top of page
Search

Comparison of Kosovo, Turkiye and GDPR

  • Dec 15, 2024
  • 5 min read

Criteria

Kosovo (06/L-082)

Turkey (KVKK)

GDPR (EU)

Purpose

Protecting personal data and defending individual rights

Processing and protecting personal data

Data processing and free movement of personal data

Scope

Public and private sector data processing activities

Personal data processed in Turkey

Data processing in EU member states

Definition of Data Controller

The entity determining the purpose of personal data processing

The entity determining the purpose and means of data processing

The entity determining the purpose of data processing

Definition of Data Processor

The entity processing personal data on behalf of the controller

The entity processing data under the controller's instructions

The entity processing data under the controller's instructions

Consent Requirements

Consent must be clear, informed, and freely given

Consent must be explicit, specific, and informed

Consent must be explicit, freely given, and detailed

Special Categories of Data

Sensitive data such as race, health, and sexual life require special protection

Strict protection for health and biometric data

Special protection for sensitive data such as race, religion, and health

Principle of Lawful Processing

Fairness, legality, and transparency

Justice, accuracy, and proportionality

Lawfulness, fairness, and transparency

Data Subject Rights

Access, rectification, erasure, portability

Access, rectification, erasure, notification

Access, portability, objection, erasure

Data Breach Notification

Must be reported to authorities within 72 hours

Immediately reportable to KVKK

Reportable within 72 hours

Cross-Border Data Transfer

Transfers aligned with EU standards

Strictly regulated data transfer rules

Transfer subject to adequacy decisions

Data Protection Officer (DPO)

Not mandatory but recommended for large organizations

Not mandatory

Mandatory for large organizations

Sanctions

Up to 4% of annual revenue

Up to 5 million TL

Up to 4% of annual revenue or €20 million

Supervisory Authority

Information and Privacy Agency oversees compliance

Personal Data Protection Authority oversees compliance

National data protection authorities oversee compliance

Compliance Timeline

Effective since 2019

Effective since 2016

Effective since 2018

Anonymization

Must be defined and segregated

Anonymization governed by regulations

Defined anonymization is mandatory

Transparency Principle

Extensive information must be provided to data subjects

Information provided through privacy notices

Processing must be transparent

Children's Data

Parental consent required for children under 16

Parental consent recommended for under 18s

Parental consent required for children under 16

Profiling

Explicit consent required

Explicitly defined

Explicitly defined

Data Inventory Requirement

Mandatory

Recommended but not mandatory

Mandatory for large organizations

Accountability Principle

Accountability is clearly defined

Clearly defined legal obligations

Accountability obligations are clearly defined

Data Minimization

Unnecessary data processing is prohibited

Mandatory data minimization

Unnecessary data processing is prohibited

Data Security

Encryption and access controls required

Access restriction and technical measures

Encryption and access controls required

Retention Period

Erased once legal period ends

Erased or destroyed after legal retention ends

Erased once retention period ends

Privacy by Design

Privacy considerations integrated into system design

Defined by regulation

Privacy integrated from design stage

Affected Rights

Rights such as access, rectification, and erasure are protected

Rights like consent and notification are supported

Core rights like access and erasure are protected

 

Legal Analysis of the Kosovo, Turkey, and GDPR Comparison Table

1. Purpose

Each framework focuses on personal data protection, but the GDPR emphasizes the free flow of data alongside protection. Kosovo and Turkey's laws are more aligned with localized protection without emphasizing cross-border data processing.

2. Scope

  • Kosovo: Covers both public and private sectors broadly, mirroring GDPR's extensive applicability.

  • Turkey (KVKK): Focuses on personal data processed within Turkey, lacking extraterritorial reach compared to GDPR.

  • GDPR: Applies extraterritorially to any entity processing EU citizens' data, setting a broader and more impactful global standard.

3. Definitions of Data Controller and Processor

The definitions in all three frameworks are similar, showing GDPR's influence. This uniformity ensures global businesses can easily align their practices across jurisdictions.

4. Consent Requirements

GDPR sets the highest bar for consent, requiring it to be explicit, informed, and specific. Kosovo closely follows GDPR's standards, whereas Turkey's KVKK has a narrower approach, focusing more on explicit and informed consent without the same level of granularity.

5. Special Categories of Data

Sensitive data categories are strictly protected under all three frameworks. GDPR's comprehensive scope includes additional protections, such as for biometric data, which Kosovo and Turkey have partially adopted.

