Violation of Personal Rights on Social Media

1) What are personal rights, and why are they considered a "high-risk" area on social media?

"Personal rights" is a broad area of ​​protection encompassing a person's honor and dignity , reputation , private life , name and image , personal data , and professional and social standing . In Turkey, the fundamental basis for this protection is the framework in the Constitution concerning the protection of material and moral existence, the privacy of private life, and freedom of expression, as well as the provisions on the protection of personality in the Turkish Civil Code (TMK) and the regulation of moral damages in the Turkish Code of Obligations (TBK) .

Social media, due to (i) speed of reach and dissemination, (ii) reproducibility, (iii) anonymity/falsification, and (iv) search engine indexing, a single post into permanent harm . Therefore, in legal practice, the goal is often to stop and remove the content before seeking compensation.

2) The most common types of violations in practice

Violations of personal rights on social media do not fit into a single pattern. The most common examples are:

• Insult / derogatory remark / profanity (shared, commented, story, DM screenshot, etc.)

• Defamation or false accusation (accusation of a crime, definite descriptions such as "fraudster")

• Reputation assassination and smear campaign (chain of posts, tagging, lynching)

• Unauthorized sharing of photos/videos (especially images relating to private life)

• Doxxing: disseminating address/phone/workplace and identity information.

• Deepfake / montage content and manipulated images

• Disclosure of personal data (health, contact, financial, identity information, etc.)

  3) The balance between freedom of expression and the right to privacy: Not every harsh word is a "violation"

  In social media disputes, courts (and the Constitutional Court in individual applications) generally freedom of expression and the right to privacy . Criteria such as public interest, timeliness, proportionality of language used, the severity of the accusation, targeting, and the context of the post are particularly important. Numerous Constitutional Court decisions emphasize that courts must strike this balance in a reasoned manner.

  In the practice of the Supreme Court, "targeting" (whether the statement/post is specifically directed at a person; the identifiability of the person) can be decisive in online content. In other words, even without mentioning a name, targeting can occur if the person is "easily identifiable"; conversely, liability may become debatable in the opposite case.

  4) Evidence: Often, "properly collected digital records" are what wins the case

  The most critical mistake in social media breaches is this: content is deleted, accounts are closed, URLs are changed, and evidence is lost. Therefore, the reaction in the first 24 hours is crucial.

  • Save the URL / username / date and time / post ID

  • Don't leave the screenshot alone: the entire page, profile information, and date/time are visible.

  • If possible, a notarized statement or a technical assessment (expert report).

  • In DM/message breaches: the message stream, username, date and time, and context must be stored together.

  Even in expedited content removal applications, the standard of evidence in the enforcement of the decision and the compensation/penalty process increases.

  5) Rapid intervention under Law 5651: Removal of content and blocking access

  In practice, the fastest way to address social media content is through the mechanisms outlined in Law No. 5651. In cases of alleged violations of personal rights , the "removal of content/blocking access" route under Article 9 is generally employed; if the right to privacy is involved, Article 9/A provides a special and faster route. Information and application examples from the Information and Communication Technologies Authority (BTK) are frequently used in practice.

  Furthermore, some regulations related to Article 9 of Law No. 5651 have been subject to review by the Constitutional Court; the Constitutional Court's decisions of 2024 regarding annulment/postponement and subsequent legal adaptations have caused the application to vary periodically. Therefore, in this application, at least two avenues (Law No. 5651 + Turkish Civil Code/Turkish Code of Obligations) simultaneously

  6) Civil law remedies: Protection under Articles 24-25 of the Turkish Civil Code, and moral damages under Article 58 of the Turkish Code of Obligations

  In social media breaches, the "main backbone" is often this:

  • Articles 24-25 of the Turkish Civil Code: In cases of attacks on personal rights, requests such as preventing or stopping the attack, determining the illegality , and eliminating its consequences

  • Article 58 of the Turkish Code of Obligations: Claim for moral damages by a person whose personal rights have been violated (factors such as the severity of the incident, its spread, fault, the social status of the parties, and its scope are evaluated).

  In practice, a well-structured lawsuit forms the core of the following framework:

  1. The content and context of the violation,

  2. Why it constitutes an attack on personal rights,

  3. Illegality (lack of consent, absence of a superior interest, disproportionate nature),

  4. The nature of the damage (moral/material),

  5. Set of demands (removal/identification/denial-publication/compensation, etc.).

     7) Criminal law avenues: Defamation, privacy, and personal data aspects

     Some social media violations are not just a matter of "compensation"; criminal investigations . For example:

     • Insult (Turkish Penal Code Article 125): This can occur through sharing/commenting/messaging, depending on the nature of the specific incident.

     • Violation of the right to privacy (Turkish Penal Code Article 134): This comes into play in situations such as the disclosure of images/sounds related to private life.

     • Unlawful disclosure/acquisition of personal data (Turkish Penal Code Article 136): This is debatable depending on the nature of the data, such as identity, contact, address, health data, and photographs.

     The strategic aims in criminal justice are often (i) deterrence, (ii) identification of the perpetrator, and (iii) strengthening the evidence through official channels. However, criminal justice is not the "most appropriate" option in every case; sometimes civil law and the 5651 law route yield faster results.

8) GDPR aspect: Unauthorized use of images/data on social media

If a social media violation also constitutes personal data processing , the Personal Data Protection Law No. 6698 may come into play. The KVKK complaint mechanism is particularly relevant in cases of unauthorized use of images , sharing without consent , or dissemination of data for purposes other than intended. Summary of KVKK decisions may include consequences such as the use of a person's image in content without their consent or the removal of photos from a social media account.

Conclusion

Success in social media cases involving violations of personal rights comes not from relying on a single type of lawsuit, but swift evidence, accurate legal classification , and a multi-faceted approach : content cessation under Law No. 5651 + legal protection and compensation under the Turkish Penal Code/Turkish Code of Obligations + criminal penalties and the Personal Data Protection Law in appropriate cases. Since each case has a different language, context, target audience, and damage profile, petitions and application texts must be tailored to the specific circumstances of the case.