The heavy workload of administrative judicial authorities, particularly of Danıştay, the administrative court of cassation in Turkey, has raised the question of incorporation of appeal mechanism as a second-line remedy in our administrative litigation system. At this stage the revision of decision, a remedy enabling the chamber of Danıştay to correct manifest errors and mistake of fact in its decision upon cassation either uphold or overturn, has been revoked and, instead, the remedy of appeal before district administrative courts has been incorporated into the administrative litigation procedure system of Turkey by the Law No. 6545. The structure of district administrative courts, which were initially designed as so-called authority of objection, a sui generis remedy for some sort of administrative acts and decisions of administrative tribunals relating to stay of execution, have been designed as the court of appeal in this system, and as such, synchronised with the system of appeal. Moreover with the purpose of getting fairer and faster result in some matters of dispute the fast-track trial procedure in administrative litigation system has been regulated by the above-mentioned Law. The new provision prescribing a fast-track trial procedure for those cases that are relating to review of administrative acts taken in conjunction with central and common exams held by an administrative authority has been added to the Law of Procedure of Administrative Litigation. In this study, French administrative litigation practice has also been addressed in order to comprehend these new reforms which have been incorporated into Turkey administrative litigation through being inspired from the system of French administrative litigation. In the scope of this study, the amendments in administrative litigation procedure made by Laws of 6545 and 6552 have been examined and the structure of district administrative courts in the new system of litigation procedure has been discussed to the extent how the likely discrepancy amongst precedents of different district administrative courts will be eased. In this study, the remedy of appeal, the fast-track trial procedure which, indeed, has been regulated by French law in a completely different way and the procedure applied for judicial review of central and common exams have been focused on and possible legal discussions, which can be encountered in the future practice of this new litigation procedure are mentioned
Law No. 6545 Law No. 6552 Administrative Litigation Procedure Proceedings Appeal Fast-track Trial Procedure.
İdari yargı yerlerinin ve özellikle Danıştay’ın iş yükü fazlalığı, hukukumuzda istinaf konusunu gündeme getirmiştir. Varılan noktada, 6545 sayılı Kanun ile karar düzeltme kanun yolu kaldırılarak idari yargı alanına istinaf kanun yolu getirilmiş, istinaf mercii olarak yapılandırılan bölge idare mahkemeleri yeni sistem ile uyumlaştırılmış, ayrıca kimi uyuşmazlıklarda daha hızlı ve adil sonuç alma amacıyla ivedi yargılama usûlü düzenlenmiştir. 6552 sayılı Kanun ile de, merkezi ve ortak sınavlara ilişkin yeni bir yargılama usûlünün öngörüldüğü hüküm, İdari Yargılama Usûlü Kanunu’na eklenmiştir. Fransız idari yargı sisteminden esinlenerek Türk idari yargı sistemine dahil edilen bu yenilikleri kavrayabilmek adına zaman zaman Fransız uygulamasına da yer verilmiştir. Bu çalışmada, 6545 ve 6552 sayılı Kanunlar ile idari yargılama usûlünde yapılan değişiklikler ele alınmış, bölge idare mahkemelerinin yeni sistemdeki yapısına sadece içtihat farklılıklarının giderilmesi konusunda yer verilmiştir. İstinaf kurumu, Fransız uygulamasından farklı şekilde düzenlenen ivedi yargılama usûlü ile merkezi ve ortak sınavlara ilişkin yargılama usûlüne ağırlık verilmiş ve uygulamada karşılaşılacak muhtemel sorunlara değinilmiştir
6545 Sayılı Kanun 6552 Sayılı Kanun İdari Yargı Yargılama Usûlü İstinaf İvedi Yargılama Usûlü.
Birincil Dil | Türkçe |
---|---|
Bölüm | Research Article |
Yazarlar | |
Yayımlanma Tarihi | 1 Ekim 2016 |
Yayımlandığı Sayı | Yıl 2016 Sayı: 28 |