Hakkaniyet Kavramı ve Hakimlerin Hukuki Yorum ve Hakkaniyete İlişkin Algıları Üzerine Bir Emprik Araştırma

Yıl 2015, Cilt: 64 Sayı: 2, 507 - 530, 01.06.2015

Eylem Ümit Atılgan

https://doi.org/10.1501/Hukfak_0000001786

Cited By: 1

Öz

Bu metin hâkim ve savcılarla yapılmış saha çalışmasından elde edilen verilerin kuram ışığında değerlendirilmesinden oluşmaktadır. Saha çalışmasında, Türk Yargı sisteminde en kıdemli hâkimler olan 1. sınıf hâkim ve savcılarla yaptığım derin mülakatlarla hâkimlerin hakkaniyet kavramından ne anladıklarını ve hüküm verirken özellikle takdir yetkisini kullanırken nasıl uyguladıklarını anlamaya çalıştım. Bu makalede sunacağım bilgiler aslında geniş kapsamlı ve uzun soluklu bir çalışmanın ilk ayağında elde ettiğim verilerden genel başlıklar olup alışmanın nihai çerçevesini “hâkimler nasıl karar verir” sorusu çizmekte. Bu sorunun yanıtını aramak için şimdiye kadar 80 kadar hâkimle derin mülakat yaptım. Araştırmayı nitel yönteme göre tasarladığım için bu çalışmanın amacının “tarama-ölçme” değil “anlama”ya yöneldiğini önemle vurgulamalıyım. Hâkimlerin hak ve nısfetle karar vermesi ilkesinin yargı sosyolojisi bakımından bir incelemesi olan bu makalenin “Gute Richter sind noch wichtiger als gute Gesetze” (İyi hâkimler, iyi yasalardan daha önemlidir)** mottosu ile başlaması bu nedenle anlamlı

Anahtar Kelimeler

Hukuk Felsefesi ve Sosyolojisi, Hakkaniyet, Hukuki Yorum, Hukuk Kültürü, Hukukta Emprik Araştırma

THE CONCEPT OF EQUITY AND AN EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ON THE PERCEPTION OF TURKISH JUDGES ABOUT JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION AND EQUITY

Öz

This paper is a theoretical evaluation of the data obtained from a field research with the in-depth interviews of 80 judges and public prosecutors in Turkey. I attempted to understand what judges understand by the concept of equity and the way they carry it into practice when delivering a verdict. This article is actually the introductory headlines from the data I obtained at the first stage of a long and comprehensive study. What establishes the framework of the study is the question of “how judges make decisions”. Since I designed the research in accordance with a qualitative method, it is dedicated to the purpose of understanding rather than surveying and assessment. This article serves as an introduction to a comprehensive study. In the subsequent stages of the study, considerably rich data obtained from in-depth interviews will possibly give way to a multidimensional analysis in various interpretational contexts and in the light of detailed codes. However, it would not be wrong to argue that judging the case from the available picture is open to the impact of value judgments. So I suppose, saying famous motto “wise judges are better than good codes” (Gute Richter sind noch wichtiger als gute Gesetze”) will not be impetuosity

Anahtar Kelimeler

Philosophy and Sociology of Law, Equity, Judicial Interpretation, Legal Culture, Empirical Studies in Law

