NEWSLETTER-2020-metin

148 NEWSLETTER 2020 In its Askaynak decision 2 , Kaynak Tekniği San. ve Tic. A.Ş. was assessed an administrative fine for hindering the on-site inspection. In this case, during the on-site inspection, Askaynak’s General Manager (“GM”) sent an e-mail from his/her personal mail account to another undertaking’s employee, which was also a party to the preliminary investigation. The said e-mail contained phrases that suggested GM used his/her personal Yahoo e-mail account for work-related purposes and, therefore, was asked to provide access to his/her Yahoo account. The Authority experts also stated that refusal to grant such access could amount to hindering on-site inspection, which could result in an administrative fine. The GM refused to provide such access for a while and, when he/she finally gave permission, the Authority ex- perts noticed that some e-mails had been deleted and could not be recovered. As a result, Kaynak Tekniği San. ve Tic. A.Ş. was assessed an administrative fine of five per thousand of its 2018 annual gross revenue for hindering on the site-inspection. In Siemens Healthcare 3 , after examining certain employees’ computers during an on-site inspection on 02.10.2019, the Authority experts requested to review certain dates and keywords that would in- clude all of the Siemens Healthcare employees. After consulting with the global headquarters of Siemens Healthineers AG, it was stated that such a review could only be done through eDiscovery, which would mean accessing all employees’ information within the European Union, and could not be limited to Siemens Healthcare users only. Ac- cordingly, it was stated that such a review could create different types of risks in different jurisdictions and, therefore, could not be accepted by the company. Through a later dated letter, Siemens Healthcare offered a pro- cedure to facilitate the requested review which was accepted and, thus, the review was performed on 15.10.2019 in accordance with the offered procedure. The Board explicitly stated that not hindering an on-site inspection did not constitute providing solely the documents and information an undertaking deems fit, when they deem fit. To the contrary, documents, which are deemed to be relevant by the Author- 2 The Board’s decision, No. 19-46/793-346, 26.12.2019. 3 The Board’s decision, No. 19-38/581-247, 07.11.2019.