Consideration of illegally obtained evidence on Law of Civil Procedure

State of law is the state which is governed based on the rules of law within by remaining within the limits provided by the law and the state which aims the prevention of arbitrariness in this governance and ensures that citizens live safely. The primary elements of the state of law are securing the fundamental rights and freedoms, equality before the rules of law and the proper functioning of independence of the judiciary and methods of legal remedies. While parties utilize their right to legal remedy in civil procedures; they present certain evidences in order to prove their claims and convince the court that they are right. Parties strive to prove their claims through evidences on which they rely. The right of proof is a universal right, rather than a right solely recognized and protected in Turkish Law. The right to proof is explicitly regulated in the European Convention on Human Rights, the Constitution, the Code of Civil Procedure and the Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, the absolute restraint of the right of proof and limitation of it without adhering to certain criteria will cause the violation of a universal right of people. On the other hand, the right of proof may only be limited in the case of violation of fundamental rights and freedoms, by carrying out an assessment of interest base on the concrete case and by implementation of principle of proportionality. The party striving to prove his/her rightfulness must remain within the boundaries drawn by the rules of law while presenting evidence to the court. Likewise, not taking into account the evidence obtained unlawfully while proving a fact in Turkish Law has been adopted as a rule. Evidence obtained unlawfully not being taken into account in the judgment does not indicate that the right of proof is limited. In this study, the subject of concepts of obtaining evidence unlawfully and creating/producing evidence unlawfully and the difference between these two matters is explained. Terms such as forbidden evidence and prohibition of proof are utilized as well, in order to express the unlawfully-obtained evidences. In order to ensure the unity of term in this study, the tem unlawfully-obtained evidence is used and with this, the obtainment of an evidence through means that are not protected by the order of law is essentially meant. The study is addressed within the context of private law and within this scope, civil procedure; criminal procedure is principally excluded. In the study, particularly divorce suits, labour law suits and actions of debt that are included in civil procedure are made the subjects of examination and in connection with these, the concept of unlawfully-obtained evidence is evaluated in the light of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court.