Menu
En iyi Manavgat Avukatı
  • Anasayfa
  • Biz
  • İletişim
  • Blog
Close Menu
24/12/2022

The Process of Criminal Investigation against Doctors

Rabia Ekşi Uncategorized @tr alanya, antalya, law, lawyer, mahmutlar

Doctors working in the private sector or public institutions perform public duties, and in some cases they are accepted as public servants because the work performed involves public benefits. The criminal investigation and trial process of public officials has been subjected to a system with unique form requirements and unique processes in accordance with the Law No. 4483 on the Trial of Civil Servants and Other Public Officials. However, a very important issue in the criminal investigation process for doctors is that there are some differences in the criminal investigation process for doctors working in any higher education institution.

The Process of Criminal Investigation Against Private Hospital Personnel Or Doctors Who Own a Private Practice

There is no administrative leave in respect of the criminal responsibilities of the doctors who work in a private hospital or have their own private practice. In other words, directly C.The issues that are the subject of complaints can be investigated through the Prosecutor’s Office. Practice In this context, it can be said that aesthetic surgeons are the group of physicians who face the criminal investigation process against doctors the most. Because of the limited resources of the state medical interventions by patients for aesthetic purposes, the appointment of the mandatory medical interventions and health personnel to be insufficient to deal with due to processes completely or partially because of the absence of free, private doctors who operate in a hospital or in your own office, it is seen that medical interventions are often preferred aesthetic. In this case, it is possible that private hospital staff or doctors who own a private practice may face a direct criminal process. However, if there was an erroneous medical intervention, the criminal investigation will turn into a criminal prosecution(criminal case).

The Process of Criminal Investigation against Public Personnel Doctors

First of all, after determining that doctors are public officials in some cases, it is necessary to determine whether the crime attributed to the doctor(the subject of the investigation) is a crime related to the doctor’s duty. Without these conditions, legal proceedings cannot be initiated against doctors through the law No. 4483.

A criminal investigation request received by the Prosecutor General’s Office through a notification or complaint is supported primarily by evidence without allowing it to be destroyed, the investigation is submitted to the competent administrative authorities for preliminary examination without resorting to any testimony of the requested public official. As a result of this preliminary examination, the issue of granting or not granting permission for an investigation will come up. As a matter of fact, according to the law, authorized administrative authorities (the governor in provincial and central districts, the district governor in districts, the ministry for senior public officials) must grant permission for an investigation in order for an investigation to be opened to public officials.

Exceptional crimes that allow an investigation to be opened ex officio by Public Prosecutors without being subject to a complaint and permission are also regulated in the law. These crimes are bribery, embezzlement and red-handed cases that require severe punishment. In these cases, in order for doctors to be subjected to an investigation, no investigative permission will be requested from the administrative authorities, and an investigation will be initiated directly by the prosecutor’s office.

The main purpose of this application is to provide some immunity to public officials from any investigation that may be made and to keep them away from unwarranted investigations that may prevent them from performing their duties. After this procedure is performed, if the investigation permission is granted, the criminal investigation process for doctors can be carried out.

If the investigation permission is granted, the prosecutor’s office will complete and conclude the necessary investigation. Persons entrusted with duties by the competent authorities at the preliminary examination stage can take statements of both the doctor to whom an investigation is requested, and other doctors or medical personnel, and prepare the necessary documents within the framework of their powers. The competent authority is obliged to make its decision on the permission for the investigation in question within thirty days from the date of receipt of the crime by the competent authorities. The person who has filed a complaint or a notification for the investigation reserves the right to appeal to the Prosecutor General’s Office within ten days.

The Process of Criminal Investigation against Doctors Working in Higher Education Institutions(Faculty Members)

Although the procedure to be applied to faculty member doctors working in higher education institutions is slightly different, decisions regarding the investigation are taken by mechanisms established within the institution. In the stage called the first investigation phase, the three-person board to be formed from among the members of the university administrative board has the authority to Decisively open the investigation. The university administrative board consists of deans, chaired by the rector, and three professors who will be elected for four years to represent different teaching units affiliated to the university.

