HEALTH LAW AND ADMINISTRATIVE JUDICIARY

Administrative Law in Health Law

Entrance

Health law is a very broad branch of law that regulates the protection of individuals' rights in the process of benefiting from health services, the obligations of health service providers, and the supervisory role of the state in this area. Administrative law is a type of judicial system that resolves disputes arising from administrative actions taken using public power and the actions and procedures of the administration. In health law, the decisions taken by the administration in the provision and regulation of health services are frequently subject to judicial review. In this context, the importance of administrative law within health law stems from its aim to ensure that health services are carried out in a manner consistent with the public interest.

I. The Role of Administrative Courts in Health Law

In the field of health law, the most important function of administrative courts is to oversee the legality of administrative actions taken in the provision of health services. This oversight is guaranteed by Article 125 of the Constitution, which states that "judicial review is open against all actions and decisions of the administration." Administrative courts review whether decisions made by public institutions regarding health services interfere with individuals' health rights and whether they are in accordance with the law.

The function of administrative courts in health law is shaped by various legal regulations. For example, the Basic Law on Health Services No. 3359 and the Civil Servants Law No. 657 contain important provisions regarding disciplinary penalties and administrative actions for public health employees. Administrative decisions made within the framework of these laws may be subject to judicial review. Furthermore, administrative actions taken in the financial management of public hospitals within the framework of the Public Financial Management and Control Law No. 5018 are also subject to administrative judicial review.

II. Health Services and Administrative Judicial Disputes

In the provision of healthcare services, the main types of disputes subject to administrative litigation include license revocations, penalties imposed on healthcare providers, appointment and transfer procedures for healthcare professionals, and licensing procedures for medical devices and drugs. These disputes generally arise regarding whether individuals' rights to access healthcare services have been violated or whether the rights of healthcare professionals have been interfered with.

For example, a decision to close a hospital can have serious consequences for individuals who use healthcare services and for healthcare workers. Such decisions are subject to legal review by administrative courts. The Council of State plays a significant role in resolving such disputes. The Council of State's ability to issue stay of execution orders on administrative decisions related to healthcare services aims to prevent potential negative impacts of administrative actions on individuals' health rights.

III. The Status of Healthcare Workers Regarding Administrative Procedures

Healthcare professionals have the right to appeal to administrative courts to protect their rights against administrative actions. In this context, the guarantees provided to healthcare professionals by Law No. 657 on Civil Servants and the right to file lawsuits in administrative courts against disciplinary penalties are of great importance. Administrative sanctions faced by healthcare professionals during their professional activities are frequently brought before the courts.

In particular, administrative courts have the right to appeal in cases where public health workers are dismissed, transferred, or subjected to disciplinary actions. In resolving such disputes, administrative courts aim to strike a balance between the requirements of public service and the rights of health workers.

IV. Access to Healthcare Services and Administrative Justice

Access to healthcare is a fundamental right guaranteed by Article 56 of the Constitution, and the state has an obligation to ensure the availability of this right. However, administrative decisions regarding the provision of healthcare services may, at times, restrict individuals' access to these services. For example, administrative actions such as closing a hospital in a region or reducing the capacity of a healthcare facility may limit individuals' access to healthcare. Such decisions may be subject to annulment proceedings in administrative courts.

Administrative courts, while reviewing administrative actions that restrict access to healthcare, strike a balance between the administration's obligation to protect individuals' right to health and its public service requirements. During this review, courts also evaluate the administration's discretionary power. For an administrative action to be annulled, it must be clearly unlawful or incompatible with the public interest.

V. The Effects of Administrative Court Decisions in Healthcare Services

Administrative court decisions can directly impact the delivery of healthcare services. In particular, decisions to annul or suspend administrative actions can lead to significant changes in the provision of healthcare. Therefore, administrative court decisions are implemented with great rigor in the field of health law.

The Council of State's landmark decisions regarding healthcare services are binding on the administration and help it to ensure legality in its future decisions. At the same time, administrative court decisions play an important role in protecting the rights of healthcare workers and service providers.

"Case Law Text"

COURT: Labor Court

The plaintiff requested compensation for material and moral damages resulting from disability caused by faulty treatment.
The court, as stated in its judgment, rejected the request.
Following an appeal by the plaintiff's attorney, and after determining that the appeal was filed within the prescribed time limit and reviewing the case file based on the report prepared by the Examining Judge…, the merits of the case were considered and the following decision was reached.

DECISION

The lawsuit concerns a claim for compensation for material and moral damages suffered by the insured due to disability resulting from faulty treatment at the defendant institution's hospital.
The court rejected the request.
The case involves, by its nature, a public official health It is based on the in-service duty misconduct of the officer, which did not result in their dismissal from service.
According to Article 125/last paragraph of the Constitution, which states that "the administration is obliged to compensate for the damage arising from its own actions and procedures," the Administrative Law No. 2577 applies Trial Article 2/1-b of the Procedural Law administrative full lawsuit filed by those whose personal rights have been directly violated as a result of the actions and transactions judgment cases administrative It is listed among the types of lawsuits.
On the other hand, Law No. 5283 on Certain Public Institutions and Organizations, published in the Official Gazette dated 19.01.2005.. Health Units Health According to the explicit provisions of Articles 4/a and 4/c, which entered into force one month after the publication of Article 10 of the Law on Transfer to the Ministry health units health lawsuits arising from the provision of services Health It is undoubtedly true that the case will be conducted with the Ministry's hostility. There is no condition that Law No. 5283 must have come into force before the date of the lawsuit, and the relevant hospital was affiliated with the Social Security Institution (SGK) at the time of the incident and the lawsuit trial in accordance with Law No. 5283 at this stage Health Even though it has been transferred to the Ministry, it is still Administrative judgment That is sufficient for the position to be considered valid.
In this specific case, it is undeniable that the SSK Kayseri Hospital, which was affiliated with the Social Security Institution at the time of the incident and was providing a public service, can only be compensated for the damages it caused to individuals while providing this service administrative in the judiciary will open completely judgment It is clear that this will be possible through the lawsuit.
In this case, it is clear that the appropriate venue for resolving the dispute is not the Labor Court, as per Article 1 of Law No. 5521, but the Administrative Court. The decision of the Court of Conflicts dated 25.12.2006, case number E:2006/251, K:2006/271, and.. Supreme Court The decision of the General Assembly of Law dated 15.10.2008 and numbered 2008/4-637-631 is also in this direction.
The court, taking these factual and legal circumstances into consideration, rejected the lawsuit petition judgment While the decision should have been to reject the case on the grounds of lack of evidence, issuing a written judgment is contrary to procedure and law and constitutes grounds for reversal.
Therefore, the plaintiff's appeals concerning these aspects should be accepted and the judgment overturned.
CONCLUSION: For the reasons explained above, the judgment is REVERSED; in light of the grounds for reversal, there is no need to examine the plaintiff's other appeals; the appeal fee shall be returned to the plaintiff upon request; this decision was made unanimously on December 21, 2010.

Conclusion

In health law, administrative courts play a critical role in protecting the health rights of individuals and the rights of healthcare professionals by subjecting the administration's decisions regarding the provision of health services to legal scrutiny. The effectiveness of administrative courts in this area ensures that health services are provided in the public interest and in accordance with the rule of law. Decisions made by administrative courts are of great importance in terms of protecting rights guaranteed by law. Therefore, the efficient and fair functioning of the administrative court application process in the field of health law plays a vital role in protecting the rights of both individuals and healthcare professionals.

 

Student Intern

Behiye Zeynep Ozturk