banner
LAW ON THE ESTABLISHMENT AND FUNCTIONING OF COURT OF JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES
 67
LAW ON THE ESTABLISHMENT AND FUNCTIONING OF COURT OF JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES

LAW ON THE ESTABLISHMENT AND FUNCTIONING OF COURT OF JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES
 

Law Number : 2247
Date of Adoption: 12 June 1979
Date and Number of the Official Gazette : 22 June 1979 - 16674



CHAPTER ONE

BASIC PRINCIPLES



JURISDICTION OF THE COURT

Article 1 - Court of Jurisdictional Disputes is an independent court empowered to conclusively settle the jurisdictional and adjudicational disputes between judicial and administrative jurisdiction authorities assigned by the Constitution of the Republic of Turkey and conducting adjudication following its establishment on this legal basis.

In accordance with the Special Law, in cases when recoursing to arbitration is compulsory, this authority is assumed as one of the judicial or administrative judicial authorities indicated in the above paragraph in compliance with the subject of case, on condition that the duty of arbitration is performed by the judge.

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COURT

Article 2 – (Amended by Article 183 of Decree Law no. 703 dated 2 July 2018)

Court of Jurisdictional Disputes shall be consisted of a President along with six full and six substitute members.

President of the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes shall be elected from among full and substitute members of the Constitutional Court.

Three full and three substitute members of the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes shall be elected by the Assembly of Civil Chambers of the Court of Cassation and the General Assembly of the Council of State from among their own presidents of Chambers and members.

The quorum for meetings shall be met with the participation of substitute members in case of the full members’ failure to participate in the meetings.

ADMINISTRATION AND REPRESENTATION

Article 3 - (Amended by Article 2 of Law no. 5791 dated 23 July 2008)

Administration and representation of Court of Jurisdictional Disputes is within the President’s competence.

In the event of the Presidency’s vacancy, an excuse or permit on behalf of the President, the duties and powers of the President of Court are fulfilled and exercised by the Vice President elected and assigned from among full and substitute members of the Constitutional Court itself.

TERMS OF OFFICE, CALCULATION OF TERMS AND TIME OF ELECTIONS

Article 4 (Amended by Article 3 of Law no. 5791 dated 23 July 2008)

President, Vice President and members of Court of Jurisdictional Disputes are elected for a term of four years. Date of commencement of office is taken as basis for the calculation of this term of four years.

Elections are held in order to provide placements in lieu of vacancies due to expiration of office terms within two months before the date on which this time period terminates; whereas within two months’ time prior to the date of retirement of the person concerned in case of retirement due to expiration of age limit; regarding the vacancies coming into existence before lapse of office terms, an election is held as of the date when the vacancy arose.

Elections are re-held in the event of termination of office terms.

PLACE AND DATE OF COURT SESSIONS AND SESSION TERM

Article 5 - The President urges the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes to convene in the venue allocated for the court in the capital city. Agenda of the session is distributed to members and Chief Prosecutors dealing with jurisdictional disputes or spokespersons for the President at least three days before the session.

The President takes the measures required for execution of urgent incoming cases such as persons on whom there is a measure imposed and cases concerning the requests for stay of execution before the end of judiciary recess period.

(Paragraph 3: Amended by Article 3 of Decree Law no. 650 dated 8 August 2011; Annulled by Decision of the Constitutional Court, dated 18 July 2012 and no. E.2011/113 K.2012/108; Rearranged by Article 2 of Law no. 6494 dated 27 June 2013) The Court of Jurisdictional Disputes recedes into nonterm from twentieth of July to thirty-first of August every year and takes office on the first day of each September.

SUBMITTAL OF OPINION STATEMENTS BY CHIEF PROSECUTORS AND THEIR PARTICIPATION IN THE SESSION

Article 6 - (Amended by Article 3 of Law no. 2592 dated 21 January 1982)

Chief Prosecutors concerned and the assistants they are to assign submit their written statements of opinion either at their discretion or in cases deemed necessary by the Court or make oral statements during the sessions, they do not cast votes.

