Özet:

Individual applications to the Constitutional Court should first be found admissible before the examination of merits. One of these requirements for admissibility is that an application should not be “manifestly ill-founded”. This article aims to explain how the Constitutional Court has so far assessed and interpreted this criterion under the light of its rulings. This admissibility requirement is also incorporated in the ECHR and applied by the ECtHR as well. Taking into consideration the fact that this system of the ECtHR has been taken as an example by the Constitutional Court, the application and interpretation of this criterion is evaluated from a comparative perspective, to the extent deemed necessary. At this point, it is apparent that the Constitutional Court tends to interpret this concept largely in line with the ECtHR. However, there is also a risk of transporting the issues that are open to criticism regarding the application of the ECtHR into the system applied by the Constitutional Court

Anahtar Kelimeler: