Faulty liability of the administration and recourse

In accordance with the 125th provision of the Constitution of the Republic of Turkey, the administration has an obligation to provide compensation for the damages incurred due to its activities. This obligation, which emerges and develops as case law and is supported by the provisions of the Constitution and legislation, may arise from the principles of fault of service as well as from the principles of strict liability. The increase in the public services carried out by the administration has increased the probability of the administration itself to suffer losses, along with third parties foreign to the administration, while performing these services. With the increase in the danger of damage, the issue of determining the financial responsibilities of public officials performing public services and recourse to the responsible public employee has revealed many problems that need to be carefully considered and need to be solved. In damages caused by a faulty behavior of a public official, after paying the loss of the injured party in accordance with the principle of service fault of the administration; Pursuant to Article 129 of the Constitution, the public official responsible for the damage must use the right of recourse in proportion to his personal fault. However, the gaps in the legislation regarding the operation of the recourse system have led to the emergence of contradictions in the doctrine and jurisprudence and have caused violations of rights in the tripartite relationship between the administration, the public official and the injured. The aim of this study is to evaluate the practice in the light of current legal regulations and judicial decisions on the detection of violations, by systematically collecting the sources in the doctrine; the faulty responsibility of the administration has been associated with the recourse mechanism it has been tried to put forward solutions.