CONDITIONS WITHOUT PERMIT AS REGARDS EXECUTION AND HANDLING OF CASES

Article 7 - President and Members of the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes shall not judge the following cases and affairs;

1. Cases or matters of their own or of concern to them;

2. Cases and matters concerning their spouses even though there is no longer an affinity by marriage, the persons in their descending line with respect to blood and marriage affinity, in cases of kinship by blood up to the fourth degree (including the degree) and as for affinity by marriage, close relatives or descendants of third degree (including the degree);

3. Cases and matters in which they act in the capacity of attorney, guardian or trustee for plaintiffs and petitioners;

4. Cases and matters they dealt with their capacity as judge, prosecutor, arbitrator or on which they have submittal of statements as witness or expert;

5. Cases regarding which they have prior consultative consideration and opinion.;

ABSTENTION

Article 8 - In the event that President and members of Court of Jurisdictional Disputes make a request to abstain from dealing with a case or work on the grounds provided in Article 7, the Court conclusively decides on the issue without seeking the participation of the President and members requesting their abstention.

In case of an abstention request by the President and members in a number sufficient to prevent the Court from convening, the abstention requests of the President and members shall be accepted, on condition that their numbers will not influence the quorum.

REJECTION OF THE COURT PRESIDENT AND MEMBERS

Article 9 - President and members of Court of Jurisdictional Disputes may be rejected on account of existence of conditions justifying the conviction that they will no longer display any impartiality.

(Amended by Article 183 of Decree Law no. 703 dated 2 July 2018) Requests for the rejection of President and members of Court of Jurisdictional Disputes are reviewed in default of appearance of the rejected member of Court and adjudicated with final effect.

Rejection is personal. Collective requests for rejection preventing the Court from convening are not taken into consideration.

 

CHAPTER TWO

PETITIONING AN APPLICATION TO COURT OF JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES AND PRINCIPLES FOR EXAMINATION

 

AROUSAL OF POSITIVE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES

Article 10 - Raising a positive jurisdictional dispute is a request submitted to the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes by the related Chief Prosecutor or Chief Law Officer for the review of jurisdiction at issue upon rejection of objection of a jurisdictional duty contended in a case filed before a judicial and administrative jurisdiction authority.

For a competent Chief Prosecutor or Chief Law Officer to submit a request to the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes, the jurisdictional objection must be raised in the first session at the latest in civil courts and, as for administrative venues of judiciary, prior to the completion of petition and defence phase; besides, it is obligatory that the venues of judiciary also judge for their own jurisdiction.

In case of a decision of lack of jurisdiction rendered by the judicial authority reasoning its grounds as proper, a review to be conducted by the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes on the jurisdiction depends on the reversal of this judgement subsequent to an appeal and the existence of a decision rendered by the judicial authority for the jurisdiction upon compliance with the reversal.

The authority empowered to request for a dispute is the Chief Public Prosecutor, provided that the objection rejected concerning lack of jurisdiction is raised in favour of the judiciary, and the Spokesperson for President of the State Council has competence, if raised in favour of administrative jurisdiction.

(Paragraph 5: Repealed by Article 183 of Decree Law no. 703 dated 2 July 2018)

CONDITIONS ON WHICH NO DISPUTE SHALL BE RAISED

Article 11 - No jurisdictional dispute is in question in the following cases:

a) Cases dealt by the Constitutional Court in its capacity as the Grand Council.

b) Closure cases of political parties filed at the Constitutional Court.

PROCEDURES TO BE CONDUCTED BY THE JUDICIAL AUTHORITY

Article 12 – The person or authority raising jurisdictional objection shall submit in two copies and within 15 days starting from the date of rejection of their objection, from the date of notification of the decision if such a notification is required, and from the date of finalization of the decision of rejection in criminal cases that can be appealed, to the judicial authority rejecting the objection in order for them to be submitted to the authority empowered to request for a dispute.

The competent judicial authority shall notify a copy of the petition as well as its annexes if any to the other party to receive a reply. The notified party shall be deemed to have waived the reply, if it fails to notify its reply within the allowed time period.

