Redesigning the Turkish Civil Litigation System in the Light of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR)

Öz

Currently, there are important developments across the world concerning online dispu-te resolution (ODR) methods. It would not be wrong to consider these ODR developments as a new movement, similar to the alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods available in the European Union. Therefore, these developments may have effects throughout judicial sys-tems. In the long run, the existence of ODR-infused judicial procedures may be deemed es-sential for adequate access to justice. In this article, we tried to rethink the Turkish civil litiga-tion system in the light of ODR. It should be stressed that technology cannot solve all the problems of the judiciary. However, if technology can be applied properly and carefully, even-tually it would be possible to find solutions for some of the structural flaws inherent in the current Turkish civil litigation system. Such a result would not be a small achievement in terms of access to justice.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• access to justice
• transformation
• digitization
• Turkish civil litigation system

Türk Hukuk Yargılama Sistemi ve UYAP Sistemini Çevrim İçi Uyuşmazlık Çözüm Yöntemleri Doğrultusunda Yeniden Tasarlamak

Öz

Günümüzde çevrim içi uyuşmazlık çözüm yöntemlerine (ODR) ilişkin dünya genelinde önemli gelişmeler yaşanmaktadır. Bu gelişmeleri, Avrupa Birliği'ndeki alternatif uyuşmazlık çözümü (ADR) yöntemlerine benzer yeni bir hareket olarak değerlendirmek yanlış olmayacaktır. Dolayısıyla bu gelişmeler yargı sistemlerini etkileyebilir. Uzun vadede, ODR'den beslenen yargı usullerinin varlığı, adalete yeterli erişim için zorunlu görülebilir. Bu nedenle bu makalede, Türk hukuk yargılama sistemini ODR ışığında yeniden düşünmeye çalıştık. Teknolojinin yargının tüm sorunlarını çözemeyeceğini vurgulamak gerekmekle birlikte teknolojik gelişmeler, doğru ve dikkatli bir şekilde uygulanabilirse, mevcut Türk medeni yargılama sisteminin yapısal sorunlarından bazılarına çözüm bulmak mümkün olabilir. Böyle bir sonuç, adalete erişim açısından önemsiz bir başarı olmayacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• adalete erişim
• Türk hukuk yargılama sistemi
• dijitalleşme
• dijital dönüşüm

Kaynakça

1. Abanoz, Buket, “Hukuki Bilgiye Dijital Erişim (Digital Access of Legal Information)”, Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi, C. 26, S. 1, 2020, pp. 190-203.
2. Arbeitsgruppe im Auftrag de Präsidentinnen und Präsidenten der Oberlandesgerichte, des Kammergerichts, des Bayerischen Obersten Landesgerichts und des Bundesgerichthofs, Modernisierung des Zivilprozesses, Diskussionspapier, 2020.
3. Akkan, Mine, “Tebligat Kanunu Çerçevesinde Elektronik Tebligat (Electronic Notification within the Framework of the Notification Law)”, Medenî Usul ve İcra İflas Hukuku Dergisi (Journal of Civil Procedure and Enforcement & Bankruptcy Law), Volume 14, Issue 39, 2018/1, s. 23-89.
4. Aktepe Artık, Sezin, Medeni Usul Hukukunda Adil Yargılanma Hakkı, 1. Baskı, Seçkin Yayınevi, Ankara 2014.
5. American Bar Association, Center For İnnovation, Online Dispute Resolution In The United States, September 2020.
6. Akkaya, Tolga, Çevrimiçi Uyuşmazlık Çözüm Yöntemleri, in Dijital Çağda Medenî Yargı 2022’den Bakış (editor: Muhammet Özekes) Adalet Yayınevi, Ankara 2022, pp. 275-326.
7. Ahmed, Sabreen, “Online Courts and Private and Public Aspects of Open Justice: Enhancing Access to Court or Violating The Right To Privacy”, The Age of Human Rights Journal, 20, June 2023, pp. 1-21.
