ADALET YÖNETİMİNDE ETKİNLİK ARAYIŞLARI: ROBOTİK BÜROKRASİ VE YAPAY ZEKÂ YÖNETİŞİMİ

Yıl 2023, Sayı: 55, 337 - 374, 17.07.2023

Mehmet Akif Özer

https://doi.org/10.54049/taad.1328456

Cited By: 1

Öz

Bu çalışmada sorunları çözmekte zorlanan bürokrasinin çıkış arama sürecinde dijitalleşmesi ve teknolojiden yararlanması sürecinde yapay zeka yönetişimi uygulamalarından ve robotik bürokrasinden nasıl yararlanabileceği hususu adalet yönetimi özelinde incelenmektedir. Dünya genelinde adalet yönetiminde yaşanan sorunlar analiz edildiğinde bilgi iletişim teknolojilerinin yetersiz kullanılmasının temel rol oynadığı çok açıktır. Bu nedenle yönetimde robotlaşma ve yapay zeka uygulamaları büyük adalet yönetimi alanında büyük önem taşımaktadır. Bu kapsamda çalışmada önce bürokrasinin neden yıprandığı ve sorunlara çözüm bulamadığı, adalet yönetimin bürokratik çıkmazları özelinde incelenmiştir. Ardından bu alanda yaşanan teknolojik gelişmelerin, verimlilik arayışlarına katkısı değerlendirilmiştir. Dijital teknolojilerin kullanımını içeren dijital otomasyonun önemli bir bileşeni olan robotik süreç otomasyonu ve robotik bürokrasi konusu ele alınmış, buradan teknolojik adalet yönetimi ve yapay zekâ yönetişimi uygulamalarına geçilerek, adalet yönetiminin bu süreçten nasıl etkilenebileceği değerlendirilmiştir. Sonuçta etkin ve verimli bir adalet yönetimi için teknolojiden mutlak surette yararlanılması gerektiğine, bu doğrultuda robotik bürokrasinin ve yapay zeka uygulamalarının sürece çok ciddi katkısı olacağı gerçeğine ulaşılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Adalet, adalet yönetimi, etkinlik, yapay zekâ, robotik bürokrasi

The Search for Efficiency in the Administration of Justice: Robotic Bureaucracy and Artificial Intelligence Governance

Öz

In this study, the issue of how the bureaucracy, which has difficulty in solving problems, can benefit from artificial intelligence governance applications and robotic bureaucracy in the process of digitalization and use of technology in the process of seeking an exit, is examined in terms of justice administration. When the problems experienced in the administration of justice around the world are analyzed, it is clear that the inadequate use of information and communication technologies plays a fundamental role. For this reason, robotization and artificial intelligence applications in administration are of great importance in the field of justice administration. In this context, in the study, firstly, the bureaucratic dilemmas of the administration of justice, why the bureaucracy was worn out and could not find a solution to the problems, were examined. Then, the contribution of technological developments in this field to the search for efficiency was evaluated. The subject of robotic process automation and robotic bureaucracy, which is an important component of digital automation involving the use of digital technologies, has been discussed, and how the justice administration can be affected by this process has been evaluated by moving on to technological justice management and artificial intelligence governance applications. As a result, it has been concluded that technology must be used absolutely for an effective and efficient justice administration, and that robotic bureaucracy and artificial intelligence applications will make a very serious contribution to the process in this direction.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Justice, justice administration, efficiency, artificial intelligence, robotic bureaucracy