Kaynakça

• Aristotle, (1995) Rhetoric, trans.: Mehmet H.Doğan, İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları.
• Aristotle, (1994) Nicomachean Ethics, Translated by W. D. Ross, London: Oxford University Press.
• Atılgan Ümit Eylem, (2011) “The Principle of Equity in Turkish Law: A Judicial Sociology Research”, in Legislation and Judicial Decision Making, (Norm Koyma-Hüküm Verme) Ankara: Ankara Universitesi Basımevi.
• Bader, K. S. (1961) DRİZ, available at http://www.ruhr-unibochum.de/rsozlog/daten/pdf/Roehl%20- %20Fehler%20in%20Gerichsurteilen.pdf on 03.06.2015.
• Berger, Adolf (1953) Encyclopedic Dictionary of Roman Law, Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.
• Brice, Charles (1913-1914) S. Roman Aequitas and English Equity, Georgetown Law Journal, V.2,
• Cardozo, Benjamin Nathan (2009) The Nature of the Judicial Process, (originally published in 1921), New Haven: Yale University Press.
• Constantini,Cristina (2008) Equity Different Talks, Social Science Research Network, Working Paper Series, SSRN Electronic Journal 12/2008; DOI:10.2139/ssrn.1315999, available at http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Cristina_Costantini2/publications, on 03.06.2015.
• Cruz, Peter De (1999) Comparative Law in a Changing World, 2nd edition, London: Routledge Cavendish.
• Dinçkol, Abdullah (1995) Basic Principals of Judicial Judgment Process, (Karar Verme Süreci İçinde Hakimin Uyması Gereken Temel İlkeler) HFSA, V. 2.
• Erem, Faruk (1988) Psychology of Justice, (Adalet Psikolojisi) 8th edition, Ankara: Sevinç Matbaası.
• Feyzioğlu, Metin (2002) Conscience (Personal Convict) in Penal Jurisdiction, (Ceza Muhakemesinde Vicdani Kanaat), Ankara:Yetkin.
• Friedman, Lawrence M. (1975) The Legal System: A Social Science Perspective, New York: Sage.
• Gadamer, Hans-Georg (2008) Philosophical Hermeneutics, 2nd Edition, (trans. & ed.) David E. Linge, Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Gadamer, Hans-Georg (1979) The Problem of Historical Consciousness, Interpretive Social Science: A Reader, ed. Paul Rabinow, William Sullivan, Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Geny, Francois (1917) The Legislative Technique Of Modern Civil Codes, in Science Of Legal Method Select Essays, Modern Legal Philosophy, Vol 9, Chapter XII, sec.13, ed.: Ernest Bruncken, Boston: The Boston Book Company.
• Gessner, Volkmar (1996) “On the Methodology of Comparing Legal Phenomena” in Volkmar Gessner, Armin Hoeland, Csaba Varga (eds.) European Legal Cultures, UK: Dartmouth.
• Greville Hanbury, Harold (1957) Modern Equity, The Principles of Equity, 7th edition, London: Stevens and Sons Limited.
• Gürkan, Ülker (1967) Legal Realism, (Hukuki Realizm) Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi.
• Gürten, Kadir (2008) Aequitas In Roman Law (Roma Hukukunda Hakkaniyet), Ankara:A dalet Yayınevi.
• Hegel, G.W.F. (1952) Philosophy of Right, 1821, translated by T.M. Knox, London: Oxford University Press.
• Holmes, Oliver Wendell, (1989) The Common Law, The Mind and Faith of Justice Holmes, His Speeches, Essays, Letters and Judicial Opinions, ed. Max Lerner, NY:Transaction Publishers.
• Hudson, Alastair (2003) Equity &Trust, London: Routledge.
• Keeton,G.W. (1938) An Introduction to Equity, London: Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons.
• Kuçuradi, Ioanna (1998) Human and Values, (İnsan ve Değerleri), Ankara:Türkiye Felsefe Kurumu.
• re, Michael S. (1997) Legal Principles Revisited, Iowa L. Review, V. 82.
• Pasquier, Claude du (1954) New Ideas in Appliance of the Law and the Court Decisions, (Hukukun Tatbiki Hakkında Yeni Görüşler ve İsviçre Mahkeme İçtihatları) AÜHF Dergisi, translated by Jale Akipek, V.11, No. 3-4.
• Roelker, Edward (1946) The Meaning of Aequitas, Aequus and Aeque In the Code of Canon, The Jurist, V.6.
• Sancar, Mithat & Eylem Ümit Atılgan, (2009) “Justice can be Bypassed Sometimes”: Judges and Prosecutors in the Democratization Process, İstanbul: TESEV.
• Shiffrin, Joshua B. (2006) A Practical Jurisprudence of Values: Re-Writing Lechmere, Inc. v. NLRB 186, Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, V. 41.
• Şahin, Kemal (2007) (Judge of Kazan), Division of Powers and The Judicial Independency in Turkey, (Türkiye’de Kuvvetler Ayrılığı ve Yargıç Bağımsızlığı) HFSA, V. 16.
• Uygur, Gülriz (2006) Law, Ethics and Principles, (Hukuk, Etik ve İlkeler) Ankara: Siyasal Kitapevi.