{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01277139208173691, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.003831417624521, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Administrative Sanction Decisions, the More Favorable Law Application and Trust on Judiciary

In terms of administrative sanctions, application of the more favorable law means that when the law in force the time an act was committed and a law subsequently brought into force is different, the law which is more favorable should be applied. 
EHRC states that applying more stringent punishment to an offender on the grounds that more stringent punishment was in force when the time criminal offence was committed. 
Misdemeanors have been considered within the scope of criminal law by the Constitutional Court and the Constitutional Court accepts that the principle of the application of the more favorable law should be applied to misdemeanors. 
Danıştay (the Turkish Council of State) decides that “it should be take into account in terms of administrative sanctions, when a law which is the ground of punishment is set aside or more favorable law is brought into force”. 
Since administrative acts are reviewed during annulment cases, a law brought into force after an administrative act cannot affect the act retrospect. A law which is enters into force after an administrative act established, could set up a rule which has retrospective affect only if the rule clearly is an amnesty. 
After an administrative fine is imposed, applying criminal law principals to administrative law and administrative sanctions, in other words, rendering decision of annulment on the ground of the principle of the more favorable law betrays the trust on judicial bodies and law.