Concrete constitutionality review in line with Constitutional Court decisions

Every individual living in a universal order has fundamental rights and freedoms. Depending on the developments in the historical process, these rights have varied and gradually increased. However, the protection of the rights of individuals against the arbitrary practices of state auditors came to the fore, thus The "Constitutional Judiciary", was born, which guarantees the rights. With the emergence of the Constitutional judiciary it was ensured that the legal norm regulated by the state organs were checked for their conformity with the constitution. In the history of Turkish constitutionalism, with the 1961 Constitution, the Constitutional Court was established and the court was given the authority to audit compliance. The Constitutional Court also performs this compliance control in three ways; abstract review of norms, concrete constitutionality review and individual application. The basis of the study is concrete constitutionality review, which is one of the ways of compliance control. The aim of the research is to examine whether the courts within the scope of today's jurisdiction the Constitutional Court as a result of the application to the Constitutional Court through the norm review procedure analyzing the decisions and analyzing the decisions of the judicial and administrative judiciary comparison of the data obtained in this context. In this context, the data obtained were tabulated interpreted. The data within the scope of the study is based on the Constitutional Court's concrete from the decisions taken as a result of norm audits. In line with this data a total of 2,373 decisions were issued for courts in today's jurisdiction were filed. In terms of the judicial dimension, the judicial jurisdiction has the highest number of objections application to the Court of First Instance. In terms of courts, the highest number of applications were made to the criminal court of first instance courts were found to have applied.