Page 243 - kdk-sempozyum-3

procedures. I just wanted to share this recommendation which is a
vital one.
Another recommendation is about the retirement compensation
paid at once to citizens upon their retirement. The subject matter of
the complaint is `balancing justice` and in this sense, an interesting
decision has been adopted. The judiciary points at the implementation
of the judgement. The judiciary detected that an amount less than the
regular rate was paid to the retired person and it was ruled that the
public administration shall compensate the discrepancy; so did the
public organization. Nonetheless, this remedy was not eliminating
unfairness because the amount to be paid applied to the power
of purchasing of the time. Therefore, the discrepancy to be paid
should have been calculated on the basis of the current rates and
the judgement does not aimed delivery of compensation but rather
provision of fairness bringing up an opening regarding a legal rule that
the public organizations must comply with.
This is not something appearing the agenda upon that judgement but
it is an important one in guiding the public sector in view of scope and
meaning of the verdict, laying legal grounds, clarifying better the area
in which the verdict will be implemented and constituting grounds
about such matters. 3 rd INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON OMBUDSMAN INSTITUTIONS
According to another judgement no 2013/100 demonstrates that
the administrative law keeps abreast with the developments taking
place in its field. This judgement puts forward how law-maker makes
a distinction between the pardoning of a disciplinary sanction and
the entitlement of a victim to indemnity for the period of time up
to the application of the victim who claims compensation and legal
paradigms are very well revealed. This also applies to the concept of
mobility of the administrative law as well as other legal spheres.
Very quickly, let me cover the judgement no 2014/4718 about mobbing.
A new evidence standard is brought by this ruling and such standards
are not debated in Turkish law. There is only one paper written about
it. In administrative law in Turkey, evidence or proof issue has not
been elaborated that much and there are significant confusions. This
ruling brings up a contemporary concept that is debated in Anglo-
Saxon legal order and expresses that in case of mobbing, a proof in its

16 - 17 September 2015, ANKARA | 241