ON THE MATTER OF VIOLATION OF THE RIGHT TO FAIR TRIAL DUE TO “MANIFEST ARBITRARINESS” AND “OBVIOUS ERROR OF JUDICIAL DISCRETION

ArticleAçık Erişim

Özet

This article explores the concepts of “manifest arbitrariness” and “obvious error of judicial discretion” at fi rst. In addition, it is inquired whether it is appropriate for the TCC (Turkish Constitutional Court) and the ECtHR (European Court of Human Rights) to ground on this criterion in the admissibility and material review of the right to a fair trial. Moreover, while the court itself does not follow the same procedure, we have discussed the criteria of “manifest arbitrariness and obvious error of judicial discretion” in terms of both the procedural and the material aspect of the right to a fair trial. Finally, taking into account the case-law of the TCC and the ECtHR, the elements that served to diff erentiate the ordinary discretionary power of local and national courts and the judgements carrying “manifest arbitrariness and obvious error of judicial discretion” were examined. It was found that courts used this criterion in a way that both procedurally and materially leads uncertainty and instability. Some suggestions were also provided in the article within the scope of these fi ndings.

Anahtar Kelimeler

RDL Kalıcı Bağlantı (PID)
https://rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net/r/ebyu/17950Resmi atıflarda kullanılan kalıcı adres
DOI
https://doi.org/10.34246/ahbvuhfd.933606Yayıncı resmi DOI adresi
Tam Kayıt
AlanDeğerDil
dc.contributor.authorKOKUSARI, ISMAIL
dc.date.accessioned2026-10-18T20:56:16.086128076Z
dc.date.available2026-10-18T20:56:16.086128076Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.description.abstractThis article explores the concepts of “manifest arbitrariness” and “obvious error of judicial discretion” at fi rst. In addition, it is inquired whether it is appropriate for the TCC (Turkish Constitutional Court) and the ECtHR (European Court of Human Rights) to ground on this criterion in the admissibility and material review of the right to a fair trial. Moreover, while the court itself does not follow the same procedure, we have discussed the criteria of “manifest arbitrariness and obvious error of judicial discretion” in terms of both the procedural and the material aspect of the right to a fair trial. Finally, taking into account the case-law of the TCC and the ECtHR, the elements that served to diff erentiate the ordinary discretionary power of local and national courts and the judgements carrying “manifest arbitrariness and obvious error of judicial discretion” were examined. It was found that courts used this criterion in a way that both procedurally and materially leads uncertainty and instability. Some suggestions were also provided in the article within the scope of these fi ndings.
dc.identifier.doi10.34246/ahbvuhfd.933606
dc.identifier.eissn2667-4068
dc.identifier.endpage667
dc.identifier.issn2651-4141
dc.identifier.issue2
dc.identifier.startpage623
dc.identifier.urihttps://rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net/r/ebyu/17950
dc.identifier.volume25
dc.language.isotr
dc.relation.ispartofAnkara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subjectHukuk
dc.titleON THE MATTER OF VIOLATION OF THE RIGHT TO FAIR TRIAL DUE TO “MANIFEST ARBITRARINESS” AND “OBVIOUS ERROR OF JUDICIAL DISCRETION
dc.typeArticle
dspace.entity.typePublication
rdl.citation.trdizin2
rdl.departmentERZİNCAN BİNALİ YILDIRIM ÜNİVERSİTESİ
rdl.source.indexTRDIZIN