Page 132 - iyi-yonetim-ilkleri
P. 132

Manual On Good Administration Principles



                                       Case Studies



               Case 1: In the Decision of the 4th Chamber of the Council of State dated
               13/11/2006 and numbered 2005/2134 E., 2006/2156 K., it was stated that
               the order of payment communicated to the plaintiff did not indicate the
               term of litigation, which was specified as 7 days by law, and that the plaintiff
               made a counterclaim against the order of claim around 28 days later.

               As a result of the examination of the case, it was stated that indication
               of  the  legal  remedies  and  authorities  the  persons  concerned  should
               apply and time limits of the application was a constitutional obligation,
               that considering the terms of litigation and other special regulations with
               respect to it, in terms of protection of the right to legal remedies of the
               individuals  with  respect  to  very  complexed  legislation,  failure  to  abide
               by  this  obligation  was  contrary  to  Article  40  of  the  Constitution,  which
               regulated  the  protection  of  the  rights  and  freedoms  of  the  individuals;
               therefore, as the order of payment did not contain the information about
               the terms of litigation, which was 7 days as per the provision in its special
               law, which must in fact be stated in the order of payment, exceeding the
               terms of litigation cannot be mentioned.
               In  addition,  the  Ombudsman  Institution  attaches  particular  importance
               to  whether  the  administrations  act  in  compliance  with  the  principle  of
               “indication of appeal possibilities” and it recommends the administrations
               the compliance with this principle in many of its decisions. Indeed, there are
               decisions of the Ombudsman Institution, where the Institution recommends
               acting  in  compliance  with  the  subject  principle  as  the  administration
               is found not to have conformed to the principle of “indication of appeal
               possibilities” due to the administrations’ failure to indicate the authorities
               that the persons concerned should apply and time limits of the application
               (decision dated 29/08/2019 on the application no. 2019/7498, decision
               dated 06/09/2019on the application no. 2019/6610 etc.).




















                                                                                131
   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137