This study analyses the effectiveness of the Human Rights Compensation Commission, which was established as a result of such a decision, in solving the structural or systemic problem, based on the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights and the Constitutional Court of Türkiye, which identified a structural or systemic problem and applied the pilot judgement procedure. The study first examines the pilot judgment procedure and the term “structural and systemic problem” which has become synonymous with the procedure. It then introduces the relevant domestic remedy through the establishment, structure, working principles and mandate of the Human Rights Compensation Commission established following the Ümmühan Kaplan pilot judgment of the European Court of Human Rights against Türkiye. Finally, the effectiveness of the Compensation Commission will be examined in the light of the “structural and systemic problem” approach of the European Court of Human Rights and the Constitutional Court of Türkiye. The article aims to trace the common components in the identification of “structural or systemic problems” in the relevant court decisions. While avoiding a categorical analysis of the limited jurisprudence of the Court on the identification of these problems, it evaluates the functionality and the effectiveness of the Human Rights Compensation Commission’s solution to the identification of the problem through the clues of recognizing and defining these problems. For this purpose, important judgments of the European Court of Human Rights and the Constitutional Court are taken as reference.