Events
The applicant mentioned the importance of nutrition, the relationship between depression and nutrition in a television program, gave messages that pharmaceutical companies act with commercial concerns, that you can’t be happy with drugs, but you can be happy with a healthy diet. Due to these speeches, a disciplinary investigation was initiated against the applicant and a fine was given to the applicant by the Honor Board of the Istanbul Chamber of Medicine.High Honor Board of the Turkish Medical Association (TTB) approved the decision in question. The case filed by the applicant with the request for annulment of this decision was rejected by the administrative court.
The Allegations
Applicant claimed that his freedom of expression had been violated due to the disciplinary penalty imposed on him due to medical statements he made on a television program.
The Court’s Assessment
In the concrete case, according to the TTC, it turned out that the applicant made a medical assessment on a subject outside his field of expertise, harmed public health with unscientific explanations, introduced himself with explanations and used an unethical method of discussion with physicians who thought differently from him. It’s about a medical issue. In line with these views, the administrative court, which examined the applicant’s appeal against the fine, did not concretely reveal how the applicant’s statements harmed public health in its evaluations.
The requirement to prove expertise in order to express an opinion restricts freedom of expression to a degree that makes it meaningless. In addition, the applicant is a cardiology and internal medicine specialist and is a well-known academician and scientist throughout Turkey. In this context, developments in the field of medicine are within the scope of the applicant’s interest. Moreover, even if it is accepted that the applicant criticizes his colleagues in some of his statements and even exaggerates in these statements, it is not the duty of the judicial authorities to determine the form of expression by taking the place of a scientist. It is used in a specific situation.
Moreover, freedom of expression is largely aimed at securing freedom of criticism. For this reason, in the context of discussing issues that are vital for individual and community life, more tolerance should be shown to harsh and polemical statements that are not directed at any person in particular. On the other hand, the harshness of the expression cannot be accepted as a justification for interfering with the expression.
The fact that the applicant, who has written a large number of books and has a great reputation, shows his books in which he makes more technical explanations while trying to justify his views, is considered an advertisement indirectly means narrowing the field of research. Ensuring freedom of expression by going beyond the desired goal to be achieved with the advertising ban for physicians. Accordingly, Narrowing the freedom of expression under various pretexts cannot be considered in accordance with the Constitution, as it will shake the foundations of a democratic society.
Considering all the conditions of the application, it has been concluded that the interference with the freedom of expression protected by the Constitution by imposing disciplinary punishment on the applicant does not correspond to a grave social need and is not proportionate.
For the reasons explained above, the Constitutional Court ruled that the freedom of expression had been violated.
You can reach our other article samples and petition samples by clicking here.