It can be seen that doctors, whether they are working in public hospitals or working in medical faculty hospitals of universities, are subjected to certain procedures to open an investigation against them during the investigation phase, as a rule. It will not be possible to open an investigation against doctors without performing these procedures. The criminal investigation process for doctors in the private sector can be carried out without permission. Whether the result is positive or negative will be determined according to the evidence in each concrete case.

You can read our articles and petition examples by clicking here.

Cancellation of the Officer’s Operation by Way of Complaint – Supreme Court Decision How is the Tracking Based on the Exchange Deed Done

Related Posts

Uncategorized @tr

TBB BAŞKANI SAĞKAN 5 NİSAN AVUKATLAR GÜNÜNDE KONUŞMA YAPTI

Avukatlar, Türkiye Barolar Birliği’nin öncülüğünde 5 Nisan Avukatlar Günü’nde Ankara’da ‘Savunmanın Bağımsızlığı ve Hukuka Saygı’ yürüyüşü yaptı. Barolar adına konuşma yapan Türkiye Barolar Birliği Başkanı Av. R. Erinç Sağkan, “Biz bugün hukuk devletini savunmak için, yargı bağımsızlığını savunmak için buradayız. Bu ses susturulamaz” dedi. “İSTANBUL BAROSU, HUKUKA AYKIRI YARGI KARARLARIYLA GÖREVİNDEN UZAKLAŞTIRILMAK İSTENİYOR” Anıtpark’ta bir […]

Uncategorized @tr

Determination and Recommendations regarding the Main Procedural Problems in Terms of Earthquake-Related Civil Cases

“It is Not Possible to Get Rid of the Responsibility of Those Responsible by Obscuring the Evidence of the Earthquake, On the Contrary, Their Responsibilities Increase” Prof. Dr. Muhammet Özekes (12.02.2023) If the CCP and procedural rules can be applied consciously, correctly and quickly, the judiciary can get out of this earthquake without being in […]

Uncategorized @tr

The Decision of the Council of State that the Consumer Bank Cannot Receive Account Operating Fees

COUNCIL OF STATE 15. apartment Basis: 2014/9570 Verdict: 2018/1194 Plaintiff : Consumer Problems Association Acting Director : Av… Respondent : Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency Acting Director : Av… Summary of the Case: Article 10 of the Regulation on the Procedures and Principles regarding Fees to be Collected from Financial Consumers, which entered into force […]

Uncategorized @tr

Negative Detection Case Based on the Guarantee Bond Claim, Exchange Monitoring Supreme Court Decision

T.C. SUPREME 19. law office MAIN NUMBER: 2016/3357 DECISION NO: 2016/13899 DECISION DATE: 24.10.2016 >> FOREIGN EXCHANGE MONITORING, NEGATIVE DETECTION CASE BASED ON THE CLAIM THAT THE BILL IS A SECURITY BILL, BURDEN OF PROOF AND STATE OF EVIDENCE 6100/m.222/5 6102/m.64 SUMMARY: The case is related to the request for negative determination. The plaintiff has […]

Uncategorized @tr

Traffic Accident, Wearing a Helmet Should Be Reduced by 20% – Supreme Court Decision

T.C SUPREME 17.law office MAIN NUMBER:2017/5716 DECISION NO:2018/1495 DECISION DATE: 01/03/2018 COURT : Court of First Instance >> SINCE THERE IS A MUTUAL DEFECT DUE TO A TRAFFIC ACCIDENT, NOT WEARING A HELMET, IT WILL BE NECESSARY TO MAKE A MUTUAL DEFECT DISCOUNT OF AT LEAST 20% ACCORDING TO ESTABLISHED APPLICATIONS. At the end of […]

Back To Top
manavgat avukat

İletişim:

+905425139898

+902425139898

info@antalya.law

Adres

Hacet Mahallesi, Canlılar Sokak,
Avukatlar İş Merkezi, No: 7, Daire: 2-3
Alanya / Antalya

Copyright © 2020 Aşıkoğlu Hukuk ™ Aşıkoğlu Uluslararası Hukuk Bürosu, Her Hakkı Saklıdır

WhatsApp us