6. Data Subject Rights

  • GDPR: Offers extensive rights, including data portability and objection to processing.

  • Kosovo: Mirrors GDPR closely, though with less clarity on portability.

  • Turkey (KVKK): Includes key rights but lacks explicit provisions for portability, reflecting its less mature framework compared to GDPR.

7. Data Breach Notification

  • GDPR and Kosovo: Require notification within 72 hours, showing a proactive approach to transparency.

  • Turkey (KVKK): Does not specify a strict timeline, leaving ambiguity in breach response requirements.

8. Cross-Border Data Transfer

  • GDPR: Provides robust mechanisms like adequacy decisions and Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs).

  • Kosovo: Aligns with GDPR standards for EU integration.

  • Turkey: Imposes stricter rules, requiring explicit consent or regulator approval, making it less flexible for international businesses.

9. Data Protection Officer (DPO)

  • Mandatory in GDPR: For large organizations or high-risk processing activities.

  • Kosovo: Recommends but does not mandate DPOs, reflecting resource considerations.

  • Turkey: DPOs are not mandatory, showing a significant gap in governance compared to GDPR.

10. Sanctions

GDPR imposes the highest penalties globally (up to 4% of annual revenue or €20 million), making compliance critical for global entities. Kosovo aligns with these penalties, while Turkey's KVKK caps fines at 5 million TL, which may be less effective as a deterrent for large organizations.

11. Supervisory Authority

  • GDPR: Empowers national Data Protection Authorities (DPAs) with investigative and corrective powers.

  • Kosovo: Similar authority through its Information and Privacy Agency.

  • Turkey: The Personal Data Protection Authority oversees compliance but lacks the proactive enforcement seen in GDPR.

12. Anonymization

Anonymization is mandatory under GDPR and Kosovo law, emphasizing data security. Turkey regulates anonymization but lacks detailed technical standards.

13. Profiling

GDPR is the only framework with explicit rules on automated decision-making and profiling, addressing ethical concerns. Kosovo and Turkey remain silent, creating regulatory gaps in AI-driven industries.

14. Privacy by Design

  • GDPR: Mandates integrating privacy into system design from the outset.

  • Kosovo: Adopts this principle, aligning with GDPR.

  • Turkey: Focuses on compliance after implementation, lagging behind GDPR's proactive approach.

15. Retention Period

All frameworks mandate data erasure after the retention period ends, though GDPR is more explicit in enforcing accountability through audits and compliance measures.

General Observations

  • GDPR as the Benchmark: GDPR sets the global standard for data protection, influencing both Kosovo and Turkey’s frameworks. However, neither jurisdiction fully matches GDPR's breadth and enforcement mechanisms.

  • Kosovo’s EU Alignment: Kosovo aligns closely with GDPR, reflecting its aspirations for EU membership. Its framework is robust, though enforcement capacity may be weaker than GDPR.

  • Turkey’s Independent Approach: KVKK draws from GDPR but maintains stricter rules on data transfer and less emphasis on proactive governance. It reflects a more localized approach to data protection, which may limit global compatibility.

  • Cross-Jurisdictional Impact: For multinational businesses, GDPR compliance is often sufficient to meet Kosovo's requirements. However, Turkey’s additional restrictions on data transfer and consent may require specific adjustments.

Practical Recommendations for Businesses

  1. For EU Operations: Align with GDPR as it covers Kosovo's requirements comprehensively.

  2. For Turkey: Develop separate mechanisms to handle data transfers and ensure explicit consent to avoid non-compliance.

  3. For Global Compliance: Adopt GDPR as the foundational standard while tailoring policies to address Kosovo and Turkey-specific nuances.

  4. Governance Enhancement: Multinationals should appoint a DPO globally to meet GDPR and Kosovo requirements while improving data management even in jurisdictions like Turkey where it’s not mandatory.

This analysis underlines GDPR's dominance as the gold standard and highlights gaps in Turkey and Kosovo’s frameworks that businesses must navigate for seamless compliance.

 

 
 
 

Comments


Commenting on this post isn't available anymore. Contact the site owner for more info.
Kosovo Consultancy White logo.png

Contact Us

Contact Information

KS Law Consultancy © 2025

Kosovo Consultancy Black Logo 2400x1800 (1).png
bottom of page