Cem Tatar - Academia.edu (original) (raw)
Uploads
Papers by Cem Tatar
Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 2021
The right to correspondence has been an area where public authorities have intervened more with t... more The right to correspondence has been an area where public authorities have intervened more with the nascent technology in the last 50 years. Therefore, it is not a coincidence that countries enact provisions that entail interception or detection of communication to their criminal laws. One of the main interventions in question is the prevention/censorship of correspondence. However, when it comes to censoring or blocking letters, those who are most affected by this situation will undoubtedly be prisoners. Because the only connection of prisoners with the outside world is sending/receiving letters. Therefore, in this study, the right to correspondence has been explained and in the light of its interpretations of jurisprudence in similar cases. Furthermore, this right is comparatively examined in terms of the interference of prisoners in communication with the outside world in the verdicts of the Turkish Constitutional Court, the European Court of Human Rights and the US Supreme Court. Finally, in the last part, the reasons for different interpretations in similar cases are dwelled on.
Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 2021
The right to correspondence has been an area where public authorities have intervened more with t... more The right to correspondence has been an area where public authorities have intervened more with the nascent technology in the last 50 years. Therefore, it is not a coincidence that countries enact provisions that entail interception or detection of communication to their criminal laws. One of the main interventions in question is the prevention/censorship of correspondence. However, when it comes to censoring or blocking letters, those who are most affected by this situation will undoubtedly be prisoners. Because the only connection of prisoners with the outside world is sending/receiving letters. Therefore, in this study, the right to correspondence has been explained and in the light of its interpretations of jurisprudence in similar cases. Furthermore, this right is comparatively examined in terms of the interference of prisoners in communication with the outside world in the verdicts of the Turkish Constitutional Court, the European Court of Human Rights and the US Supreme Court. Finally, in the last part, the reasons for different interpretations in similar cases are dwelled on.