İdari yargıda mahkeme kararlarının uygulanmasının yargı kararları bağlamında incelenmesi
Examination of the implementation of court decisions in administrative jurisdiction in the context of judicial decisions
Yazar: AHMET HÜSREV VURAL
Danışman: DR. ÖĞR. ÜYESİ DİLHUN AYAYDIN
Çankaya Üniversitesi / Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü / Kamu Hukuku Ana Bilim Dalı / Kamu Hukuku Bilim Dalı
Derece: Yüksek Lisans, 2024
Konu: Hukuk = Law

Özet:
Bu çalışmada idari yargı mercilerince verilen kararların kimler tarafından hangi sürede uygulanması gerektiği, uygulanmamasının nasıl ortaya çıktığı, kararların uygulanmasına ilişkin hukuki güvencelerin neler olduğu ve kararların uygulanmaması durumunda buna sebep olanların sorumluğuna değinilecek, mahkeme kararlarının uygulanmamasının sebep olduğu zararların tazmin edilebilme koşullarının belirlenmesi ile buna ilişkin yargı kararlarının değerlendirilmesi ve kararlarda ortaya konulan ölçütlerin değerlendirilmesi amacıyla çalışma yapılacak olup buna ilişkin olarak karar ve mahkeme kavramı, kararların icrai şekli, meydana gelen zarar, zarar ile eylem veya eylemsizlik arasındaki illiyet bağı, konuyla ilgili yargı kararlarıyla belirlenen ölçütler, literatür taraması yapılarak bilimsel eserlerden, doktrinden ve yargı kararlarından yararlanmak suretiyle tez yazımı gerçekleştirilecektir.

Abstract:
In the second article of the 1982 Constitution, which defines the characteristics
of the Republic, it is stated that the Republic of Turkey is a "state of law." A state of
law is one in which individuals' rights and freedoms are secured, the state is subject to
legal rules in all its components, and the legal security of both individuals and society
is ensured. The fundamental element of a state of law is that all administrative
activities must be conducted in accordance with legal rules, and the administration
itself must be constrained by the law. The most important requirement of a state of law
is that all actions and decisions of the administration are subject to judicial review.
While it is crucial that the actions and decisions of the administration are
subject to judicial review, it is equally important that the administration promptly
executes the decisions made by judicial authorities. The existence of a decision in the
legal realm can only be proven by the execution of that decision.
The judicial oversight of the administration, which can be conducted in various
ways, can only be achieved by the administration's timely and full execution of the
decisions made by administrative judicial authorities, except in cases of factual or legal
impossibility. According to the imperative legal rules stated in Article 138 of the
Constitution, it is a constitutional obligation for the administration to promptly
implement judicial decisions. The administration must comply with judicial decisions
and take action or establish procedures according to the requirements of these
decisions, which is also a necessity for being a state of law. The administration has no
discretion in the implementation of court decisions; it must implement these decisions
"exactly" and "without delay."
In the decisions of the Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human
Rights, it has been recognized that the right to seek legal remedies and the right to a
fair trial, as expressed in Article 36 of the Constitution, not only includes the right to
make claims and defenses before judicial authorities but also encompasses the right to
obtain what one is entitled to at the end of the trial. The right to execute the decision
is considered an element of the right to a fair trial, along with the right to access the
court and the right to a decision. Although the execution of court decisions is outside
the scope of the trial, it is a complementary element that ensures the trial produces
results.
It is stipulated in the Paragraph 1 of Article 28 of the Procedure of
Administrative Justice Act No. 2577 that the administration is obliged to take action
or take action without delay in accordance with the requirements of the decisions of
the Council of State, regional administrative courts, administrative and tax courts on
the merits and suspension of execution, and that this period cannot exceed 30 (thirty)
days as of the notification of the decision to the administration. In the face of the
aforementioned principle, the administration has no other option but to implement a
judicial decision that is applicable according to the material and legal conditions
"exactly" and "without delay" and it is undoubted that the responsibility of the
administration will arise in case the Court decisions are not fulfilled within the period
specified in the Law. Accordingly, it is clear that the refusal of the administration to
implement the judicial decision, which is a constitutional obligation, will also be in the
nature of a service defect of the administration.
The subject of this study is "Studying the Implementation of Court Decisions in
Administrative Jurisdiction in the Context of Judicial Decisions". For this reason,
firstly, the concept of court is mentioned, the courts operating in the administrative
jurisdiction are briefly introduced, then the types of judicial decisions in the field of
administrative jurisdiction in Türkiye, their applications and the cases of liability that
may arise in case of non-implementation of the said judicial decisions and their legal
bases are put forward, and the attitude of the judiciary in the cases filed against the
non-implementation of court decisions is set forth by reviewing their decisions.
Keywords: Rule of law, Administrative judicial authorities and decisions,
Right to a fair trial, Right to execution of the decision