Statute of Limitations for Administrative Penalties

Turan Yıldırım

Makale detayları

Statute of Limitations for Administrative Penalties

Yazarlar:

Turan Yıldırım

Yayıncı:

Istanbul University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hukuk (Diğer)

Dergi:

İdare Hukuku ve İlimleri Dergisi Issue 22, pp.25-46

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001315513

pISSN:

2687-2897

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 The statute of limitations for administrative penalties is not as thoroughly regulated as criminal penalties. Since Article 38 of the Constitution is applicable to administrative offenses and penalties, there exists a notable gap, particularly in disciplinary actions taken against certain professionals. Legislative provisions must be introduced to safeguard members of specific professions from facing disciplinary measures after years have elapsed. This outcome can be easily achieved by amending relevant laws to address the temporal aspects of disciplinary penalties. The insufficient statute of limitations for civil servants and academicians is another pressing concern. Emphasizing the capacity to take action anew following the annulment of monetary and disciplinary penalties by the administrative judiciary is crucial, as it overrides statutory limitations in administrative penalties. Despite the absence of an explicit provision, the Council of State recognizes that filing a lawsuit interrupts the statute of limitations, rendering it inapplicable during the annulment proceedings. Nevertheless, as the Higher Education Law exemplifies, the statute of limitations is not disrupted by the filing of a lawsuit if time is allowed for the re-imposition of disciplinary penalties on annulment decisions. The legislative will move toward this direction but the judiciary sometimes assumes the existence of a gap and diverges to impose conditions that could curtail fundamental rights and freedoms. Attempts made by judicial decisions to address this presumed legislative gap have evoked legal difficulties that have resulted in practices that are incongruent with the lawful properties of annulment decisions and have transformed the judiciary into an advisory body for administrations. Consequently, a comprehensive legislative approach is imperative to address the statute of limitations in administrative penalties and all associated sanctions.

 The statute of limitations for administrative penalties is not as thoroughly regulated as criminal penalties. Since Article 38 of the Constitution is applicable to administrative offenses and penalties, there exists a notable gap, particularly in disciplinary actions taken against certain professionals. Legislative provisions must be introduced to safeguard members of specific professions from facing disciplinary measures after years have elapsed. This outcome can be easily achieved by amending relevant laws to address the temporal aspects of disciplinary penalties. The insufficient statute of limitations for civil servants and academicians is another pressing concern. Emphasizing the capacity to take action anew following the annulment of monetary and disciplinary penalties by the administrative judiciary is crucial, as it overrides statutory limitations in administrative penalties. Despite the absence of an explicit provision, the Council of State recognizes that filing a lawsuit interrupts the statute of limitations, rendering it inapplicable during the annulment proceedings. Nevertheless, as the Higher Education Law exemplifies, the statute of limitations is not disrupted by the filing of a lawsuit if time is allowed for the re-imposition of disciplinary penalties on annulment decisions. The legislative will move toward this direction but the judiciary sometimes assumes the existence of a gap and diverges to impose conditions that could curtail fundamental rights and freedoms. Attempts made by judicial decisions to address this presumed legislative gap have evoked legal difficulties that have resulted in practices that are incongruent with the lawful properties of annulment decisions and have transformed the judiciary into an advisory body for administrations. Consequently, a comprehensive legislative approach is imperative to address the statute of limitations in administrative penalties and all associated sanctions.

 The statute of limitations for administrative penalties is not as thoroughly regulated as criminal penalties. Since Article 38 of the Constitution is applicable to administrative offenses and penalties, there exists a notable gap, particularly in disciplinary actions taken against certain professionals. Legislative provisions must be introduced to safeguard members of specific professions from facing disciplinary measures after years have elapsed. This outcome can be easily achieved by amending relevant laws to address the temporal aspects of disciplinary penalties. The insufficient statute of limitations for civil servants and academicians is another pressing concern. Emphasizing the capacity to take action anew following the annulment of monetary and disciplinary penalties by the administrative judiciary is crucial, as it overrides statutory limitations in administrative penalties. Despite the absence of an explicit provision, the Council of State recognizes that filing a lawsuit interrupts the statute of limitations, rendering it inapplicable during the annulment proceedings. Nevertheless, as the Higher Education Law exemplifies, the statute of limitations is not disrupted by the filing of a lawsuit if time is allowed for the re-imposition of disciplinary penalties on annulment decisions. The legislative will move toward this direction but the judiciary sometimes assumes the existence of a gap and diverges to impose conditions that could curtail fundamental rights and freedoms. Attempts made by judicial decisions to address this presumed legislative gap have evoked legal difficulties that have resulted in practices that are incongruent with the lawful properties of annulment decisions and have transformed the judiciary into an advisory body for administrations. Consequently, a comprehensive legislative approach is imperative to address the statute of limitations in administrative penalties and all associated sanctions.

