR has also addressed the issue in Association Ekin v France App no. 39288/98 (ECtHR, 17 July 2001), [58]; Editorial Board of Pravoye Delo and Shtekel v Ukraine App no. 33014/05 (ECtHR, 5 May 2011), [55].
- 31.
Wikimedia Foundation Inc. v Diğerleri Başvurusu (Başvuru Numarasi: 2017/22355, Karar Tarihi: 26/12/2019).
- 32.
- 33.
Atay Alam et al. (2017).
- 34.
Bulgakov v Russia App no. 20159/15 (ECtHR, 23 June 2020); Engels v Russia App no. 61919/16 (ECtHR, 23 June 2020); OOO Flavus and Others v Russia App nos 12468/15, 23489/15, and 19074/16 (ECtHR, 23 June 2020); Vladimir Kharitonov v Russia App no. 10795/14 (ECtHR, 23 June 2020).
- 35.
Vladimir Kharitonov v Russia App no. 10795/14 (ECtHR, 23 June 2020), [38.].
- 36.
Akdeniz and Altiparmak v Turkey App no. 5568/20; Akdeniz and Altiparmak v Turkey App no. 35278/20.
- 37.
Which also means that Akdeniz in this case was not admitted for non-admission on the grounds of incompatible personal jurisdiction (ratione personae), as we have seen in Sect. 10.2.1. The same happened with another of his petitions in 2021, Akdeniz and Others v Turkey App nos 41139/15 and 41146/15 (ECtHR, 4 May 2021).
- 38.
AccessNow (2021a).
- 39.
Barata and Richter (2023), p. 28.
- 40.
Article-19 (2020).
- 41.
UNHRC (2021), p. 69.
References
AccessNow (2020) Targeted, Cut off, and Left in the Dark, 24 Feb. https://www.accessnow.org/cms/assets/uploads/2020/02/KeepItOn-2019-report-1.pdf
AccessNow (2021a) #KeepItOn update: who is shutting down the internet in 2021? 7 June. https://www.accessnow.org/who-is-shutting-down-the-internet-in-2021/
AccessNow (2021b) Shattered dreams and lost opportunities – a year in the fight to. 3 March. https://www.accessnow.org/cms/assets/uploads/2021/03/KeepItOn-report-on-the-2020-data_Mar-2021_3.pdf
Akdeniz Y, Güven O (2020) An iceberg of unseen internet censorship in Turkey. İfade Özgürlüğü Derneği, Istambul
Akdeniz Y, Güven O (2021) Fahrenheit 5651: the scorching effect of censorship. İfade Özgürlüğü Derneği, Istambul
Article-19 (2020) Russia: European Court Judgment is Victory for Freedom of Expression. article19.org, 23 June. https://www.article19.org/resources/russia-european-court-judgment-is-victory-for-freedom-of-expression/
Atay Alam H, Arif M, Joe Sterling J (2017) Turkey Blocks Wikipedia over What it Calls Terror “Smear Campaign”. CNN, 29 Apr. https://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/29/europe/turkey-wikipedia/index.html/
Barata J, Richter A (2023) Internet shutdowns in international law. Columbia University, New York
Bayer J (2017) Az Emberi Jogok Európai Bíróságának 10. cikkel kapcsolatos joggyakorlatának egyes súlypontjai (Some key points in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights on Article 10). Állam- és Jogtudomány 58(4)
Bennett P, Naim M (2015) 21st-century censorship. Columbia Journal Rev 14(1)
Bychawska-Siniarska D (2017) Protecting the right to freedom of expression under the European Convention on Human Rights. A handbook for legal practitioners. Council of Europe, Strasbourg
Carpenter S (2021) The Internet Shutdowns Issue. The Current 2021(4). https://jigsaw.google.com/the-current/shutdown/
De Gregorio G, Stremlau N (2020) Internet shutdowns and the limits of law. Int J Commun 14(1)
European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) (2014) Information Note on the Court’s case-law. 2014, 173. sz., Akdeniz v Turkey – 20877/10, Decision 11.3.2014 [Section II]. https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/CLIN_2014_04_173_ENG.pdf
Hertig Randall M (2016) Freedom of expression in the internet. Swiss Rev Int Eur Law 26(2)
International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) (2022) Legal guidance on internet restrictions and shutdowns in Africa. International Commission of Jurists, Geneva
Oster J (2015) Media freedom as a fundamental right. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Pogácsás A (2020) Modern jogérvényesítés vagy modern cenzúra? A weboldalak blokkolásának újabb tanulságai (Modern law enforcement or modern censorship? Recent lessons on website blocking). In Medias Res 9(1)
UNHRC (2011) Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression. UN Doc A/HRC/17/27
UNHRC (2021) Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association. UN Doc A/HRC/47/24/Add.2
UNHRC (2022) Internet shutdowns: trends, causes, legal implications and impacts on a range of human rights. UN Doc A/HRC/50/55
Worldometer (2022) How many countries are there in the world? https://www.worldometers.info/geography/how-many-countries-are-there-in-the-world/
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gosztonyi, G. (2023). The Practice of Restricting Internet Access Before the European Court of Human Rights or New Tools of Political Censorship. In: Censorship from Plato to Social Media. Law, Governance and Technology Series, vol 61. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-46529-1_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-46529-1_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-46528-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-46529-1
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)