The government of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is preparing legislation that would require identity verification for social media users and effectively end anonymous accounts, according to recent statements by officials and details from earlier parliamentary discussions, reviving a contentious proposal that critics say could reshape online political debate ahead of future elections.
Newly appointed Justice Minister Akın Gürlek on February 13 signaled the renewed effort during a televised interview on the government-funded A Haber TV station, saying a bill aimed at preventing anonymous online activity was under preparation. “If a person makes a comment or publishes a post, their identity must be known,” Gürlek said, adding that users would no longer be able to post through fake or foreign-based accounts without verification.
Officials say the main goal of the planned legislation is to combat disinformation and online abuse by ensuring accountability. The proposal would require users to verify their identities, potentially through phone numbers or other identification mechanisms and would introduce new restrictions on minors’ access to social media. According to the information note accompanying the proposal, children under 15 would be prohibited from opening social media accounts, while users under 18 could face biometric-based limitations on access to certain online services, including social media and online betting platforms. The draft also foresees faster removal of illegal content without waiting for lengthy court proceedings.
In recent years anonymous social media accounts have become a common channel for political expression in Turkey as some users say they prefer to avoid using their real identities when voicing criticism of the government or of President Erdogan amid concerns over legal consequences. Critics of the bill argue that the planned identity verification requirement could further narrow these spaces by making it easier to identify individuals behind critical posts. Concerns have also been fueled by several recent cases in which citizens giving brief interviews on the street to independent media outlets were detained or investigated after their remarks circulated online, developments that opposition figures and rights advocates cite as evidence of increasing pressure not only on journalists and activists but also on ordinary citizens.
The idea of restricting anonymity is not new in Turkey. Similar measures were discussed in 2024 in the Turkish Parliament’s digital media committee but were shelved following public backlash and concerns from civil society groups and opposition parties. The proposal has resurfaced amid heightened political tensions and growing government criticism of anonymous accounts that officials say spread misinformation or conduct coordinated online campaigns.
The idea of requiring Turkish citizens to log in to social media with their national ID numbers was first raised in parliament in 2024:
Erdogan ally the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) previously proposed a parallel framework requiring all social media accounts to be linked to verified mobile phone numbers. Under that proposal, platforms failing to comply could face gradual bandwidth reductions, effectively limiting access in Turkey. The measure envisioned that social networks would not be allowed to host accounts not associated with Turkish phone numbers.
Enforcing such rules presents significant technical and jurisdictional challenges because major social media platforms operate globally rather than within a single national framework. Companies such as X, Meta and Google host users across multiple countries and legal systems, and identity verification requirements imposed only in Turkey would apply primarily to accounts registered with Turkish phone numbers or created from within the country. This could effectively create a dual structure in which domestically registered accounts are subject to stricter verification rules, while accounts operated from abroad remain anonymous and accessible.
In practical terms enforcement would largely be limited to users connecting from Turkey or using locally registered phone numbers and identification systems. Accounts managed from outside the country could remain beyond the direct reach of domestic regulation, allowing anonymous or pseudonymous activity to continue through foreign-based profiles. Such a framework could lead users seeking anonymity to shift activity toward accounts operated abroad, increasing their visibility and influence in Turkish online discussions. Efforts to extend restrictions to overseas accounts or to require global platforms to block them entirely would also face technical limitations and could risk disrupting access to entire services operating on international infrastructure.
Global social media companies would also face operational dilemmas. While Turkey has previously compelled platforms to appoint local representatives and comply with content removal orders, mandatory identity verification would require changes to account creation systems that operate globally. Implementing country-specific identity checks could raise compliance and privacy concerns, particularly in regions with strong data protection laws.
Attempts to impose real-name or identity-based systems have been tested in other countries with mixed results. South Korea introduced a real-name verification requirement for major websites in the late 2000s, but its Constitutional Court struck down the measure in 2012, ruling that it violated freedom of expression and failed to reduce harmful content. China, by contrast, has implemented strict real-name registration across digital platforms, though critics say the system operates within a broader framework of state censorship and surveillance. India has also debated traceability requirements for messaging services, prompting legal disputes with technology companies over privacy and encryption.
A UN General Assembly resolution adopted on December 19, 2023, recognized anonymity as a fundamental part of digital freedoms and human rights:
International human rights organizations have closely monitored similar proposals worldwide. The United Nations has consistently emphasized that anonymity online is closely linked to the rights to privacy and freedom of expression. UN reports have argued that encryption and anonymous communication allow individuals, particularly journalists and human rights defenders, to express opinions safely and avoid unlawful surveillance or retaliation. The organization has warned against mandatory real-name registration policies, saying such measures can restrict fundamental rights and chill public debate.
Human Rights Watch has also highlighted concerns that restrictions on anonymity may disproportionately affect activists and independent media, especially in politically polarized environments. UN Special Rapporteur reports on freedom of expression have described anonymity as a gateway right that enables individuals to exercise other freedoms in the digital age.
Turkey is imposing increasing levels of online restrictions under Internet Law No. 5651 and related regulations, with official figures and independent monitoring reports indicating a steady rise in blocked accounts and content. According to data cited by government officials, authorities blocked access to 27,304 social media accounts and 6,765 URLs in early 2025 alone, while more than 112,000 social media accounts were blocked between mid-2023 and early 2025 as part of online enforcement efforts. Independent monitoring groups report that in 2024 access restrictions were imposed on approximately 17,000 X accounts, 75,000 posts or tweets, 25,500 YouTube videos, 16,700 Facebook posts and 16,000 Instagram posts, along with more than 270,000 individual URLs. Since the adoption of the law in 2007, more than 1.26 million websites and domain names have been blocked in Turkey, putting the country among those with the highest number of access-blocking decisions globally. Social media platforms such as X, YouTube and Instagram have also faced temporary nationwide restrictions at different times, reflecting Turkey’s increasingly interventionist approach to online regulation compared to countries where platform access is rarely restricted.
