a critical evaluation on the concept of justice in planning process

etween Özdilek which carries a privileged property and the neighboring plots of
Özdilek which their building rights were limited by the decisions of Committee.
The first point indicated by these data is that there are no only one justice
definitions and no just criteria and applications reached by common processes about the
disagreements which can constitute a sample and which take place between the parties.
These results show that each party has a justice acceptance and defense defined by
different contents in the disagreements seen during the adjudication process on urban
space. This kind of result on the other hand indicates that an urban space formation
process, which is legal but illegitimate and is almost impossible to conclude that it is
“just”, is detected on urban land. In this sense, justice concept has an abstract quality
almost like a myth. In this practice, it is almost impossible to free the urban space from
its property of being an area on which existing inequalities are reproduced if another
<strong>evaluation</strong> other than concrete criteria and legal controls cannot be established.
Establishing an <strong>evaluation</strong> about forming just processes an urban land makes it
necessary to reconsider the subjects about the rights, interest, freedoms and equality
concepts as components of justice and about the study of these concepts on urban land.
In such an <strong>evaluation</strong> the practicable criteria can be formed by eliminating the
limitations sourcing from the unbalances in social, economic and cultural structure and
by orienting toward the agreeable principles. The guiding approaches for these
principles are developing an approach which considers the requirements priority and
establishes a balance between the opportunities and limitations and individuals and
society on urban land.
In this context, the fist step in the formation of a just social-spatial structure on
urban land is to decrease the economic and cultural inequalities which result of macro
political economic structure of the Turkey. The questions that should be asked for a
realistic <strong>evaluation</strong> of such an orientation are about the tools, methods and results of just
process. The questions which are guidance in <strong>evaluation</strong> about whether every decision,
action and interference on urban land has just processes can be: What kind of
opportunity and advantage distribution is realized on urban land with the decisions and
practices? Which requirement of which social group is met by service? Is there any
priority on urban land and by which criteria are these priorities determined? Does any
investment in an urban area have the property of being the most needed investment at
that area and does it have priority? Is the investment decision considered in social
wholeness? Are they realized by the approval, knowledge and contribution of the
193