Exams and judicial review in Turkish administrative law

Examinations are the main measurement and evaluation tools that are frequently encountered in daily life and are most commonly used in educational processes and public personnel recruitment. Although these procedures, which are carried out within the framework of the discretionary power of the administration, are subject to the general principles of administrative law, they give rise to various procedural and substantive legal debates in practice. Examination procedures contrary to the law and the principle of merit are subject to judicial review; however, the limits of the discretionary power of the administration in this review may lead to different interpretations among the courts. This study aims to reveal the function of judicial review in order to ensure the conformity of examination processes with the law and to develop recommendations regarding the balance between the discretionary power of the administration and fundamental rights. In this context, this study will examine the legal regime of examinations in Turkish administrative law, the current debates on judicial review of the results of examinations and the uncertainties in the case law. Practices that contradict the principle of merit in areas where discretionary power is broad, such as oral exams, and the approaches of the Council of State and other courts on this issue will be examined comparatively. In addition, the importance of the judiciary's supervisory role in terms of the legitimacy of administrative actions and the protection of individual rights will be evaluated through concrete decisions.