Translation of the German Federal Constitutional Court’s Plane Hijack Verdict and Analysis of the Relationship Between Human Rights and Terrorism Based on This Verdict

Year 2024, Volume: 82 Issue: 4, 1231 - 1269, 30.12.2024

Berk Cem Tatar

Abstract

When compared, isthe life of 10,000 people more important than the lives of 150? Ifso, can human life be viewed only as a quantitative number? Before answering the question, it should be considered that is it possible to look only at numbers without looking at people’s backgrounds? The German Federal Constitutional Court discussed this situation in detail in its verdict examined in this study. For this reason, in this study, a critical verdict in this regard was translated into Turkish, and then an analysis was written in terms of the method of reaching the result in the decision. During the analysis in question, philosophical approaches were made that the right to life cannot be objectified and that human beings can only be the subject of a right. In addition, the methods used by the German Constitutional Court during the examination of the case in question were discussed. In this case, which arose out of an enacted law, the Court did not use only the legal background while examining it. Members of Parliament with different opinions were given the opportunity to present their views on the case. In addition, not only the deputies submitted their opinions, but also the German Armed Forces Association, the Pilots’ Association, and the Independent Flight Attendant Organisation submitted written opinions. With this approach, the differences in the examination of a case before the Turkish Constitutional Court are also mentioned.

Keywords

Human Rights , Right to Life , Human Dignity , Constitution , Terrorism

Alman Federal Anayasa Mahkemesi Kararının Tercümesi ve Bu Karar Üzerinden İnsan Hakları ve Terörizm İlişkisinin Analizi

Abstract

10.000 insanın hayatı 150 insanın hayatından daha önemli midir? Eğer öyleyse, insan hayatı yalnızca nicel bir sayı olarak görülebilir mi? Söz konusu soruya cevap vermeden önce düşünülmelidir ki, insanların geçmişlerine bakmadan sadece rakamlara bakılabilir mi? Alman Federal Anayasa Mahkemesi’nin bu çalışmada incelenen kararında bu durum detaylı olarak tartıılmıtır. Bu nedenle, bu çalımada bu konuda çok büyük önem taıyan bir karar Türkçeye çevrilmi, akabinde de kararda ulaılan sonuçla birlikte ulaılma yöntemi bakımından da bir analiz yazılmıtır. Söz konusu analiz sırasında yaşam hakkının nesneleştirilemeyeceği ve insanın bir hakkın sadece öznesi olabileceği hususunda felsefi yaklaşımlarda bulunulmuştur. Ayrıca Alman Anayasa Mahkemesi’nin söz konusu davayı incelemesi sırasında başvurduğu yöntemler tartışılmıştır. Bir kanun kaynaklı vuku bulan bu davada Mahkeme incelerken sadece hukuki arka plandan faydalanmamıştır. Meclisteki farklı görüşteki milletvekillerine davada görüş sunma fırsatı tanınmıştır. Ek olarak sadece milletvekilleri görüş sunmamış, Alman Silahlı Kuvvetler Birliği, Pilotlar Birliği ve Bağımsız Uçuş Refakatçileri Örgütü de yazılı görüşler sunmuşlardır. Söz konusu yaklaşım ile Türk Anayasa Mahkemesi önünde bir davanın incelenmesi sırasındaki farklılıklara da değinilmiştir.

