İdari Uyuşmazlıklarda Tarafların Kişilik veya Niteliklerinin Değişmesi Hallerinin Kapsam ve Sonuçlarının İdari Yargılama Usulüne Hâkim Olan İlkeler Bakımından Değerlendirilmesi
Cihan Yüzbaşıoğluİdari yargıda yargılama devam ederken davanın tarafının ölüm ya da başka bir sebeple değişmesinin yargılamanın devamı ve yargılama hukuku işlemleri üzerinde önemli sonuçları bulunmaktadır. Davanın tarafının kişiliğinde veya niteliğinde meydana gelen değişiklik üzerine bazı hallerde yargılama sona ermekte, bazı hallerde ise askıya alınmaktadır. Bunun yanında, davanın tarafında değişiklik meydana gelmesine karşın mahkemenin yargılama hukuku işlemlerine devam etmesi veya yargılama hukuku işlemlerinin uzun bir süre boyunca askıda kalması davanın tarafları ya da üçüncü kişilerin hak ve menfaatleri üzerinde sonuçlar yaratabilmektedir. Diğer yandan, davanın tarafının kişilik veya niteliğindeki değişikliğin tespitinin idari yargılama hukuku kurallarının yanında medeni hukuk, eşya hukuku ve ticaret hukuku ile de ilişkili olması, konunun multidisipliner bir yaklaşımla incelenmesini zorunlu kılmaktadır. Konunun özel hukuk ile doğrudan ilişkili olmasının yanında hem ilk derece yargılaması hem de kanun yolu aşamasında uygulamasının olması pek çok farklı ihtimale yönelik çözüm üretilmesini gerekli kılmaktadır. İdari yargıda taraf değişikliğinin bu karmaşık niteliğine karşın, konunun düzenlendiği 2577 sayılı İdari Yargılama Usulü Kanunu’nun 26. maddesi oldukça soyut ve ihtiyaçlara cevap vermekten uzaktır. Boşluklar içtihat yoluyla doldurulmaya çalışılmışsa da yargı kararlarının tutarlı olduğunun kabulü güçtür. Bu durum başta hak arama özgürlüğü olmak üzere, idari yargılama hukukunun tabi olduğu idari istikrar, usul ekonomisi ve silahların eşitliği ilkeleriyle bağdaşmayan, bu ilkelerin çelişmesine veya yarışmasına yol açan sonuçların ortaya çıkmasına sebep olabilmektedir.
Evaluating the Scope and Consequences of Substituting Party Qualities or Status in Administrative Disputes in Terms of the Principles Governing Administrative Procedural Law
Cihan YüzbaşıoğluIn administrative justice, the substitution of parties due to death or any other reason while a process is still pending has important consequences on how procedural acts will continue and which rules of procedural law will be applied. Due to changes in the qualities or status of a party to a case, courts sometimes end and other times suspend proceedings. Meanwhile, a court’s decision to continue or suspend for an extended time procedural acts despite a party substitution may have consequences regarding the rights or interests of the parties to the case and those of third parties. However, determining whether or not a change has occurred in parties’ qualities or status is a matter related to civil, property, and commercial law, which requires examining the issue with a multidisciplinary approach. In addition to the concept being directly related to private law, its application both at first instance and at appeal proceedings requires finding solutions for many different scenarios. Despite the complex nature of the matter, Article 26 of Türkiye’s Administrative Procedure Act, which regulates the substitution of parties, is far from able to respond to the needs. Although attempts have been made to fill the gaps through jurisprudence, difficulty is had in accepting that judicial decisions are consistent. This situation causes results that are incompatible with the principles of administrative procedural law, such as administrative stability, procedural economy, equality of arms, and especially the right to access the court; it also leads to conflicts or struggles among these principles.
In administrative justice, the substitution of parties due to death or any other reason while a process is still pending has important consequences on how proceeding will continue and which rules of procedural law will be applied. Determining whether a change in a party’s qualities or status has occurred is a matter related to civil law, property law, and commercial law, thus requiring the issue to be examined with a multidisciplinary approach. Therefore, the concept of the substitution of parties and its consequences have been interpreted in line with the requirements of public law and have gained an original appearance in the jurisprudence of Türkiye’s Council of State (Danıştay). In addition to its direct relationship with private law, applying a substitution of parties both at the first instance and at appeal proceedings requires finding solutions for many different scenarios. Despite the complex nature of the matter, Article 26 of the Administrative Procedure Act, which regulates the substitution of parties in administrative justice, is quite abstract and far from able to respond to what is needed. Although attempts have been made to fill the gaps through jurisprudence, this situation has led to results that are incompatible with the principles of administrative procedural law, such as administrative stability, procedural economy, equality of arms, and especially the right to access the court; this also creates conflict or competition among these principles.
This study first focuses on the consequences of a decision to suspend proceedings. On one hand, this has positive results regarding the right to access the court and compliance with the principle of equality of arms. On the other hand, negative results arise that are incompatible with the principle of procedural economy and administrative stability. Upon suspending proceedings, the court not only suspends the case for a long period of time but also fails to reach a final decision. This legal uncertainty has consequences not only on the rights and interests of the parties to the case but also to those of third parties.
The next part of this study analyzes the validity of procedural acts when a substitution of parties occurs. Determining whether or not a change has occurred in a party’s qualities or status is a matter for private law. This is why the administrative judge may sometimes not be informed of this substitution, whether practically or legally, and continues with the proceedings. In such cases, the validity of these procedural acts comes under question. In practice, Türkiye’s Council of State (Danıştay) has interpreted the rules of private law in line with the requirements of public law. However, judicial decisions should be noted as being inconsistent with one another, as well as to also go against the principles of administrative procedural law.
The study’s second section concerns cases where the court is unable to suspend proceedings and annuls the petition. In some cases, the court decides to end proceedings pursuant to the changes in the qualities of the party to the case. Petitions that concern only a deceased person are to be annulled. Because the notion of “petitions that concern only a deceased person” is not described in the text of Article 26 of the Administrative Procedure Act, administrative courts and the Council of State decide whether to continue or end proceedings based on a case’s individual circumstances. According to jurisprudence, if the process concerns the rights of the inheritors of the deceased party, the court is to decide to suspend the proceedings. Otherwise, the petition is annulled. In administrative justice, decisions taken regarding actions for the annulment of administrative acts impact not only the parties of the litigation but also the legal status of third parties. In addition, some actions in administrative justice are directly related to the public interest. The current legal framework doesn’t allow for cases that have no monetary interest for the inheritors of the parties to continue, nor those that don’t comply with the aims of the actions for annulment.
In conclusion, the current legislation regulating the substitution of parties due to death or any other reason for a process that is still pending is noted as being insufficient. Moreover, jurisprudential solutions are unpredictable and inconsistent. Therefore, this study has attempted to outline the solutions in comparative law and their applicability in Turkish Law, with special emphasis on French Law where the principles of administrative stability, procedural economy, and the right to access the court have been balanced effectively. These solutions are believed to be able to serve as a guide in eliminating some of the deficiencies in the Turkish legislation. In addition, the study underlines that harmonization and unification of the Council of State’s jurisprudence will also provide significant benefits.
