İdarenin Yargı Dışı Denetim Yollarının Etkinliği

Abstract

The principle of the rule of law considers the existence of audit activity necessary in order to prevent the administration from acting against the law. Obligation to audit the administration does not prevent administrative acts from benefiting from the presumption of legality. For this reason, it is legally possible and obligatory to audit the actions and transactions to be carried out by the administration, which benefits from the presumption of compliance with the law and has the authority to take enforcement action. Although the basis of the said control is based on the judiciary, today, non-judicial control methods show their own existence and increase their importance. However, although non-judicial review methods are not binding in their decisions as a rule, they offer attractive opportunities compared to judicial review. For this reason, the ombudsman institution and similar human rights institutions reinforce their activities in Western legal systems. In the face of these developments, while Turkey has functionally contributed to administrative and political audits, which are among the means of extrajudicial control, it has been late in establishing human rights institutions at the national level. Although new human rights institutions have been established in our country, especially in the last ten years, these institutions have some institutional and functional deficiencies. This study focuses on the structural and functional effectiveness of the new human rights institutions, which were established within the scope of the differences in supervision of the administration through judicial and non-judicial means.