Kaynakça

• Abel C, and Sementelli A, Justice and Public Administration (The University of Alabama Press USA 2007) 2.
• Arya N, ‘Concept and Theories of Criminal Justice Administration’ (2019) 8(5) International Journal of Science and Research 1410 1410.
• Ayhan E, and Emlek D, ‘Kamu Yönetiminin Yapay Zekâ Paradigmasıyla Dönüşümü: Ulusal Güvenlik Politikaları’, in M. Akif Özer (ed), Kamu Yönetiminde Yeni Yönelimler (Ekin Yayınları 2023), 309 311-312.
• Bauwens R, and Meyfroodt K, ‘Debate: Towards a More Comprehensive Understanding of Ritualized Bureaucracy in Digitalized Public Organizations’ (2021) 41(4), Public Money & Management, 281 281
• Bozeman B, and Youtie J, Robotic Bureaucracy (PAR Published 2020) 158.
• Brickhill J, Corder H, Dennis D, and Marcus G, ‘The Administration of Justice’ (Yearbook of South African Law 1 Juta, 2020) 1 <http://dx.doi.org/10.47348/ysal/v1/i1a22> Erişim Tarihi 07 April 2023.
• Brunet J, ‘Social Equity in Criminal Justice. Justice for All Promoting Social Equity in Public Administration’ in Norman J. Johnson and James H. Svara (eds), Transformational Trends in Governance and Democracy (M.E. Sharpe Armonk USA 2011) 165 173.
• Buker H, Gultekin S, and Akgul A, ‘Expected Functions of an Effective Child Justice System Administration? A Framework Developed Through A Qualitative Study in Turkey’ (2019) 16(1) Journal of Human Sciences, 87 97-99.
• CAJTW (The Committee for Administrative Justice and Tribunals), ‘Wales Administrative Justice’ (A Cornerstone of Social Justice in Wales, Reform Priorities for the Fifth Assembly 2015), <https://ukaji.org/ > 5 Erişim Tarihi 10 April 2023.
• Coleman V, ‘Technology in Criminal Just:ice Administration’, in Morales DuPont, Michael K. Hooper and Judy H. Schmidt (eds), Handbook of Criminal Justice Administration (Marcel Dekker, USA 2001) 473 486.
• Considine M, Mcgann M, Ball S, and Nguyen P, ‘Can Robots Understand Welfare? Exploring Machine Bureaucracies in Welfare-to-Work’(2022) 51 (3), Jnl. Soc. Pol. 519 521-522.
• Danzig R, ‘Machines, Bureaucracies and Markets as Artificial Intelligences’ (2022 CSET Issue Brief, Center for Security and Emerging Technology) 13-14 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/> Erişim Tarihi 07 April 2023.
• Deflem M, and Swygart A, ‘Comparative Criminal Justice’, in Morales DuPont, Michael K. Hooper and Judy H. Schmidt (eds), Handbook of Criminal Justice Administration (Marcel Dekker, USA 2001) 51 59.
• Dönmez, D, ‘Kamu Yönetiminde Dijital Dönüşüm’ in M. Akif Özer (ed), Kamu Yönetiminde Yeni Yönelimler (Ekin Yayınları 2023), 219 221-222.
• ECLAC (Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean), Digital Technologies for a New Future (LC/TS. United Nations Publication 2021/43) 66.
• Emmanuel Y, Kwame A, and Kyeremeh T, ‘Therefore, Is Bureaucracy Dead? Making a Case for Complementarity of Paradigms in Public Administrative Thinking and Discourse’ (2016) 39(5) International Journal of Public Administration, 382 389.
• Gooden S, ‘Assessing Agency Performance: The Wisconsin Experience’ in Norman J. Johnson and James H. Svara (eds), Transformational Trends in Governance and Democracy (M.E. Sharpe Armonk USA 2011) 228 229.
• Gören H, and Övgün B, ‘Adalet Yönetiminde Dönüşüm’ (2020) 11(2), Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 131 135.
• Guimarães T, Adalmir G, Edson F, ‘Administration of Justice: An Emerging Research Field’ (2018) 53(3) RAUSP Management Journal 476 476.
• Johansson J, Michel T, and Åkesson M, Public Value Creation and Robotic Process Automation: Normative, Descriptive and Prescriptive Issues in Municipal Administration, Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy (Emerald Publishing Limited USA 2022) 3-4.
