Discretion and judicial control of the administration (Minister of Internal Affairs and governors) in issuing weapon licenses

The primary objective of this study is that the vast majority of firearms used in crimes in our country are unlicensed, a fact that has prompted research on this topic. The study covers the provisions of Law No. 6136 and the Regulation on Firearms, Knives, and Other Implements. The study notes that the discretionary power granted to the administration in issuing firearms licenses can sometimes be arbitrary, while in some areas, binding authority is in effect, highlighting the uncertainties surrounding this matter. Public officials, including retirees, as defined in the regulation, unlike individuals, are required to pay a five-year fee for each firearm and obtain a medical report from a medical board every five years to obtain a firearms license. This also applies to lawyers. The study also addresses the argument that this situation violates the principle of equality enshrined in the Constitution. In addition to the requirement that discretionary power not be arbitrary, this power should remain outside the scope of necessity and expediency review. Furthermore, because this area is shaped by case law, the study also utilizes judicial decisions from cases in which the court itself acted as an attorney. The study also examines the principle of equality in the context of administrative litigation.