 İdari cezalarda zamanaşımı, adli suç ve cezalardaki gibi ayrıntılı düzenlenmemiştir. Anayasanın 38. maddesindeki ilkeler idari suç ve cezalarda da geçerli olduğuna göre bu boşluğun doldurulması gerekmektedir. Bazı meslek mensuplarına verilecek disiplin cezalarında böyle bir boşluk olduğu görülmektedir. Bu meslek mensuplarının meslek mensubunun seneler sonra disiplin işlemine maruz kalmaması için kanunla düzenleme yapılması gerekmektedir. İlgili yasalara eklenecek bir hükümle bu sorun kolayca çözülebilir. Memurlar, üniversite görevlileri bakımından göze çarpan bir başka problem ise zamanaşımı sürelerinin kısalığıdır. Hakimler ve Savcılar Kanunu zamanaşımı süreleri bakımından iyi bir örnek oluşturmaktadır. Para ve disiplin cezalarının idari yargı tarafından iptali halinde yeniden işlem yapılabileceğinin kabulünün, idari cezalarda zamanaşımı düzenlemelerinin içini boşalttığı için üzerinde durulmalıdır. Kanunda açık hüküm olmadığı halde Danıştay, dava açılmasıyla zamanaşımı süresinin kesildiğini; iptal davası sürecinde zamanaşımı süresinin işlemeyeceğini kabul eden karar vermektedir. Yükseköğretim Kanunu örneğinde olduğu gibi iptal kararı üzerine yeniden disiplin cezası tesisi için süre tanınması, dava açılmasıyla zamanaşımı süresinin kesilmediğini gösterir. Yasama iradesi, bu yöndedir. Ancak yargı, boşluk olduğu kanaatiyle olsa gerek, aksi yönde karar vererek temel hak ve hürriyetleri sınırlayıcı düzenleme yapmaktadır. Kanuni düzenleme eksikliğinin yargı kararlarıyla doldurulmaya çalışılması ise başka hukuki sorunlar ortaya çıkarmıştır. İptal kararlarının hukuki niteliğiyle bağdaşmayan, yargıyı idarenin danışmanı haline sokan uygulamalara rastlanmaktadır. Bu sebeple idari cezalarda ve tüm idari yaptırımlarda zamanaşımı konusu, kanun koyucu tarafından ayrıntılı şekilde düzenlenmelidir.

Makale detayları

Statute of Limitations for Administrative Penalties

Yazarlar:

Turan Yıldırım

Yayıncı:

Istanbul University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hukuk (Diğer)

Dergi:

İdare Hukuku ve İlimleri Dergisi Issue 22, pp.25-46

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001315513

pISSN:

2687-2897

Administrative sanction

Statute of limitations

Power to restrict rights and freedoms

Judicial interpretation

Enforcement of judicial decisionİdari yaptırım

Zamanaşımı

Hak ve hürriyetlerin sınırlandırılması yetkisi

Yargı yorumu

Yargı kararının uygulanması

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Turan Yıldırım

Yayıncı: Istanbul University

Ana Başlıklar: Hukuk (Diğer)

Dergi: İdare Hukuku ve İlimleri Dergisi Issue 22, pp.25-46

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 12/2023

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2001315513

pISSN: 2687-2897

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Turan Yıldırım

Yayıncı:

Istanbul University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hukuk (Diğer)

Dergi:

İdare Hukuku ve İlimleri Dergisi Issue 22, pp.25-46

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001315513

pISSN:

2687-2897