The social risk principle as the strict liability principle of the administration

Although the understanding of the nonliability of the state was dominant in the past, this approach was abandoned in time and the liability of the administration was accepted. At first, only the defect liability of the administration was accepted, after the Cames Decision issued by the French Council of State, the strict liability of the administration was also accepted for the first time. In the course of time, the scope of the strict liability of the administration has widened and decisions have been made on many issues according to the principles of the strict liability of the administration. One of the principles of the strict liability of the administration is the social risk principle. It can be defined as a state of risk which arise from people living together. The principle of social risk is a principle that envisages the compensation for the harms of individuals who suffer from damages of situations even though they are not a part of them, such as chaos, war and social events that as a consequence of people live as a community. In our country, the liability of the administration due to the principle of social risk has been accepted through jurisprudence, not through laws as in French Law. Decisions ruling the liability of the administration according to the social risk principle started to be issued mainly in the 1980s, when terrorist incidents have increased. In Turkey, the most comprehensive law based on the social risk principle is Law No. 5233 on the Compensation of Damages Arising from Terrorism and the Fight against Terrorism. The issue of the liability of the administration according to the principle of social risk has been widely discussed in the doctrine and various opinions have been asserted. Moreover, considering the judicial decisions, it is not possible to say that there is harmony in decisions. In this context, in our study, social risk is discussed together with its practices, and the liability of the administration in cases subject to the social risk principle is evaluated in detail by including the opinions in the doctrine