To live without being bugged by others

Every single voice except very low whispers were recorded. Impossible it was to know whether or not you were being spied on at any minuteÉ But it could be known that they were tapping everyone. After all, they could access to your phone lines. You had to survive by knowing that every single thought you voiced would be eavesdropped. After a while, this habit became an instinctÉ

This is not about today’s Turkey. This is just an excerpt from George Orwell wrote in his novel "1984". In the book he wrote in 1949, Orwell tells about a totalitarian country where people live in fear of being tipped off to the "Thought Police" all the time. Eavesdropping techniques in 1949 were not as developed as they are today.

But it is thought-provoking that some parts of the book resemble the situation in modern day Turkey. Every day we come across new methods of interference into people’s privacy. As the legitimacy of phone tapping is being discussed, we face eavesdropping of a venue this time. You are being bugged. And records of your conversations are kept. Just like in the "1984". Then, if needed, they are broadcast on YouTube. Orwell’s imagination couldn’t go this far.

There shouldn’t be any crime contingent on complaints

Regardless of your angle, serious violation of privacy is at issue if it is considered a crime in the Penal Code. According to the Code of Criminal Procedure, even if there is a court order, voices or images in houses cannot be recorded. But the Penal Code, against the law, penalizes individuals keeping the records of others with imprisonment from six months to three years. And the broadcast or publication of such information on the Internet is yet another crime. However, prosecutors cannot take action without a complaint since such crimes are contingent upon complaints. This is an odd situation.

People are bugged and records are kept secretly so individuals who are bugged don’t know this; therefore cannot issue a complaint. That allows protection for individuals tapping others to the extent of violating the law. Articles on privacy in the Constitution and Penal Code become ineffective. Illegal wire-tapping is therefore committed despite the violation of law. Similar crimes shouldn’t be contingent upon complaints.

Since people are being bugged secretly, the stakes that arbitrary practices of the relevant offices are high. For this reason, to have legal measures assuring that arbitrary moves will be prevented is critical. And resolutions of the European Court of Human Rights, or ECHR, are in this direction.

Retention of records

There is a point included in the ECHR decisions yet rarely practiced in Turkish laws: Voice records, although they are obtained lawfully, retention of them is a problem. Records obtained according to the Code of Criminal Procedure are destroyed if they are unnecessary for criminal proceedings and the relevant office/official is informed about it. However, which regulations will be applied on the retention period? This is private information so the ECHR decisions dictate that keeping such records is violation of privacy. In order for such interferences be in line with the law, a clear and understandable legal basis is need.Besides, people who are being bugged should be informed about the records on them. There is no such regulation in the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Since Turkey is not a party in the Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data dated 1981, this remains an open-end issue.In the case Amman vs. Switzerland (2000), The Swiss Intelligence Service bugs phone calls of a Swiss citizen, named Amman, to the Soviet Embassy. As Amman learns this, he asks for the records.

However, the intelligence service removes parts before sending the records to Amman. The ECHR rules on violation of eight articles on personal privacy in this case.As in "1984," in today’s Turkey people are looking for ways to have conversations free from the fear of being bugged.