An Examination Regarding the Implementation of Independent and Impartial Tribunal Principle in Tax Courts

Alper Aydın

Makale detayları

An Examination Regarding the Implementation of Independent and Impartial Tribunal Principle in Tax Courts

Yazarlar:

Alper Aydın

Yayıncı:

Necmettin Erbakan University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hukuk

Dergi:

Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.6 Issue 2, pp.449-466

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001296088

pISSN:

2667-4076

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 Being a state of law necessitates the principle of independent and impartial tribunal, which is a constitutional right in our nation. It is a crucial assurance of the justice systems dependability. Thanks to this assurance, the establishment of a court specific to the person and the case and the making of a trial are prevented. The aforementioned assurance has emerged in the historical process and is a constitutional guarantee that has been in effect in our country since 1876. The independent and impartial tribunal principle is implemented by the Constitutional Court as the principle of natural judge. In comparison to the independent and impartial tribunal principle, the natural judge principle provides more comprehensive protection. The principle of natural judge is also a requirement for rule of law. Because the Constitutional Courts interpretation is accurate, in our study, only the concept of independent and impartial tribunal principle was used to ensure the meanings integrity. Tax courts were also established by law and are in accordance with the independent and impartial tribunal principle, and the trial procedures are also regulated by law. However, due to some situations arising from practice and legislation, problems arise regarding the independent and impartial tribunal principle applied in the tax court. These problems are the change of the monetary limit regarding the files to be resolved by a single judge and the appeal law, related cases, the application of Article 5 of the Law No. 2577, the change of the jurisdiction and authorized court, the cases renewed upon the rejection of the petition, the change of the file transfer andor the committee. In the study, the independent and impartial tribunal principle was first reviewed, and the historical change and growth process in our nation were studied by pointing out how it differed from the natural judge principle. The independent and impartial tribunal assurance used in the tax court was then reviewed, and remedies were offered by taking into account the issues encountered within the purview of this assurance. Finally, the studys findings were presented together with a summary of the suggested fixes.

 Being a state of law necessitates the principle of independent and impartial tribunal, which is a constitutional right in our nation. It is a crucial assurance of the justice systems dependability. Thanks to this assurance, the establishment of a court specific to the person and the case and the making of a trial are prevented. The aforementioned assurance has emerged in the historical process and is a constitutional guarantee that has been in effect in our country since 1876. The independent and impartial tribunal principle is implemented by the Constitutional Court as the principle of natural judge. In comparison to the independent and impartial tribunal principle, the natural judge principle provides more comprehensive protection. The principle of natural judge is also a requirement for rule of law. Because the Constitutional Courts interpretation is accurate, in our study, only the concept of independent and impartial tribunal principle was used to ensure the meanings integrity. Tax courts were also established by law and are in accordance with the independent and impartial tribunal principle, and the trial procedures are also regulated by law. However, due to some situations arising from practice and legislation, problems arise regarding the independent and impartial tribunal principle applied in the tax court. These problems are the change of the monetary limit regarding the files to be resolved by a single judge and the appeal law, related cases, the application of Article 5 of the Law No. 2577, the change of the jurisdiction and authorized court, the cases renewed upon the rejection of the petition, the change of the file transfer andor the committee. In the study, the independent and impartial tribunal principle was first reviewed, and the historical change and growth process in our nation were studied by pointing out how it differed from the natural judge principle. The independent and impartial tribunal assurance used in the tax court was then reviewed, and remedies were offered by taking into account the issues encountered within the purview of this assurance. Finally, the studys findings were presented together with a summary of the suggested fixes.