8. Baldwin, John, “Is There a Limit to the Expansion of Small Claims?”, Current Legal Problems, Volume 56, Issue 1, 2003, pp. 313-343.

9. Cortes, Pablo, Online Dispute Resolution for Consumers in the European Union, Routledge 2011.
10. Civil Justice Council, Online Dispute Resolution Advisory Group, Online Dispute Resolution For Low Value Civil Claims, February 2015.
11. Designing the Future of Dispute Resolution THE ODR POLICY PLAN FOR INDIA, The NITI Aayog Expert Committee on ODR, October 2021.
12. Dymitruk, Maria, “The Right to a Fair Trial in Automated Civil Proceedings”, Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology, Volume 3, No 1, 2019, pp. 27-44.
13. Özkan Duvan, Ayşe, “Bireysel Başvuru Kararlarında Makul Sürede Yargılanma Hakkı (Right to Trial Within A Reasonable Time in the Individual Application Decisions)”, Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, Volume 68, Issue 2019, . 287-336.
14. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, From digitisation to digital transformation: A case for online courts in commercial disputes? (Online Courts In Commercial Disputes), Draft Discussion Paper, October 2020.
15. Erdönmez, Güray, Pekcanıtez Usûl Medenî Usul Hukuku, 15. Edition, İstanbul 2017.
16. Ercan, İbrahim, “Mukayeseli Hukuktaki Düzenlemeler Çerçevesinde Küçük Alacakların Tahsili Konusundaki Öneriler (Suggestions on Collection of Small Claims within the Framework of Comparative Law)”, Selçuk Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi (Selçuk University Law Faculty Journal), Volume 20, Issue 1, 2012, pp. 231-241.
17. Engstrom, David Freeman, “Digital Civil Procedure”, (September 15, 2021), University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 169, No. 7, 2021, pp. 2243-2289.
18. Hanağası, Emel, Medenî Yargılama Hukukunda Silahların Eşitliği, Yetkin Yayınları, Ankara 2016.
19. Hörnle, Julia, Technical Study On Online Dispute Resolution Mechanisms, EU Report, Strasbourg, 1 August 2018, Document prepared by the Secretariat Directorate General of Human Rights and Rule of Law.
20. Fang, Michael, “Has COVID-19 Turned “ODR” into the “Only Dispute Resolution” Available?”, https://odr.info/files/china.pdf accessed 30 July 2024.
21. Gayretli Aydın, Seda, “Medenî Yargılama Hukukunda Ses ve Görüntü Nakli Yoluyla Duruşmaya Katılma”, D.E.Ü. Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, Prof. Dr. Şeref ERTAŞ’a Armağan, C. 19, Özel Sayı, pp. 2101-2126.
22. Göksu, Mustafa, Civil Litigation and Dispute Resolution In Turkey, Banka ve Ticaret Hukuku Araştırma Enstitüsü, Ankara 2016.
23. Gras, Ignacio Oltra, “Online Courts: Bridging the Gap Between Access and Justice”, UCL Journal of Law and Jurisprudence, Volume 10, Issue 1, 2021, pp. 24-51.
24. Gelder, Emma van, The EU Approach to Consumer ODR, International Journal of Online Dispute Resolution 2019 (6) 2, pp. 219-226.
25. Guo, Meirong, “Internet court’s challenges and future in China”, Computer Law & Security Review 40, 2021, pp. 1-13.
26. Gao, Wei/Xu, Lu, Online Courts in China: A New Hybrid Model for Access to Justice, ResearchGate Website, pp. 1-13, accessed 18 April 2025.
27. Guidelines of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on online dispute resolution mechanisms in civil and administrative court proceedings (ODR Mechanisms In Court Proceedings), 16 June 2021.
28. Habuka, Hiroki/Rule, Colin, “The Promise and Potential of Online Dispute Resolution in Japan”, International Journal on Online Dispute Resolution, 2017 (4) 2, pp. 74-90.
29. Hodges, Christopher, “Proposed Modernisation of Courts in England & Wales: IT and the Online Court”, International Journal of Procedural Law, Volume 6, Issue 1.
