MADDİ VARLIĞIN ÖTESİNDE: ULUSLARARASI İNSANCIL HUKUKTA “NESNE” KAVRAMININ DİJİTAL ÇAĞDA YENİDEN YORUMLANMASI

Abstract

Dijital teknolojilerin silahlı çatışmalarda giderek daha yoğun biçimde kullanılması, fiziksel altyapıya zarar verilmeksizin dijital verilerin hedef alınmasını mümkün hale getirmiştir. Bu durum, uluslararası insancıl hukukta sivil nesnelerin korunmasına ilişkin rejimin fiziksel varlığı bulunmayan dijital verileri ne ölçüde kapsadığı sorusunu gündeme getirmektedir. Tartışmanın merkezinde, 1977 tarihli I No.lu Ek Protokol’ün (I No.lu Ek Protokol) 52. maddesinde yer alan “nesne” kavramının dijital verileri kapsayacak şekilde yorumlanıp yorumlanamayacağı bulunmaktadır. Bu çalışma, maddeselliğin 52. maddede açıkça öngörülmüş bağımsız bir hukuki unsur olmadığını ve tanımlanmamış “nesne” kavramının Viyana Andlaşmalar Hukuku Sözleşmesi’nin 31. maddesinde yer alan yorum kuralları çerçevesinde belirli dijital verileri kapsayacak şekilde yorumlanabileceğini savunmaktadır. Bununla birlikte bu yaklaşım, tüm dijital verilerin kendiliğinden “nesne” sayılmasını değil, özellikle sivil yaşamın ve temel sivil hizmetlerin devamlılığı bakımından işlevsel önem taşıyan verilerin koruma kapsamına alınmasını gerektirmektedir. Böyle bir yorum, yeni bir hukuk kuralı yaratılmasından ziyade mevcut hukukun değişen teknolojik koşullara uygulanmasını ifade etmektedir.

Keywords

• Uluslararası İnsancıl Hukuk
• Dijital Veri
• Siber Operasyonlar
• Nesne Kavramı
• Teleolojik Yorum

Beyond Materiality: Reinterpreting the Concept of “Object” under International Humanitarian Law in the Digital Age

Abstract

The increasing use of digital technologies in armed conflicts has made it possible to target digital data without causing damage to physical infrastructure. This development raises the question of the extent to which the international humanitarian law regime protecting civilian objects encompasses digital data that lack physical existence. At the center of this debate is whether the concept of “objects” in Article 52 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I can be interpreted to include digital data. This article argues that materiality is not expressly prescribed as an independent legal requirement under Article 52 and that the undefined concept of “objects” can be interpreted, in accordance with the rules of treaty interpretation set out in Article 31 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, to encompass certain digital data. This approach does not entail treating all digital data as “objects”; rather, it requires extending protection particularly to data that are functionally significant for the continuity of civilian life and essential civilian services. Such an interpretation constitutes an application of existing law to changing technological conditions rather than the creation of a new legal rule.

Keywords

• International Humanitarian Law
• Digital Data
• Cyber Operations
• Object
• Teleological Interpretation

References

1. Adu, Yao N. and Mirzet S. Ramich. “The Principle of Distinction Between Civilian Objects and Military Objectives in the Context of the Development of Information and Communication Technologies in Armed Conflicts”. Vestnik RUDN. International Relations. 25/1 (2025): 67–77.
2. Akkuş, Berkant. “Siber Çatışmada Sivil Verilerin Roma Statüsü Açısından Değerlendirilmesi”. Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi. 28/1 (2024): 393-434.
3. Albayrak, Gökhan. “İnsancıl Hukukun Temel İlkeleri ve Bu İlkelerin Tarihsel Gelişim Safhaları”. İçinde Uluslararası İnsancıl Hukuk, ed. Fatma Taşdemir ve Gökhan Albayrak, 15-35. Ankara: Adalet Yayınevi, 2018.
4. Biggio, Giacomo. “Regulating Non-Kinetic Effects of Cyber Operations: The ‘Loss of Functionality’ Approach and the Military Necessity-Humanity Balance under International Humanitarian Law”. Journal of Conflict and Security Law. 30/2 (2025): 241-263.
5. Biggio, Giacomo and Andraz Kastelic. International Humanitarian Law and Cyber Operations: (Consequences of) Divergent National Interpretations of “Attack” and “Data”. Geneva: United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, 2026. (Erişim Tarihi 10.09.2026). https://unidir.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/UNIDIR_International_Humanitarian_Law_Cyber_Operations_Divergent_Interpretations.pdf.
6. Bothe, Michael, Karl Josef Partsch and Waldemar A. Solf. New Rules for Victims of Armed Conflicts. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1982.
7. CyberPeace Institute, “Cyber Attacks in Times of Conflict: Analysis of Humanitarian Impact and Civilian Harm”, (Erişim Tarihi 29.07.2026), https://cyberconflicts.protect.ngo/.
8. Delerue, François. Cyber Operations and International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020.