 Being a state of law necessitates the principle of independent and impartial tribunal, which is a constitutional right in our nation. It is a crucial assurance of the justice systems dependability. Thanks to this assurance, the establishment of a court specific to the person and the case and the making of a trial are prevented. The aforementioned assurance has emerged in the historical process and is a constitutional guarantee that has been in effect in our country since 1876. The independent and impartial tribunal principle is implemented by the Constitutional Court as the principle of natural judge. In comparison to the independent and impartial tribunal principle, the natural judge principle provides more comprehensive protection. The principle of natural judge is also a requirement for rule of law. Because the Constitutional Courts interpretation is accurate, in our study, only the concept of independent and impartial tribunal principle was used to ensure the meanings integrity. Tax courts were also established by law and are in accordance with the independent and impartial tribunal principle, and the trial procedures are also regulated by law. However, due to some situations arising from practice and legislation, problems arise regarding the independent and impartial tribunal principle applied in the tax court. These problems are the change of the monetary limit regarding the files to be resolved by a single judge and the appeal law, related cases, the application of Article 5 of the Law No. 2577, the change of the jurisdiction and authorized court, the cases renewed upon the rejection of the petition, the change of the file transfer andor the committee. In the study, the independent and impartial tribunal principle was first reviewed, and the historical change and growth process in our nation were studied by pointing out how it differed from the natural judge principle. The independent and impartial tribunal assurance used in the tax court was then reviewed, and remedies were offered by taking into account the issues encountered within the purview of this assurance. Finally, the studys findings were presented together with a summary of the suggested fixes.

 Kanuni hâkim güvencesi, hukuk devleti olmanın zorunlu bir sonucu olup; ülkemizde anayasal teminat altına alınmış bir güvencedir. Yargılamanın güvenirliliği açısından çok önemli bir teminattır. Bu güvence sayesinde, kişiye ve olaya özgü mahkeme kurulması ve yargılama yapılması önlenir. Söz konusu güvence tarihsel süreçte ortaya çıkmış olup, ülkemizde de 1876 yılından beridir uygulanmakta olan anayasal bir teminattır. Kanuni hâkim güvencesi Anayasa Mahkemesi tarafından doğal hâkim ilkesi olarak uygulanmaktadır. Doğal hâkim ilkesi, söz konusu güvenceye göre daha kapsamlı bir koruma sağlar. Doğal hâkim ilkesi de zaten hukuk devleti olmanın bir gereğidir. Anayasa Mahkemesinin yorumu isabetli olup; çalışmamızda, anlam bütünlüğü için sadece kanuni hâkim güvencesi kavramı kullanılmıştır. Vergi mahkemeleri de kanuni hâkim güvencesine uygun olarak kanunla kurulmuş ve yargılama usulleri yine kanunla düzenlenmiştir. Fakat uygulamadan ve mevzuattan kaynaklanan bazı durumlar sebebiyle vergi mahkemesinde uygulanan kanuni hâkim güvencesine dair sorunlar ortaya çıkmaktadır. Bu sorunlar ise, tek hâkimle çözülecek dosyalara dair ve istinaf kanun yoluna dair parasal sınırın değişmesi, bağlantılı davalar, 2577 sayılı Kanunun 5. maddesi uygulaması, görevli ve yetkili mahkemenin değişmesi, dilekçe ret üzerine yenilenen davalar, dosya havalesinin veveya heyetinin değişmesidir. Çalışmada, öncelikle, kanuni hâkim güvencesi ele alınmış ve doğal hâkim ilkesinden farkı mevzu bahis edilerek ülkemizdeki tarihsel değişim ve gelişim süreci incelenmiştir. Daha sonra ise, vergi mahkemesinde uygulanan kanuni hâkim güvencesi incelenmiş ve bu güvence kapsamında yaşanan sorunlar ele alınarak çözüm önerileri sunulmuştur. Son olarak ise, çalışmada varılan sonuçlar verilip, çözüm önerileri özetlenmiştir.

Makale detayları

An Examination Regarding the Implementation of Independent and Impartial Tribunal Principle in Tax Courts

Yazarlar:

Alper Aydın

Yayıncı:

Necmettin Erbakan University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hukuk

Dergi:

Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.6 Issue 2, pp.449-466

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001296088

pISSN:

2667-4076

Independent and Impartial Tribunal Principle

Natural Judge Principle

Tax Court

Appeal Law

Monetary Limit.kanuni hâkim güvencesi

doğal hakim ilkesi

vergi mahkemesi

istinaf kanun yolu

parasal sınır.

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Alper Aydın

Yayıncı: Necmettin Erbakan University

Ana Başlıklar: Hukuk

Dergi: Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.6 Issue 2, pp.449-466

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 12/2023

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2001296088

pISSN: 2667-4076

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Alper Aydın

Yayıncı:

Necmettin Erbakan University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hukuk

Dergi:

Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.6 Issue 2, pp.449-466

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001296088

pISSN:

2667-4076