Right to private life of public officials in the context of sexual orientation and gender identity

The status which public officials in, expands the limits of some rights and freedoms while narrowing the limits of others. The right to private life also appears as an area of right that sometimes narrows for public officials, but as a constitutional right made ground in Article 20 of the Constitution, it has certain limits of restriction for also persons in the status. Administrative interventions to private life of public officials in the context of sexual orientation and gender identity are not exempt from these limitations. In this study, it is analysed how the understanding of morality, which is often coequated on the grounds of "general morality", is interpreted within the framework of a libertarian understanding of morality especially in the light of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Which also Türkiye is obliged to adopt due to its international obligations. Even especially individual judgments of the Constitutional Court seem to converge with the ECtHR, it seems that there still is a long way to go when more recent ECtHR judgments on gender identity are considered. In this study, the basic principles to ensure the balance between the private life and professional life of public officials are examined through court decisions under headings of dress code, duty to show special care in behaviours and social media use, and an attempt is made to interpret them to prevent further abstraction of the right to private life of public officials.