The impact of the Council of Forensic Medicine judgments on administrative jurisdiction

There has been an increase in the intensity of the services provided by healthcare organizations functioning within the administration today when access to healthcare services has never been easier. This increase has also been reflected in the disputes stemming from medical interventions performed within the scope of healthcare activities. If a matter ofdispute takes place in hospitals affiliated to the Ministry of Health or medical faculties of public universities, civil justice is provided by administrative courts. Since medical science requires expertise by its nature, it has almost become a requirement that expert witnesses are called upon by administrative courts for the settlement of such disputes. Our study consists of two parts. In the first part, we discuss the concepts of evidence and proof regarding the regulations related to administrative jurisdiction procedures. In addition to the analysis of the establishment of expert witnesses, whose opinions are considered as evidence, in the light of the Expert Witness Law numbered 6754, the structure, functioning, and working principles of the Council of Forensic Medicine acting as an official expert and consulted in full remedy actions filed due to medical interventions are also examined. Thesecond part includes a discussion of key concepts of medical intervention, followed by jurisdiction procedures related to full remedy actions due to medical interventions, effects of the reports prepared by the Council of Forensic Medicine on the jurisdiction, and expert witness capacities of Higher Education Institutes.