Draconian access block orders in Turkey

Unprecedented number of X account blocks

Court orders to block access to X accounts in Turkey reached an unprecedented number in September 2026, followed by the closure of T24, an independent news website. According to data from the EngelliWeb project of the Freedom of Expression Association (İFÖD), X blocked at least 1,270 accounts. In comparison, a total of 995 accounts were blocked in the entire year of 2025. In fact, the website of EngelliWeb, which tracks and documents online censorship in Turkey, was also blocked on 1 October 2026. Authoritarian measures and alarming levels of censorship in the country are increasingly eroding freedom of expression.

National security overshadowing fundamental rights

The common factor in all decisions related to access block orders is Article 8/A of Law No. 5651. This article allows the right of life, the safety of life and property of the persons, the protection of national security and public order, the prevention of crime or the protection of the internet contents or the prevention of access to the internet content. Several restrictions on access blocks in September cited grounds such as national security or protection of public order under 8/A.

Article 8/A was introduced by the government as an arrangement that was supposed to be implemented in exceptional cases, but its use has been gradually expanding. The use of this article is also being combined with the new provisions on family values under the so-called “My Family is Safe” investigations, which have led to a brutal crackdown on LGBTQ+ and HIV advocacy groups in Turkey.

Crackdown on civil rights defenders and independent media

EDRi-member Alternatif Bilisim condemns this act by the Turkish authorities and the complicity of X on the shadow bans. Turkey is increasingly witnessing an ideological surge on critical opinion and its clear consequences for the journalism landscape as well as digital spaces at large.

According to Engelliweb, in September 2026, many different accounts – from LGBTQ+ organisations and activists to journalists, academics to economists, from women’s organisations to individual users – were impacted by the access blocks. A few examples of note are the accounts of Evrensel, a socialist newspaper; Amnesty International Turkey; Academics for Peace; and the Media and Law Studies Association.

In the second half of September, social media posts on capital markets have also a key focus of blocks due to alleged cause of fear and panic in the society. A major capital-markets scandal in Turkey involved widespread market manipulation by asset managers who allegedly inflated fund values using worthless “junk stocks,” leading to the liquidation of 131 funds and affecting about 455,000 investors. Authorities arrested over 114 people and froze assets as part of the investigation into fraud and criminal organization charges.

A more recent disproportionate measure has been the closure of a prominent independent news website T24 and its social media accounts after the justice ministry reported that they had published 118 items during the previous year which the court classified as “LGBTQ propaganda”. The X accounts of Independent News Network Bianet, as well as several of its reporters have also been banned due to court orders citing national security and protection of public order.

X makes 90 percent of accounts invisible

Court decisions on access to an account does not mean that the account will automatically become invisible in X from Turkey. The decision must also be implemented by the platform. X did not implement all the decisions. According to the IFÖD’s findings, 1,139 of the at least 1,270 accounts (around 90 percent) that were blocked in September were made invisible from Turkey by X. According to X’s official policy, the company can only block access to certain content or accounts in the respective country when it receives a valid and appropriate legal request from an competent authority. The account is not closed globally in this case. Co-founder of EngelliWeb, Yaman Akdeniz, argues that platforms have become more harmonious with the demands of the authorities in Turkey, especially after March 19, 2025, following the arrest of Istanbul mayor and presidential candidate of the main opposition party (CHP), Ekrem Imamoglu along with 100+ opposition members due to alleged corruption and aid to terrorists.

While ideologically-oriented access block decisions lack legitimacy, legal grounds manufactured for such decisions should be subject to scrutiny. Transparency is also significant because in some cases, users have not been notified by X about the blocking of their accounts unless inquired by the user or legal experts.

What’s next?

Alternatif Bilisim calls on public authorities in Turkey to reconsider block orders based on full account bans rather than single posts and to immediately lift bans targeting a wide community of rights defenders, journalists and news websites as part of the so-called “My Family is Safe” investigation. Delegating the responsibility to the Constitutional Court mostly delays the process for up to 5 years; thus such disproportionate practices of censorship create chilling effects and should be eliminated.

Alternatif Bilisim also appeals to digital rights organisations in Europe and beyond to flag such rights violations to hold governments responsible and social media platforms accountable.

As a digital rights organisation with 15 years of experience in the digital rights field, Alternatif Bilisim will continue monitoring such violations and keep on forming alliances with civil society in the media and journalism field. They also plan to create wider public awareness on non-extractive social-sharing platforms.

Contribution by: EDRi member, Alternatif Bilisim