According to the decision published in the Official Gazette today, a person filed a complaint alleging that some of the message content, audio recordings, videos and photo submitted to the court during the divorce case were seized and used by spyware installed on his mobile phone by his wife.
As a result of the trial held by the Ezine Criminal Court of First Instance, the applicant’s wife was acquitted.
In the reasoning of the court, it was stated that the applicant did not have any intention of committing a crime because his wife did not knowingly and willingly disseminate the records through the press, broadcast, internet or any other means, in a way that would embody the crimes committed, other than presenting the records as evidence in the divorce case.
It was ruled that the right to demand the protection of personal data was violated.
After the decision was upheld by the Bursa Regional Court of Justice, the applicant made an individual application to the Constitutional Court. Examining the application, the Court ruled that the right to demand the protection of personal data within the scope of the right to respect for private life was violated due to the failure to fulfill the obligation to establish an effective judicial system.
In the decision of the Constitutional Court, it was emphasized that the state should take preventive measures for the unlawful acquisition, processing and disclosure of personal data and that it should show a deterrent judicial reaction against those who do this so that similar situations do not happen again.
In the decision, which stated that the documents of the applicant, which were seized and presented as evidence in the divorce case, were in the nature of personal data, it was reminded that the illegal seizure and disclosure of these data was regulated as a crime in the legislation.
In the decision, it was emphasized that an effective criminal investigation should be carried out by considering the complaints of the applicant, the event should be clarified in all its aspects and the result should be explained with reasons specific to the event.
It is stated in the decision that the acquittal of the accused was ruled on the mention of the fact that the information obtained in the acquittal decision of the local court was used only in the divorce case. It was also seen that there was no explanation as to whether it was not met.” statements were included.
“It is clear that it is against constitutional guarantees”
In the decision, which stated that the local court did not make an assessment regarding the way and scope of obtaining the personal data accessed by installing a spyware program on the applicant’s phone, and whether the purpose of accessing the personal data was legitimate, it was stated that “It is clear that the approach of the lower courts to the conclusion that the spouses do not have a private life space against each other is contrary to constitutional guarantees. ” it was said.
The decision of the Constitutional Court stated:
“Due to the fact that the fundamental allegations regarding the clarification of the incident were not investigated during the trial process, the prosecution was not deepened, and the conclusion was reached with reasons that have no legal basis, the obligation to establish an effective judicial system was not complied with. As a result, the conditions required by the public authorities to establish an effective judicial system were not fulfilled in the concrete case. For the reasons explained, the Constitutional Court has decided that the right to demand the protection of personal data within the scope of the right to respect for private life has been violated.