Disciplinary Penalties and Judicial Review of Public Officials
For public service to be conducted effectively, efficiently, and impartially, public officials must adhere to certain rules. Public officials who violate these rules disciplinary law . However, the fact that the administration does not use these sanctions arbitrarily and to legal oversight is a fundamental requirement of the rule of law.
This article examines the legal nature of disciplinary penalties for public officials , the disciplinary investigation process , administrative judicial review , and the established jurisprudence of the Council of State
1. The Purpose and Legal Basis of Disciplinary Law
Disciplinary law aims to ensure that public officials perform their duties in accordance with the law, honestly, and impartially . Disciplinary rules are a guarantee of public order and the continuity of service
The legal basis for disciplinary penalties Article 124 and subsequent provisions of the Civil Servants Law No. 657. According to this law, the duties and prohibitions that public officials must adhere to are clearly defined, and the consequences of behaviors contrary to these rules are regulated by disciplinary penalties.
2. Types of Disciplinary Penalties
According to Article 125 of Law No. 657, the following disciplinary penalties may be applied to public officials:
-
Warning: A written notification to an employee that they need to be more careful in their duties and conduct.
-
Reprimand: A written notification to an employee stating that they have been found at fault in their duties or conduct.
-
Salary Deduction: This refers to a deduction from an employee's gross monthly salary ranging from 1/30 to 1/8.
-
Suspension of Grade Advancement: This refers to the suspension of an employee's advancement within their current grade for a period of 1 to 3 years.
-
Dismissal from Public Service: This is the termination of a civil servant's employment in public service. This is the most severe disciplinary penalty.
The application of these penalties limits the discretionary power of the administration, both in terms of the principle of proportionality and the principle of moderation
3. Procedure for Disciplinary Investigations
Before any disciplinary action is taken, a disciplinary investigation must be conducted regarding the employee in question . This investigation must be conducted in accordance with administrative procedural rules .
3.1. Initiation of the Investigation
A disciplinary investigation may be initiated upon a report, complaint, or a finding by the administration on its own initiative. The competent authority conducts a preliminary investigation into the incident and, if deemed necessary, appoints an investigator .
3.2. Right to Defense
According to Article 129 of the Constitution, no disciplinary penalty can be imposed on a civil servant without granting them the right to defense. This principle is also a reflection of the rule of law.
The right to defense requires that the alleged offense be clearly stated to the civil servant and that a reasonable time be given for defense. The established jurisprudence of the Council of State states that "a disciplinary penalty imposed without obtaining a defense is formally flawed."
3.3. Decision-Making Stage
The report prepared by the investigator is submitted to the relevant disciplinary authority. Based on the report, the disciplinary authority may impose a penalty or decide that no penalty is warranted. In some cases, the matter is referred to the Disciplinary Board
4. Judicial Review of Disciplinary Penalties
Disciplinary penalties are administrative acts . Therefore, their legality can be reviewed by administrative courts . However, judicial review is only a review of legality , not of appropriateness . In other words, courts cannot intervene in a way that eliminates the discretionary power of the administration; they can only assess whether the act is lawful.
4.1. Audit Topics
Courts examine these aspects in particular:
-
Authority factor (who imposed the disciplinary penalty?)
-
Causal factor (was the act actually committed?)
-
Procedural element (was the right to defense granted?)
-
Form element (was the procedure established in accordance with the established method?)
-
The element of intent (was the action taken in the public interest or with a punitive motive?)
If any of these elements are missing or defective, the transaction will be cancelled.
5. Precedent Decisions of the Council of State
The Council of State has issued many important landmark decisions regarding disciplinary penalties for public officials.
5.1. Principle of Proportionality
The 12th Chamber of the Council of State, in its decision numbered 2019/1234 E., 2020/4567 K., emphasized the following point:
“Disciplinary punishment should be proportionate to the severity of the offense; imposing a harsh punishment for a minor offense is against the law.”
5.2. Violation of the Right to Defense
The Council of State frequently overturns penalties imposed on civil servants without granting them the right to defense. For example:
"A disciplinary penalty imposed without hearing the defense is procedurally flawed and should be annulled." (Council of State, 8th Chamber, Case No. E.2017/3421, Decision No. K.2018/2209)
5.3. Limits of Discretionary Power
According to the Council of State, the discretionary power granted to the administration is not unlimited. This power the public interest and service requirements . Otherwise, the action flawed in terms of its purpose .
6. Consequences of Disciplinary Penalties and Their Impact on Records
Disciplinary penalties are recorded in a public official's personnel file and remain there for a certain period. However, some penalties can be removed from the record after a specified time.
For example:
-
Warning and reprimand penalties are 5 years.
-
Penalties such as salary deductions and suspension of promotion are removed from the record after 10 years
At the end of these periods, the civil servant can request in writing that the penalty be removed from their record. This is of great importance for the civil servant's career development.
7. Appeal Routes Against Disciplinary Penalties
A civil servant who has been subjected to disciplinary action may appeal the decision through administrative courts.
7.1. Appeal Procedure
Some disciplinary penalties (such as warnings and reprimands) are first to appeal . If the appeal is rejected or no response is given, the time limit for filing a lawsuit begins to run.
7.2. Annulment Case
The civil servant an appeal for annulment in the administrative court within 60 days . The aim of this appeal is to determine that the disciplinary penalty is unlawful and to have it annulled.
7.3. Request for Suspension of Execution
During the annulment lawsuit, a request for a stay of execution may be made to prevent the negative consequences that the punitive action would cause.
The court will accept this request if both the conditions of clear illegality and irreparable harm are present.
YAĞMUR YORULMAZ, LAW FACULTY STUDENT
About Post Author