(Paragraph 3: Amended by Article 4 of Law no. 5791) On condition that the competent authority does not render a decision of lack of jurisdiction by abolishing the decision on rejection to objection rendered upon receival of an appeal petition; it transmits the petition submitted for the purposes of transfer to related authority, the response given and its decision on the rejection of objection to lack of jurisdiction to the authority empowered to submit for raising a jurisdictional dispute, together with certified copies of content in the case document.

One application shall solely be lodged for raising dispute in a case.

PROCEDURES TO BE FULFILLED BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY EMPOWERED TO SUBMIT FOR RAISING A JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTE

Article 13 - (First Clause: Amended by Article 5 of Law no. 5791 dated 23 July 2008) The competent authority receiving the petition and its attachments contending a jurisdictional dispute rejects the request if it deems necessary after the completion in the petition or documents attached, on condition that it concludes existence of no grounds for raising a dispute or identifies a lapse of time prescribed in paragraph 1 of Article 12 concerning the application lodged. This judgement is promptly notified to the persons or authority concerned and the related judicial authority. No application is to be lodged to any judicial authority against this judgement.

As for cases where contending a jurisdictional dispute is deemed necessary, the competent authority transmits its statement of opinion including reasons justifying its views, prepared no later than ten days as of the date when deficiencies are eliminated, to The Court of Jurisdictional Disputes along with the petition and documents appended thereto, if the authority at issue has resorted to completion of deficiencies as of submittal of the petition and its attachments and transmitted the letters issued on this purpose to mail delivery within ten days and further more informs the related judicial authority of its application to the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes without delay. (Clause added by Article 5 of Law no. 5791 dated 23 July 2008) In this case, the related judicial authority postpones execution of the case as provided in Article 18.

President of the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes communicates the statement of his opinions and its annexes to the competent Chief Prosecutor or Chief Law Officer, depending on the judicial authority rejecting the objection regarding the lack of jurisdiction. If the addressee authority intends to reply, it shall reply in writing within 7 days.

NEGATIVE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTE

Article 14 - For contending the existence of a negative jurisdictional dispute, the parties from judicial and administrative jurisdiction authorities, as regards a case whose subject and reason are the same, their consideration concerning a lack of jurisdiction and finalization or conclusiveness of the decisions rendered are required.

Request for eliminating a jurisdictional dispute shall only be made by the parties involved in the case.

ACTIONS TO BE TAKEN BY THE JUDICIAL AUTHORITY

Article 15 - (Amended by Article 6 of Law no. 5791 dated 23 July 2008)

Case documents on negative jurisdictional disputes are transmitted to the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes by the judicial authority rendering the final judgement on lack of jurisdiction after the finalization of this judgement upon the request of one of the parties by obtaining the case file belonging to the judicial authority rendering the initial judgement on lack of jurisdiction and indication of the judicial authority having jurisdiction is requested.

ACTIONS TO BE TAKEN BY THE COURT OF JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES

Article 16 - (Amended by Article 5 of Law no. 2592 dated 21 January 1982)

Court of Jurisdictional Disputes renders its own decision indicating the competent judicial authority, both at the stage of preliminary examination of the files related to negative jurisdictional disputes and in cases where it deems necessary by receiving the statements of opinion of related Chief Prosecutors as well.

POSITIVE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTE AND THE PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWED

Article 17 - A positive jurisdictional dispute comes into existence when both judicial authorities separate in terms of their affiliation to judicial and administrative jurisdictions, before which cases whose parties, subjects and causes are the same, are filed render decisions for acceptance/recognition of their own jurisdiction.

(Paragraph 2: Amended by Article 7 of Law no. 5791 dated 23 July 2008) The judicial authority to which one of the parties lodge an application through a petition to be prepared in copies outnumbering the parties by two for the request of elimination of a positive jurisdictional dispute;

a) promptly informs the other judicial authority of a copy of the petition and its attachments, if there are any, by a letter and asks for the transmittal of the case file.

b) notifies the adverse party and related authorities of the other petitions and the appended documents, if any, so as to be given a response in respect thereof within seven days.

c) transmits the petition, responses received and their attachments, if any, as well as case files to the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes and requests indication of the judicial authority having jurisdiction.

