The dichotomy of form and substance in law

In this study, it is aimed to determine the concepts of form and substance, which have a significant frequency of use in law, to determine the hierarchical relationship between these two concepts in favor of form, to analyze the reasons for this superiority and its appropriateness. In the first part, a conceptual analysis was made, and it was determined which features were included in the form and substance elements. For this purpose, objectivity and certainty; conceptuality and systematism; scripting and codification; methodological and scientific are considered as the elements that make up the form of law. It is stated that the article of law consists of the elements of purpose, social fact, meaning and content. In the second part, form analysis in Roman Law and Common Law has been made, taking into account the criteria that we have determined as form elements. After this discussion, it has been tried to show that the dichotomy of form and matter began to emerge with the modern period, in other words, in this duality, the concept of form is considered superior to substance. At the end of the second part, it is aimed to support the basic thesis that the form element is superior to the substance element in law, by making a Supreme Court decision that gives importance to form instead of substance, and by analyzing the form and substance related to the law of notification in general, in order to show the theoretical discussions through practical examples. In the third chapter, the subject of critical analysis of the qualities such as objectivity, certainty, conceptuality and methodology, which we accept as forms in law, in line with the views of contemporary philosophy of science. Thus, despite the subordination of the substantial element for the sake of providing certainty, precision and scientific; it has been tried to show to what extent certainty, precision and scientific are provided or not. At the end of the study, the developments about anti formalist tendency that have emerged in America and Europe since the second half of the 20th century have been discussed. However, these developments have not provided a change in the formal nature of the legal solution mechanisms, which are the main ones, due to their "alternative" nature. Therefore, it can be stated that anti-formal law movements did not create a significant change in the quality of modern law that prioritizes the formal element.