30. Inter-American Development Bank, Digital Technologies for Better Justice A Toolkit for Action, Discussion Paper No: IDB-DP-761, April 2020.
31. Salter, Shannon, “Online Dispute Resolution and Justice System Integration: British Columbia’s Civil Resolution Tribuna”, Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice”, 2017, Issue 34, pp. 112-129.
32. Sayar, İbrahim Barış, “Avrupa Basit Hak İddiaları Prosedürü (European Small Claims Procedure): Kapsamı ve Uygulanması Üzerine Bir İnceleme (European Small Claims Procedure: An Examination On Its Scope and Implementation)”, Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi (Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli University Faculty of Law Review), Volume 22, Issue 1, 2018, pp. 49-94.
33. Sela, Ayelet, “Streamlining Justice: How Online Courts Can Resolve The Challenges Of Pro Se Litigation”, Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy, 2016, Issue 26, pp. 331-388.
34. The Rt. Hon. Sir Ernest Ryder (Senior President of Tribunals), “The Modernisation of Access to Justice in Times of Austerity”, 5th Annual Ryder Lecture: the University of Bolton, 3 March 2016.
35. Susskind, Richard, Online Courts And The Future Of Justice, Oxford University Press, 2019.
36. Sorabji, John, “The Online Solutions Court - A Multi-Door CourtHouse For The 21st Century”, Civil Justice Quarterly, Volume 36, Issue 1, 2017.
37. Stiglich, Melisse, (Project Staff), Utah Online Dispute Resolution Pilot Project (Technical Assistance Grant: Final Report), December 2017, pp. 1-16.
38. Schmitz, Amy J., “Expanding Access to Remedies through E-Court Initiatives”, Buffalo Law Review, Volume 67 Number 1, 1-1-2019, pp. 89- 163.
39. Özekes, Muhammet, Medeni Usul Hukukunda Hukuki Dinlenilme Hakkı, Yetkin Yayınları, Ankara 2003
40. Özmumcu, Seda, “Dünyada ve Ülkemizde Online Uyuşmazlık Çözümleri Bağlamında Online Tahkim ve Uygulamaları (Online Arbitration and its Applications in the Context of Online Dispute Resolutions in the World and Our Country)”, (in Turkish), İstanbul Law Journal, Volume 78, Issue 2, 2020, pp. 431-454.
41. Öztek, Selçuk, “Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu’nun Aleniyet İlkesine İlişkin 28 İnci Maddesi İle Ses ve Görüntü Nakledilmesi Yoluyla Veya Başka Yerde Duruşma İcrasına İlişkin 149 Uncu Maddesinde 7251 Sayılı Kanunla Yapılan Değişiklikler Hakkında Bazı Düşünceler/Some Thoughts on the Amendments Made by Law No. 7251 to Article 28 of the Code of Civil Procedure on the Principle of Publicity and Article 149 on the Conduct of Hearings by means of Audio and Video Transmission or in Another Place, (in Turkish)”, Adalet Dergisi, 2021/1, Issue 66, pp. 641-665.
42. Özbek, M. Serdar, “Avrupa Konseyince Adalet Hizmetlerinin Etkinliğinin Artırılması İçin Öngörülen Tedbirler (Measures Prescribed by Council of Europe to Increase the Efficiency of Justice)”, Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi (Ankara University Law Faculty Journal), Volume 55, Issue 1, 2006, pp. 207-292.
43. Kaya, Serkan, “Access To Justice For Consumers In Turkey: The Need For Enhancing Consumer Dispute Resolution Through Online Dispute Resolution”, Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, Volume 26, Issue 1, 2022, pp. 225-260.
44. Karaaslan, Varol, (in Ali Cem Budak and Varol Karaaslan, Medeni Usul Hukuku, 7. Edition Filiz Kitabevi, İstanbul,), İstanbul, 2023.
45. Kale, Serdar, “Ses ve Görüntünün Nakledilmesi Yoluyla Duruşmanın İcrası (HMK md. 149)”, Medenî Usûl ve İcra İflas Hukuku Dergisi, 2013, Sayı 25, pp. 141-155.