(Paragraph 3: Repealed by Article 9 of Law no. 2592 dated 21 January 1982)

(Paragraph added by Article 7 of Law no. 5791 dated 23 July 2008) In this case, both authorities of judiciary postpone the execution of case as prescribed by Article 18.

AWAITAL OF DECISIONS BY COURT OF JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES AND STAY OF EXECUTION AS REGARDS TIME PERIODS

Article 18 - The judicial authority to which an official letter informing the application lodged to the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes suspends/adjourns the trial until a judgement is rendered concerning the jurisdiction. In this case, the periods considered as lapse of time and the other legal time periods or periods granted by the judge suspend until the process of re-examination of case begins.

The judicial authority continues to hold the case till the transmittal of this Court’s judgement within six months at the latest. However, the judicial authority is compelled to abide by the decision in question before rendering a final judgement on the merits if the judgement of Court of Jurisdictional Disputes is received.

Suspension/adjourning of a case shall not be requested from the judicial authority by simply notifying a dispute.

(Paragraph added by Article 8 of Law no. 5791 dated 23 July 2008) Should termination of periods prescribed by Articles 12, 13 and 17 coincide with recess period, these time periods shall be considered to have extended seven days as of the date following the termination of the non-term.

APPLICATIONS TO COURT OF JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES BY JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES

Article 19 – On condition that a judicial authority reviewing or beginning to review a case, which is final or finalized upon the decision of lack of jurisdiction rendered by one of judicial and administrative jurisdiction authorities reaches the conviction that the authority rendering the decision of lack of jurisdiction is empowered, it lodges an application to the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes with a reasoning decision for indication of a competent judicial authority and postpones its review until a judgement is rendered by the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes.

(Paragraph 2: Amended by Article 9 of Law no. 5791 dated 23 July 2008) The judicial authority obtains the former case file on the judgement of lack of jurisdiction rendered previously and case documents along with the reasoned decision concluded on the application are transmitted to the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes.

APPLICATIONS BY JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES CONDUCTING APPEAL REVIEW

Article 20 – Where a high court priorly reviewing appeal in a case for which no previous judicial authority was indicated by the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes, reaches the conviction that the case is not within the scope of jurisdiction of the Court holding the case, it may judge on applying the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes by postponing its review instead of reversing the judgement being examined, for the purpose of indication of an judicial authority.

(Paragraph 2: Repealed by Article 9 of Law no. 2592 dated 21 January 1982)

RULES OF PROCEDURE TO BE APPLIED IN THE REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS

Article 21 – Procedural rules in relation to the negative jurisdictional disputes are applied by Court of Jurisdictional Disputes in the examination of activities transmitted by Courts in accordance with the Articles above.

CONTINUATION, TERMINATION OF MEASURES IN CIVIL CASES AND THE COMPETENT JUDICIAL AUTHORITY EMPOWERED TO JUDGE FOR A MEASURE IN CASE OF A DISPUTE IN CIVIL CASES

Article22- Decisions of precautionary measure, precautionary attachment and notably stay of execution retain their validity until the judgement of Court of Jurisdictional Disputes and even after notification of the plaintiff party of judgements of the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes on the jurisdictional incompetence of the judicial authority rendering these judgements, the Court judgements are valid for sixty days until they are abolished by the judicial authority whose jurisdiction is indicated.

The judicial authority rendering the final judgement on jurisdiction upon the request of a party against whom a decision of measure was judged may conclude cancellation or alteration of these measures to a judgement.

If a measure decision dependent upon time lapses before the specified period provided in the first paragraph referred above, the authority of jurisdiction rendering the final judgement with respect to jurisdiction, may extend the measure period upon a request by the judging authority.

As for a case in which no measure was decided, the judicial authority priorly rendering the final judgement on jurisdiction is also empowered to duly render a judgement on measure.

The decisions referred to in Articles 2, 3 and 4 of this Article shall be rendered by the judicial authority rejecting the objection to decision on lack of jurisdiction in case of raising a dispute whereas concerning application of the competent judicial authority to Court of Jurisdictional Disputes, decisions shall be rendered by that judicial authority.