9. Delerue, François. “Data Centers and International Humanitarian Law”. İçinde Big Data and Armed Conflict: Legal Issues Above and Below the Armed Conflict Threshold, ed. Laura A. Dickinson and Edward W. Berg, 207-228. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2024.
10. Djeffal, Christian. Static and Evolutive Interpretation of Treaties. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016.
11. Dörr, Oliver. “Article 31. General Rule of Interpretation”. İçinde Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties: A Commentary, ed. Oliver Dörr and Kirsten Schmalenbach, 559-616. Berlin: Springer, 2018.
12. Droege, Cordula. “Cyber Operations and International Humanitarian Law: Five Key Points”. ASIL Insights. 24/11 (2020). (Erişim Tarihi 10.09.2026). https://asil.org/insights/volume-24-issue-11/.
13. Durham, Helen. “Cyber Operations During Armed Conflict: 7 Essential Law and Policy Questions”. ICRC Humanitarian Law & Policy Blog, 26 March 2020, (Erişim Tarihi 29.07.2026), https://blogs.icrc.org/law-and-policy/2020/03/26/cyber-armed-conflict-7-law-policy-questions/.
14. Efrony, Dan and Yuval Shany. “A Rule Book on the Shelf? Tallinn Manual 2.0 on Cyberoperations and Subsequent State Practice”. American Journal of International Law. 112/4 (2018): 583-657.
15. Federal Department of Foreign Affairs of Switzerland. “Switzerland’s Position Paper on the Application of International Law in Cyberspace: Annex UN GGE 2019/2021”. 27 May 2021. (Erişim Tarihi 10.09.2026). https://www.eda.admin.ch/content/dam/eda/en/documents/aussenpolitik/voelkerrecht/20210527-Schweiz-Annex-UN-GGE-Cybersecurity-2019-2021_EN.pdf.
16. French Ministry of the Armed Forces. “International Law Applied to Operations in Cyberspace”. 2019. (Erişim Tarihi 10.09.2026). https://documents.unoda.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/French-position-on-international-law-applied-to-cyberspace.pdf.
17. Gardiner, Richard. Treaty Interpretation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.
18. Geiß, Robin and Henning Lahmann. “Cyber Warfare: Applying the Principle of Distinction in Digital Battlefields”. Israel Law Review. 45/3 (2012): 381–399.
19. von Glahn, Gerhard and James Larry Taulbee. Law Among Nations: An Introduction to Public International Law. New York: Routledge, 2016.
20. Gisel, Laurent, Tilman Rodenhäuser and Knut Dörmann. “Twenty Years On: International Humanitarian Law and the Protection of Civilians Against the Effects of Cyber Operations During Armed Conflicts”. International Review of the Red Cross. 102/913 (2020): 287–334.
21. Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, “Appendix: International Law in Cyberspace”, 26 September 2019, “International Humanitarian Law (Jus in Bello)”. (Erişim Tarihi 10 Eylül 2026). https://cyberlaw.ccdcoe.org/wiki/National_position_of_the_Netherlands_(2019).
22. Government Offices of Sweden. “Position Paper on the Application of International Law in Cyberspace”. July 2022. (Erişim Tarihi 10 Eylül 2026). https://www.government.se/reports/2022/07/position-paper-on-the-application-of-international-law-in-cyberspace/.
23. Harrison Dinniss, Heather A. “The Nature of Objects: Targeting Networks and the Challenge of Defining Cyber Military Objectives”. Israel Law Review. 48/1 (2015): 39-54.
24. Henckaerts, Jean-Marie and Louise Doswald-Beck. Customary International Humanitarian Law, Vol. I: Rules. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
25. Herdegen, Matthias. “Interpretation in International Law”, Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, Oxford University Press, (Erişim Tarihi 29.07.2026), https://opil.ouplaw.com/display/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e723.
26. ICRC, The Potential Human Cost of Cyber Operations, 2019, (Erişim Tarihi 29.07.2026), https://www.icrc.org/en/document/potential-human-cost-cyber-operations.
27. ICRC, International Humanitarian Law and Cyber Operations during Armed Conflicts, November 2019, (Erişim Tarihi 29.07.2026), https://www.icrc.org/sites/default/files/document/file_list/icrc_ihl-and-cyber-operations-during-armed-conflicts.pdf.