46. Karabel, E. Gökçe/Aydemir, Dilek, “Medeni Usul Hukukunda Yargılamanın Hızlandırılması ve Adalete Erişim Hakkı Bakımından Çevrimiçi Yargılama ve Yapay Zekanın Kullanımı”, Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi, C. 29, S. 1, 2023, pp. 530-573.
47. Katsh, Ethan/Einy, Orna Rabinovich, Digital Justice, Technology And The Internet Of Disputes, Oxford University Press, 2017.
48. Kıyak, Emre, “Büyük Veri ve Yapay Zekâ Teknolojileri İle Adım Adım Zeki UYAP (Ulusal Yargı Ağı Projesi) Ekosistemine Doğru”, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, C. 22, S.1, 2020, pp. 79-121.
49. Kıyak, Emre, “Duruşmada Etkinlik Kazanan Yargılama İlkeleri ile Usulî Müktesep Hak Işığında Türk Hukuk Yargılamasında Eş Zamanlı Ses ve Görüntü Aktarımıyla Duruşma Yapılmasının Olması Gereken Sınırları”, Bahçeşehir Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, C. 16, S. 205, 2021, pp. 1453-1502.
50. Kurt Konca, Nesibe, Medeni Usul Hukuku ve İcra – İflas Hukuku Açısından Elektronik Tebligat, 2. Baskı, Seçkin Yayınevi, 2024.
51. Kramer, Xandra E., Access to Justice and Technology: Transforming the Face of Cross-Border Civil litigation and Adjudication in the EU, (in: Karim Benyekhlef, Jane Bailey, Jacquelyn Burkell and Fabien Gelinas (Ed), eAccess to Justice (University of Ottawa Press 2016), pp. 351-377.
52. Lord Justice Briggs (Judiciary of England and Wales) Civil Courts Structure Review: Interim Report, December 2015.
53. Lord Justice Briggs (Judiciary of England and Wales), Civil Courts Structure Review: Final Report, July 2016.
54. Meriç, Nedim/Tat, Tuğçe Arslanpınar, Elektronik Ortamda Duruşma ve Diğer Yargı Faaliyetlerinin İcrası, in Dijital Çağda Medenî Yargı 2022’den Bakış (editor: Muhammet Özekes), Adalet Yayınevi, Ankara, Aralık 2022, pp. 189-235.
55. Menashe, Doron, “A Critical Analysis Of The Online Court”, University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law, Volume 39, No: 4, 2018, pp. 921-953.
56. Mıdık, Barış, “Teknolojik Gelişmeler Işığında Hukuk Yargılamasını Yeniden Düşünmek: Otomasyondan Köklü Dönüşüme (Rethinking the Civil Justice System According to Technological Developments: From Automation to Transformation)”, Kocaeli Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi (Kocaeli University Law Faculty Journal), Issue 25/26, 2022, pp. 63- 104.
57. Mıdık, Barış, Sorularla Çevrim İçi Uyuşmazlık Çözüm Yöntemleri (Online Dispute Resolution Methods with Questions), First Edition, On İki Levha Yayıncılık, İstanbul 2021.
58. Nunes, Dierle, “A technological shift in procedural law (from automation to transformation): can legal procedure be adapted through technology?”, Civil Procedure Review, Volume 11, No 3, 2020, pp. 11-32.
59. Rabinovich-Einy, Orna, “Beyond Efficiency: The Transformation Of Courts Through Technology”, UCLA Journal Of Law & Technology, Spring 2008, Volume 12, Issue 1.
60. Reiling, Dory, “Beyond Court Digitalization With Online Dispute Resolution”, International Journal for Court Administration, Volume 8, No 2, 2017, pp. 2-6.
61. Reiling, Dory, “Courts and Artificial Intelligence”, International Journal for Court Administration, 2020, Volume 11, Issue 2, Article 8, pp. 1-10.