Keywords

İnsan Hakları , Yaşam Hakkı , İnsan Onuru , Anayasa , Terörizm

References

• Aktaş S, ‘Hukuk Devleti İdealine Felsefi Bir Bakış’ (2020) 1 Yıldırım Beyazıt Hukuk Dergisi 1-32. google scholar
• Beestermöller G, ‘Darf der Staat doch Unschuldige opfern? Taugt die Analogie mit der Wehrpflicht zur Rechtfertigung der Tötung Unschuldiger beim Flugzeugabschuss?’ 26(1) Security and Peace, Themenschwerpunkt: Maritime Sicherheit 38-43. google scholar
• Bingham T, The Rule of Law, (Penguen Books 2011). google scholar
• Brettschneider C, A Substantive Conception of the Rule of Law: Non-Arbitrary Treatment and the Limits of Procedure (NYU Press 2011). google scholar
• Cesare B, An Essay on Crimes and Punishments by the Marquıs Beccaria of Milan with a Commentary, (1st, W.O. Little & Co 1872). google scholar
• Council of the EU, European Security Strategy Paper (2003), <https://www.consilium.europa.eu/ media/30823/qc7809568enc.pdf > Date of Access 9 June 2023. google scholar
• Duymaz E, ‘Mahkeme’nin Dostlarından “İç Güvenlik Yasası” Uyarısı: Anayasa Mahkemesi’ne Sunulan İlk Amıcus Curıae Raporu Kabul Edildi’ (2015) 4(8) Anayasa Hukuku Dergisi 307-314. google scholar
• Eren A, Anayasa Hukuku Ders Notları (2. Bası, Seçkin Yayıncılık 2020). google scholar
• GeiB R, ‘Civil Aircraft as Weapons of Large-Scale Destruction: Countermeasures, Article 3BIS of the Chicago Convention, and the Newly Adopted German “Luftsicherheitsgesetz”” (2005) 27(1) Michigan Journal of International Law 227-256. google scholar
• Hoffman Bruce, ‘The Logic Of Suicide Terrorism’ (2003) (3) The Atlantic Monthly <https://www. theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2003/06/the-logic-of-suicide-terrorism/302739/> Date of Access 29 July 2023. google scholar
• Holger AK, ‘BVerfG: Verfassungsbeschwerde gegen § 14 Abs. 3 Luftsicherheitsgesetz’ (2006) 11(1) MRM - MenschenRechtsMagazin 95-103. google scholar
• Lepsius O, ‘Human Dignity and the Downing of Aircraft: The German Federal Constitutional Court Strikes Down a Prominent Anti-terrorism Provision in the New Air-transport Security Act’ (2006) 7(9) German Law Journal 761-776. google scholar
• Miguel Beltran De Felipe and Jose Mana Rodriguez De Santiago, ‘Shooting Down Hijacked Airplanes? Sorry, We’re Humanists. A Comment on the German Constitutional Court Decision of 2.15.2006, Regarding the Luftsicherheitsgesetz (2005 Air Security Act)’ (2007) Bepress Legal Series <https://law.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=9355&context=expresso> Date of Access 25 September 2023. google scholar
• Müller LF, ‘Identifying German Legal Approaches to Terror—How the Constitution Shapes Legislation Allowing the Shooting Down of a Hijacked Plane’ (2019) 19(1) German Law Journal 113-136. google scholar
• Naske N and Nolte G, ‘“Aerial Security Law.” Case No. 1 BvR 357/05. 115 BVerfGE 118’, (2007) 101(2) The American Journal of International Law 466-471. google scholar
• Öztaş C, ‘The March of the Mehteran Rethinking the Human Rights Critiques of Counter-Terrorism’, (2011) 7(2) Utrecht Law Review 180-191. google scholar
• Rory SB, (2007). ‘Shooting Down Civilian Aircraft: Illegal, Immoral and Just Plane Stupid’, (2007) 20(1) Revue Quebecoise de droit international 57-106. google scholar
• Sağlam F, ‘Hukuk Devleti ve Terör’ (2007) 62(3) Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi 291-317. google scholar
• Turan S ve Özkural Köroğlu N, Uluslararası İlişkilerde Teoriden Pratiğe Güncel Yaklaşımlar (1. Bası, Dora 2015). google scholar
• Youngs R, ‘Germany: Shooting Down Aircraft and Analyzing Computer Data’ (2008) 6(2) Oxford University Press 331-348. google scholar