MEASURES IN CRIMINAL CASES

Article 23 – (Repealed by Article 183 of Decree Law no. 703 dated 2 July 2018)

 

CHAPTER THREE

DISPUTES ON JUDGEMENTS

 

Article 24 – (Paragraph 1: Amended by Article 7 of Law no. 2592 dated 21 January 1982) In cases of impossibility to provide justice due to the inconsistency between court decisions rendered by the judicial authorities set forth in Article 1 concerning jurisdiction or those which are finalized on the same subject and grounds, regardless of the jurisdiction, existence of adjudicational inconsistency is recognised.

(Paragraph 2: Repealed by Article 183 of Decree Law no. 703 dated 2 July 2018)

The person involved may ask for the elimination of judgement disputes by petitioning to the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes. In such an event, rules of procedure as regards the elimination of adjudication are applied, which are Articles 15 and 16 of Rules of Procedure of the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes concerning negative jurisdictional issues.

RULES OF PROCEDURE TO BE APPLIED IN JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES

ARTICLE 25 – As for disputes concerning jurisdiction, the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes decides on the merits of the dispute as well, by applying the provisions of Trial Procedure of the Council of State not running contrary to this law.

(Paragraph 2: Repealed by Article 183 of Decree Law no. 703 dated 2 July 2018)

Court of Jurisdictional Disputes judges adjudicational disputes by reviewing them on the file. In cases where it deems necessary or upon request, it is empowered to hear the parties.

 

CHAPTER FOUR

SESSIONS HELD BY THE COURT OF JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES AND ITS JUDGEMENTS

 

CONDITIONS FOR CONVENING AND RENDERING A JUDGEMENT AND MAKING A REVIEW OVER THE FILE

Article 26 –  In the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes, sessions cannot be held before reaching the absolute number of members. The member in default of appearance shall be replaced by the substitute member or another substitute member if the court member in question is not present. The Court carries out annual lists with regard to workload at the beginning of each term of plenary court.

In the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes, the examinations are conducted on the file and the decision is for the most part rendered, except for reviews prescribed by this Law.

SEQUENCE OF THE EXAMINATION

Article 27 – Court of Jurisdictional Disputes examines the requests on indication or existence of jurisdictional disputes both in terms of form and time periods; rejects the submittals which are not due or not within the specified time limit.

NOTIFICATION OF JUDGEMENTS

Article 28 – Court of Jurisdictional Disputes promptly informs the consequences of all the decisions it is to render to the Chief Public Prosecutor and spokesperson for the President of the Court who are both involved, the judicial authority petitioning to it for dispute settlement, the judicial authority which has been requested to await the judgement or to the persons or authorities petitioning for the settlement of dispute.

The authorities of judiciary along with all competent authorities, organizations and persons are assigned to attain compliance with Court judgements for their timely execution.

A copy of the justified decision is also transmitted to each of the judicial venues and persons Stated in paragraph one.

FINAL NATURE OF JUDGEMENTS AND PUBLICATION OF THE ADJUDICATION:

Article 29 – (Amended by Article 183 of Law no. 703 dated 2 July 2018)

Judgements of the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes are final. Judgements approved by the Court President are published in the Official Gazette.

ELIMINATION OF INCONSISTENCIES BETWEEN JUDGEMENTS

Article 30 – (Repealed by Article 183 of Law no. 703 dated 2 July 2018)

 

CHAPTER FIVE

MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

RAPPORTEURS

Article 31 – Ad hoc rapporteurs are assigned in a number sufficient under the Court President’s discretion for assistance in activities of Court of Jurisdictional Disputes.

(Clause amended by Article 183 of Law no. 703 dated 2 July 2018) Ad hoc rapporteurs are assigned by the competent authorities to which they are affiliated as members from among those persons having at least four year term of office held within the scope of services recognised as judicature and prosecution and those whose diligent work is understood to be useful for the Court, upon request of the President of Court of Jurisdictional Disputes and with the consent of the related person. Professional provisions are applied for their personnel affairs and their office terms as a rapporteur are counted as professional term of office. However, as for their promotion, the written statement of the President of Court is taken as basis.

