Press Statement - Fiber Optic Infrastructure Protocol

The Fiber Optic Infrastructure Protocol currently under public debate is not merely a technical communications investment. Today, internet infrastructure constitutes the backbone of freedom of expression, the right to access information, freedom of association, and democratic participation. Therefore, this protocol must be assessed within the framework of human rights, the rule of law, and democratic principles.

The centralisation and effective monopolisation of the operation and management of internet infrastructure by granting exclusive authority to a private company based in Türkiye creates a structure that may increase the capacity for interference with freedom of expression, particularly during periods of democratic crisis. In a democratic society, communication infrastructure must be regulated in a manner that safeguards pluralistic public debate.

One of the most concerning aspects of the protocol is the granting of broad and exclusive powers to a private company in relation to the operation and management of infrastructure of a public nature. Leaving critical components such as the internet backbone and international gateways—areas that fall within the sphere of public sovereignty—effectively under the control of a single private actor raises serious concerns regarding the exercise of public authority. A fundamental element of the rule of law is that public power must be accountable, subject to oversight, and bound by public responsibility mechanisms. This arrangement places a private company in a position resembling the exercise of public authority, while simultaneously eliminating the authority and supervisory capacity of local administrative institutions.

Moreover, the absence in the protocol of clear rules, limitations, and effective oversight mechanisms concerning data security poses serious risks to the confidentiality of communications and the protection of private life.

Trade unions, professional associations, internet service providers, independent members of parliament opposing the protocol, and members of the main opposition have clearly expressed their objection to this protocol. Despite this, as has frequently been observed in recent times, the government’s attempt to proceed with the process by disregarding the objections of organised social groups and elected representatives is not merely a political choice; it constitutes a serious problem in terms of democratic conventions and the principles of participatory governance. The attempt to enact such a structural regulation—one that directly concerns fundamental rights and public sovereignty—without seeking broad social consensus and while ignoring the explicit objections of organised civil society creates a crisis of democratic legitimacy.

The government must heed the growing objections and reassess this regulation—one that may amount to a transfer of public power to private actors—within the framework of human rights, the rule of law, and democratic oversight principles.

Human Rights Platform