62. Rule, Colin, Online Dispute Resolution for Business, B2B, E-Commerce, Consumer, Employment, Insurance, and Other Commercial Conflicts (ODR For Business), Jossey-Bass, 2002.
63. MIDIK – Redesigning The Turkish Civil Litigation … 659 EU, Regulation (EU) No 524/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on online dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2009/22/EC (Regulation on consumer ODR).
64. EU, Report on the application of Directive 2013/11/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes and Regulation (EU) No 524/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on online dispute resolution for consumer disputes, 17 October 2023
65. UNCITRAL Technical Notes On Online Dispute Resolution, 2016.
66. Ulusan, Banu, “Medeni Yargılama Hukukunda Tanığın E-Duruşma İle Dinlenilmesi ve Kişisel Verilerin Korunması: Alman Hukukuyla Karşılaştırmalı Bir Değerlendirme”, TBB Dergisi, S. 163, 2022, pp. 155-189.
67. Gören Ülkü, Nazlı, “Medeni Yargılama Hukukunda Avukatla Temsil Zorunluluğu/Obligation of Representation by a Lawyer in Civil Procedure Law (in Turkish)”, Marmara University Law Faculty Legal Research Journal, Volume 16, Issue 3-4, 2010, pp. 309-325.
68. Transforming Our Justice System, By the Lord Chancellor, the Lord Chief Justice and the Senior President of Tribunals, Ministry of Justice, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/transforming-our-justicesystem-joint-statement. Xi, Chen, “Asynchronous Online Courts: The Future of Courts?”, Oregon Review of International Law, Volume 24, 2023, pp. 39-94.
69. Yardımcı, T. Emre, “Yeni Elektronik Tebligat Yönetmeliği Çerçevesinde Elektronik Tebligat (Electronic Notification within the Framework of the New Electronic Notification Regulation)”, Ankara Barosu Dergisi (Journal of the Ankara Bar Association), Issue 3, 2019, pp. 1-38.
70. Yıldırım, M. Kamil /Gül, M. Akif, ““Küçük Uyuşmazlıkların (Small Claims)” Kendine Özgü Bir Prosedür Dâhilinde Çözümlenmesine İlişkin Düşünceler (Considerations for the Resolution of “Small Claims” in a Sui Generis Procedure)”, Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi (Marmara University Law Faculty Journal Of Legal Research), Volume 27, Issue 2, 2021, pp. 1334-1351.
71. Zhurkina, Olga/Filippova, Elena/Bochkareva, Tatiana, Digitalization of Legal Proceedings: Global Trends, Proceedings of the 1st International Scientific Conference “Legal Regulation of the Digital Economy and Digital Relations: Problems and Prospects of Development” (LARDER 2020), Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, Volume 171, pp. 119-124.
72. Internet Resources https://kararlarbilgibankasi.anayasa.gov.tr/BB/2019/13338
73. https://kararlarbilgibankasi.anayasa.gov.tr/BB/2019/21781
74. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2017/10/20171025-8.htm
75. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2018/12/20181219.pdf
76. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2020/07/20200728-14.htm
77. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2023/04/20230405-3.htm
78. https://www.ntv.com.tr/ntvpara/kira-sozlesmelerinde-yeni-donem-e-devlet-uzerinden-yapilacak,_bvi-q1hBUyM3oUgIbFy7A
79. https://giris.turkiye.gov.tr/Giris/e-Devlet-Sifresi
80. https://bireysel.ziraatbank.com.tr/Transactions/Login/TRIDCardLogin.aspx
81. https://www.turkiye.gov.tr/2fa-tanitim
82. https://edurusmabilgi.adalet.gov.tr/
83. https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/mevzuat?MevzuatNo=6325&MevzuatTur=1&MevzuatTertip=5
84. https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/mevzuat?MevzuatNo=6100&MevzuatTur=1&MevzuatTertip=5
85. https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/mevzuat?MevzuatNo=5070&MevzuatTur=1&MevzuatTertip=5
86. https://www.ptt.gov.tr/kep-hizmetleri-e-imza