(Paragraph 3: Repealed by Article 183 of Law no. 703 dated 2 July 2018)

President of Court of Jurisdictional Disputes determines the duties of ad hoc rapporteurs. The Court’s president, if regards necessary at sole discretion, may assign a Court member with the duty of reviewing the file for the preparation of report. The reasoned statement of opinion concerning the consequence found rightful by the writer of the report is also included in the Report.

EDITORIAL AFFAIRS AND OTHER OFFICERS

Article 32 – Upon the Court President’s request and consideration, an officer to be appointed by the Ministry of Justice acts in the capacity of Secretariat of Presidency of the Court and performs duties in the Court Building.

(Paragraph amended by Article 183 of Law no. 703 dated 2 July 2018) Editorial and clerical works of the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes are carried out by a bureau consisting of respective three clerks appointed by the Court of Cassation, Council of State and the Ministry of Justice upon the Court President’s request and consideration.

A clerk to be assigned by President of Court of Jurisdictional Disputes acts in the capacity of Editor-In-Chief of Court of Jurisdictional Disputes.

Usher, distributive and cleaning services of the Court and travel services provided by vehicles belonging to this Court are performed by officers to be appointed by the Ministry of Justice.

Professional provisions concerning their occupations are applied in the personnel affairs of the officers prescribed by this Article and their office terms in this Court are recognized as their professional terms of office; however, the written statement of information transmitted by the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes sets the groundwork for their promotion.

The President has competence in assignments of the officers with certain activities and re-assigning those unable to perform service in their former institutions.

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES

Article 33 – Notification procedures to be conducted under this Law are applied in compliance with the provisions of the Notification Law no. 7201.

TAX AND FEE EXEMPTION

Article 34 – Petitions, summary of proceedings, scripts or documents to be judged by the court of Jurisdictional Disputes, activities of the Court procedures, judgements or documents or Copies of judgements of the Court or those to be requested by the Court are exempt from taxation or fees.

POWERS OF THE COURT AND CHIEF PROSECUTORS AS WELL AS SPOKESPERSONS FOR THE PRESIDENT OF COURT REGARDING RECEIVAL OF INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTS

Article 35 – Court of Jurisdictional Disputes may directly correspond with all organs, authorities or organisations and request information or documents of all kinds or certified copies of these documents from them in its reviews. Refraining from furnishing information or documents is allowed solely under the conditions prescribed by the Law on the Council of State numbered 521.

Chief Prosecutors or spokespersons for the president affiliated to the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes also exercise the powers stated above.

HAVING NO RECOURSE TO COURT OF JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES ON THE GROUNDS OF JUDGEMENTS OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT AND BINDING INFLUENCE OF JUDGEMENTS OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT ON AUTHORITIES OF JUDICIARY

Article 36 – No recourse to Court of Jurisdictional Disputes can be in question for judgements rendered by the Constitutional Court as the Grand Council concerning jurisdiction.

All authorities of judiciary are obligatorily in compliance with the judgements of the Constitutional Court as the Grand Council rendered concerning the jurisdiction despite any existence of a final or finalized judgement concluded in contrast to the judgement of the Constitutional Court.

Adjudication disputes are solely considered in the light of the Constitutional Court’s judgement and it is executed.

RECOGNITION OF PARTICIPANTS AS PARTIES

Article 37 – (Repealed by Article 183 of Law no. 703 dated 2 July 2018)

FEES

Article 38 - (Amended by Article 10 of Law no. 5791 dated 23 July 2008)

The person acting in lieu of the President of Court in case of the President’s excuse shall be granted a monthly payment during term of office and Chief Prosecutors along with full/permanent and substitute members participating in the session shall be paid on a monthly basis for the session convened at the amount calculated by multiplication of the indicator number 7500 by the monthly coefficient unit applied on the salaries of public officers, separately from their salaries and allowances.

Prosecutors attending the session instead of chief prosecutors shall be granted a monthly payment for the session convened; whereas rapporteurs of Court of Jurisdictional Disputes are entitled to a payment every month at the amount calculated by multiplying the indicator number 3500 by the monthly coefficient unit applied on the salaries of public officers, separately from their salaries and allowances.

These payments shall not be subject to any other taxation except stamp duty.

