The Turkish Human Rights and Equality Institution (TİHEK) has made a decision regarding a case where A.Ö. wanted to make a reservation at an entertainment venue in Izmir to celebrate with friends before his wedding. A.Ö. informed the venue that 8 men would be coming, but he received a response stating that reservations from groups consisting only of men were not accepted. The individual whose reservation request was denied on this basis filed a complaint with TİHEK, claiming that discrimination was being carried out based on gender.
The complainant presented the communication with the establishment as evidence, showing screenshots of the written correspondence. In the screenshots, it was seen that the establishment used the expression “Unfortunately, I cannot accept only men, sir.” in response to the reservation request. When A.Ö. asked, “Do you say the same thing when women make reservations?” the response was, “No, because our concept is aimed at female customers, I cannot also accept groups consisting only of men or mostly men.”
During the investigation, the entertainment venue, in its written opinion, stated that they aimed to provide the best service to all customers regardless of ethnic origin, race, or gender and claimed that the applicant’s allegations did not reflect the truth. The opinion mentioned that the venue catered more to families and women, thus being extra cautious in reservations due to past experiences of negative behaviors towards female guests from large groups of only men under the influence of alcohol.
The opinion emphasized that priority was given to groups of women and families, but reservations were also made for small groups of men. TİHEK, which made the final decision on the application, imposed an administrative fine of 80,000 Turkish Liras on the establishment for violating the prohibition of discrimination based on gender. The decision highlighted the principle of equality and the prohibition of discrimination as an integral part of international human rights conventions and the highest legal norm in international law.
The decision stated that gender constituted one of the discrimination grounds listed in Article 3 of Law No. 6701, and any differential treatment that hindered or made it difficult for a person to enjoy legally recognized rights and freedoms compared to others in a similar situation on the basis of gender constituted discrimination. TİHEK, addressing the claim in the decision that men in all male groups were disturbing female guests under the influence of alcohol, commented that such beliefs were based on prejudices and fed the discrimination phenomenon. The decision concluded that the purpose of not admitting groups consisting solely of men to the establishment based solely on stereotypes and assumptions was not legitimate.