• Kalkınma Bakanlığı, On Birinci Kalkınma Planı (2019-2023) (Adalet Hizmetlerinde Etkinlik Özel İhtisas Komisyonu Raporu, Ankara 2018) <https://www.sbb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/AdaletHizmetlerindeEtkinlikOzelIhtisas KomisyonuRaporu.pdf> V-VI.
• Landry C, and Caust M, The Creative Bureaucracy & İts Radical Common Sense. (Gloucestershire: Comedia Gloucestershire NL 2017) 24 <https://culturalplacemaking.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/078> Erişim Tarihi 07 April 2023.
• Mannes A, ‘Institutional Options for Robot Governance’ (WeRobot Conference Miami 2016) <https://www.robots.law.miami.edu/2016/wpcontent/uploads/2015/07/Mannes_RobotGovernance- Final.pdf.> 1 3. Erişim Tarihi 10 April 2023.
• Mäntymäki M, Minkkinen M, ‘Defining Organizational AI Governance’ (2022) 2, AI Ethics 603 609
• Monell J, ‘Administrative Justice’ in A. Farazmand (ed.), Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy and Governance (2016) 1 4.
• National Audit Office, Efficiency in the criminal justice system, Comptroller and Auditor General, (Ministry of Justice, Victoria London 2016) <https://www.nao.org.uk/> Erişim Tarihi 12 April 2023.
• ODIHR (Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights), ‘Handbook for Monitoring Administrative Justice’ (Folke Bernadotte Academy, Poland 2013), <www.osce.org/odihr> Erişim Tarihi 12 April 2023.
• OECD, Understanding Effective Access to Justice (OECD 2016) <https://www.oecd .org/gov/ Understanding-effective-access-justice-workshop-paper-final.pdf> 3 Erişim Tarihi 30 March 2023.
• Pound R, ‘The Administration of Justice in the Modern City’ (1913) 26(4) Harvard Law Review, 302 324-325 <https://www.jstor.org/stable/1326317> Erişim Tarihi 30 March 2023.
• Rass-Masson N, and Rouas V, ‘Effective Access to Justice, Policy Department C: Citizens Rights and Constitutional Affairs’ (European Union 2017), 135 <http://www.europarl.europa.eu/supporting-analyses> Erişim Tarihi 28 March 2023.
• Seçkiner S, Atay Metehan and Eroğlu Yunus, ‘Robotik Süreç Otomasyonlarının Pandemi Dönemi Havacılık Sektörü Uygulamaları ve Geleceği’ (2021) 5 (2) Journal of Aviation. 290 296.
• Sezer Ö, and Sarı C, ‘Yeni Kamu Yönetimi Anlayışının Türk Yargı Sistemine Etkileri’ (2017) 9(20) Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 196 212.
• Slaby J, Robotic Automation Emerges as a Threat to Traditional Low-Cost Outsourcing (HfS Research Ltd, 2012), 10-12 <https://www.hfsresearch.com/> Erişim Tarihi 07 April 2023.
• Stanislav I, and Webster C, ‘Robots in Tourism: A Research Agenda for Tourism Economics’ (2020) 26(7) Tourism Economics, 1065 1068.
• Stojkovic S, Kalinich D, and Klofas J, Criminal Justice Organizations: Administration and Management (Sixth Edition, Cengage Learning USA 2015) 58-59.
• Taeihagh A, ‘Governance of Artificial İntelligence’ (2021) 40 Policy and Society 137 157.
• Tanrıverdi A, ‘Yapay Zekânın Kamu Hizmetinin Sunumuna Etkileri’ (2021) 66(1), Adalet Dergisi, 293 311.
• Thielscher Mi, Reasoning Robots The Art and Science of Programming Robotic Agents, (3300 AA Dordrecht, Netherlands 2005) 1.
• Topraklı A, ‘Türkiye Mahkeme Yönetim Sistemine Uyumlu Adliye Tasarımı: Ordu Ek Adliyesi Örneği’ (2019) 5(44) International Social Sciences Studies Journal, 4924 4925.
• Uzun M, Big Questions Of Artificial Intelligence (AI) In Publıc Administration and Public Policy (Master’s Thesis, Hacettepe University Ankara: 2021) 67-68.
• Wilson D, Olaghere A, and Kimbrell C, Effectiveness of Restorative Justice Principles in Juvenile Justice: A MetaAnalysis (U.S. Department of Justice, George Mason University, USA 2017) 4.
• Yılmaz G, ‘Yapay Zekânın Yargı Sistemlerinde Kullanılmasına İlişkin Avrupa Etik Şartı’, (2020) 28(1) Marmara Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi 27 31.
• Yılmaz O, ‘Yargı Uygulamasında Yapay Zekâ Kullanımı – Yapay Zekâ Hâkim Cübbesini Giyebilecek Mi?’ (2021) 66(1), Adalet Dergisi 377 383.