TOOLS, MATERIALS AND OTHER NEEDS

Article 39 – Tools, materials and other needs of Court of Jurisdictional Disputes as well as salaries paid to the Court’s President, member acting as the President of Court of Jurisdictional Disputes, in the event that the Court President has an excuse, Chief Prosecutor, Chief Law Officer and his/her assistants, full and substitute members of Court of Jurisdictional Disputes and rapporteurs are financed from the supplementary allowances to be included in the budget of the Ministry of Justice.

REPEALED PROVISIONS

Article 40 – Provisions numbered 1602 of High Military Administrative Court on the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes and the Law dated 9 July 1945 and numbered 4783 on the Establishment of Court of jurisdictional Disputes have been repealed.

ADDITIONAL ARTICLE 1 – (Added by Article 8 of Law no. 2592 dated 21 January 1982)

The expression “Chief Law Officer” included in various articles of this Law refers to Chief Prosecutor of the Council of State and Chief Prosecutor of High Military Administrative Court whereas the expression State Council assistants indicates investigative judges at the Council of State and “law officers” means prosecutors of the State Council in the light of the context.

PROVISIONAL ARTICLES

Provisional Article 1 – Provisions prescribed by Article 36 are applied for the jurisdictional disputes arising before enforcement of this Law between the Constitutional Court as the Grand Council and competent judicial authorities.

Provisional Article 2 - A) Before the enforcement of this Law, cases regarding positive jurisdictional disputes received by the spokespersons for President of the State Council or to Court of Jurisdictional Disputes or transferred to spokesmanship of State Council’s President by ministers or governors as well as requests concerning which the period of fifteen days indicated in Article 9 of the same law has not terminated or those transmitted to spokesmanship of State Council’s President remain within the scope of former provisions of law and put into procedure within the framework of that Law, as prescribed by the Law numbered 4788.

These issues are judged in the Civil Department of the Court.

B) In accordance with the Law No. 4788, in cases filed at civil courts against persons not empowering the positive jurisdiction, notwithstanding a prior objection of jurisdiction a positive jurisdictional dispute may be issued until the date when the issue is concluded to a judgement.

C) If periods prescribed in law for criminal cases or cases before civil judicial authorities lapsed and the phases provided in paragraph 2 of Art. 10 on the date of enforcement of this Law, a positive jurisdictional dispute may be contended till when the judgement is rendered.

If the phases provided in paragraph 2 of Article 10 is in question for the criminal cases in progress or cases in venues of administrative judiciary on the enforcement date of this Law, a positive jurisdictional dispute may be contended until the day of judgement of the case.

Provisional Article 3 – The time spanning from the office term of the first council to be elected after the date of enforcement until September the 6th is not considered in the calculation of 4-year office term and this Council is recognized to have taken office at the beginning of the session.

Provisional Article 4 – Accounts, files (reports) priorly registered in the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes on the date of enforcement of this Law are kept in the archives of the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes

Provisional Article 5 - Election of President and members of Court of Jurisdictional Disputes under Articles 2 and 3 along with the procedures to compose rapporteurs and Secretariat under Articles 31 and 32 are initiated without delay. Duties of former Presidents and members as well as rapporteurs and public officers continue until the day when the Law takes effect as a whole.

Provisional Article 6- (Added by Article 11 of Law no. 5791 dated 23 July 2008)

Duties of current members continue until the end of four-year period as of their dates of election.

Provisional Article 7 – (Added by Article 183 of Decree Law no. 703 dated 2 July 2018)

Member status of the full and substitute members elected by the Assembly of Criminal Chambers of the Court of Cassation shall terminate on the effective date of the Decree Law.

EFFECT

Article 41 – Publication of the provisional Article 5 of this Law takes effect two months later as of the publication date of its other articles.

ENFORCEMENT

Article 42 – This Law is enforced by the Council of Ministers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Phone :90 (0312) 489 82 04
Fax :90 (0312) 489 80 59
E-Mail :bilgi@uyusmazlik.gov.tr
Address:Ahlatlıbel Mahallesi İncek Şehit Savcı Mehmet Selim Kiraz Bulvarı No:4 06805 Çankaya Ankara/Türkiye
Republic Of Turkey The Court Of The Jurisdictional Disputes 2017-2021