Ceza muhakemesi hukukunda adli kontrol
Abstract
During the criminal procedure, various control and surveillance tools are envisaged as an alternative to the detention in order to prevent the suspect or the accused from fleeing or the danger of blacking out evidence. These preventive measurements, which are called judicial control in Turkish law, have been the subject of criticism in the doctrine since the effective date of the Criminal Procedure Law No. 5271. Most of the theoretical criticisms regarding the judicial control are related to the legal nature of the measure. For this reason, in the first part of this study, the nature of the legal control obligations as a protective measure, and then the claim of being an alternative to detention are examined. In addition, in the first part, the historical process of alternative measurements to arrest is briefly mentioned. Parallel to the relationship between judicial control measure and detention, under the heading of fundamental rights and freedoms that interfere with judicial control obligations, it has been examined how the freedom of movement and the right to freedom and security can be restricted through these obligations. In the second part of this study, conditions of the judicial control decision, objection to the judicial control decision, the termination of the judicial control measure, the execution and supervision of the judicial control decision according to the probation services legislation, the judicial control measure stipulated in the Criminal Procedure Law and the Child Protection Law. measurements are discussed. Finally, the developments in practice in the compensation of damages arising from the unfair application of judicial control are given