"Internet Committee Report Aimed at Supporting Internet Filter"

The Association for Alternative Information evaluated the report prepared by the Internet Committee (İK) on the central internet filter system that is expected to be enforced on 22 August.

In an announcement posted on their website, the association described the İK report as being "far away from the expectations of the public and full of misleading information".

The Association for Alternative Information highlights the fact that most of the suggestions put forward at a meeting of the İK with the association and many other non-governmental organizations were ignored:

"It was the joint opinion of everybody that the central filter of the government was absolutely unacceptable; that the application was going to be problematic in all aspects and that it should have been withdrawn immediately. Yet, the İK recommendation is inclined to rewriting the regulation and continuing the central filter system".

The association emphasized that this was an unacceptable situation. They drew attention to concrete errors in the report allegedly made "with the purpose to support the central filter system".

The announcement criticized the İK report for depicting the internet filter as a "widespread and necessary application". It was emphasized that many countries created options other than a central filter. Additionally, the association referred to the countries quoted in the İK report that are supposed to have applied a filter:

"None of the mentioned countries have a 'central filter' system like us. In some countries internet access is restricted legally, in others voluntarily. Also according to the OECD report quoted as a source, a 'central filter' is obligatory in Turkey only".

"The filter applied in the USA does not include private users at home. Only filters in schools and libraries are being funded".

"The statement that a filter is a 'Legal Obligation' in Spain is not true either. It is raising awareness that is obligatory".

The announcement of the Association for Alternative Information underlined that the report "on purpose conveyed" applications in other countries in order to seek support for the system that is planned to be enforced in Turkey. The critical statement also indicated that the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) did not recommend a filter imposed by the government. "The OSCE recommends a voluntary application of the filter. This kind of software is still available in the Turkish software industry".

The association pointed out that internet access was a fundamental human right. They assessed the application of a central filter by the government as censorship and drew attention to education and raising awareness as a solution. (YY/VK)