28. ICRC, International Humanitarian Law and the Challenges of Contemporary Armed Conflicts: Building a Culture of Compliance for IHL to Protect Humanity in Today’s and Future Conflicts, Geneva, September 2024, (Erişim Tarihi 29.07.2026),https://www.icrc.org/en/publication/international-humanitarian-law-and-challenges-contemporary-armed-conflicts-building.
29. ICRC, Principles of Humanity and Necessity, March 2023, (Erişim Tarihi 29.07.2026), https://www.icrc.org/sites/default/files/wysiwyg/war-and-law/02_humanity_and_necessity-0.pdf.
30. ICRC, Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, Geneva, 1987, (Erişim Tarihi 29.07.2026), https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/llmlp/Commentary_GC_Protocols/Commentary_GC_Protocols.pdf.
31. ICRC, What is International Humanitarian Law?, 2004, https://www.icrc.org/sites/default/files/document/file_list/what-is-ihl-factsheet.pdf; ICRC, What is International Humanitarian Law, 2022, (Erişim Tarihi 29.07.2026), https://www.icrc.org/en/document/what-international-humanitarian-law.
32. ICRC, “Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field”, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Commentary of 2016, (Erişim Tarihi 29.07.2026), https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gci-1949/article-1/commentary/2016.
33. International Law Commission (ILC). “Draft Conclusions on Subsequent Agreements and Subsequent Practice in Relation to the Interpretation of Treaties”. Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-Third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10). New York: United Nations, 2018, https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/commentaries/1_11_2018.pdf.
34. Mačák, Kubo. “Military Objectives 2.0: The Case for Interpreting Computer Data as Objects under International Humanitarian Law”. Israel Law Review. 48/1 (2015): 55-80.
35. Mačák, Kubo, Talita Dias and Ágnes Kasper. Handbook on Developing a National Position on International Law and Cyber Activities: A Practical Guide for States. 2025. (Erişim Tarihi 11.09.2026). https://ccdcoe.org/uploads/2025/05/Handbook-on-Developing-a-National-Position-on-International-Law-and-Cyber-Activities_A-Practical-Guide-for-States.pdf.
36. McCormack, Tim. “International Humanitarian Law and the Targeting of Data”. International Law Studies. 94 (2018): 222-240.
37. Microsoft, “Microsoft Digital Defense Report 2023: Building and Sustaining Cyber Resilience”, October 2023, (Erişim Tarihi 29.07.2026), https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security/security-insider/threat-landscape/microsoft-digital-defense-report-2023.
38. Orakhelashvili, Alexander. Akehurst’s Modern Introduction to International Law. London: Routledge, 2022.
39. Pazarcı, Hüseyin. Uluslararası Hukuk. Ankara: Turhan Kitabevi, 2023.
40. Pomson, Ori. “‘Objects’? The Legal Status of Computer Data under International Humanitarian Law”. Journal of Conflict and Security Law. 28/2 (2023): 349-387.
41. Schmitt, Michael N. Tallinn Manual 2.0 on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Operations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.
42. Schmitt, Michael N. “Wired Warfare 3.0: Protecting the Civilian Population During Cyber Operations”. International Review of the Red Cross. 101/1 (2019): 333–355.
43. Schmitt, Michael N. “The Notion of ‘Objects’ during Cyber Operations: A Riposte in Defence of Interpretive and Applicative Precision”. Israel Law Review. 48/1 (2015): 81-109.
44. Shaw, Malcolm N. International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.
45. Solis, Gary D. The Law of Armed Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
46. United Kingdom. “Application of International Law to States’ Conduct in Cyberspace: United Kingdom Statement”. 2021. (Erişim Tarihi 10.09.2026). https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/application-of-international-law-to-states-conduct-in-cyberspace-uk-statement.
47. U.S. Department of Defense. Law of War Manual. June 2015, Updated July 2023. (Erişim Tarihi 10.09.2026). https://media.defense.gov/2023/Jul/31/2003271432/-1/-1/0/dod-law-of-war-manual-june-2015-updated-july%202023.pdf.
48. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. 23 May 1969. United Nations Treaty Series, Vol. 1155, 331.
49. Villiger, Mark E. Commentary on the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Leiden: Brill, 2009.