Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi Kapsamında Açılan Devletlerarası Davalar

Abstract

Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi’nin (AİHS veya Sözleşme) ilk metninden itibaren devletlerarası başvuru yolu taraf devletler için zorunlu bir denetim mekanizması olarak öngörülmüştür. Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi (AİHM veya Mahkeme) önündeki yaklaşık 62.000 derdest bireysel başvuruya karşılık bugüne kadar toplam 29 devletlerarası dava açılmıştır. Ancak son zamanlarda sayısı artan ve devletlerarası çatışmalardan kaynaklanan devletlerarası başvurular üzerinde önemle durulması gereken bir konu haline gelmiştir. AİHS kapsamında açılan devletlerarası davaları ele alan bu çalışma üç bölümden oluşmaktadır. Birinci bölümde, AİHS kapsamında açılan devletlerarası davaların usulü, kabul edilebilirlik ve esas yönünden incelenmesi üzerinde durulmakta; ikinci bölümde, AİHS kapsamında açılan devletlerarası davalar hakkında bugüne kadar verilen kararlar ve halen derdest olan devletlerarası davalar incelenmekte, üçüncü ve son bölümde ise AİHS kapsamında açılan devletlerarası davaların etki ve sonuçları değerlendirilmektedir.

Keywords

• Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi
• Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi
• devletlerarası davalar
• erga omnes yükümlülükler
• geçici tedbirler

The Inter-State Cases Submitted under the European Convention on Human Rights

Abstract

Starting from the initial text of the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR” or “the Convention”), the inter-state cases are provided as a compulsory monitoring mechanism for High Contracting Parties. Although there are nearly 62.000 individual applications pending before the European Court of Human Rights (“ECtHR” or “the Court”), only 29 inter-state cases were submitted under the Convention so far. Nevertheless the inter-state cases has become an important subject to study since the number of these cases tend to increase and some are originating frominter-state conflicts. This paper examines various aspects of the inter-state cases submitted under the ECHR and includes three parts. The first part explores the proceedings, examination of admissibility and merits of inter-state applications submitted under the Convention; the second part examines the decisions and judgments rendered by the Convention organs on inter-state cases so far and deals with the pending inter-state applications submitted under the Convention; and the last part analyses the impact and consequences of the inter-state applications brought under the Convention.

Keywords

• European Convention on Human Rights
• European Court of Human Rights
• inter-state cases
• erga omnes obligations
• interim measures

References

1. Council of Europe Steering Committee for Human Rights, “Draft CDDH report on the effective processing and resolution of cases relating to inter-State disputes”, DHSYSC- IV(2020)04, 8 Temmuz 2020, https://rm.coe.int/steering-committee-forhuman- rights-cddh-committee-of-experts-on-the-s/16809f02d7 (19 Ekim 2020).
2. De Schutter, Olivier, International Human Rights Law – Cases, Materials, Commentary, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2019.
3. European Court of Human Rights, “Factsheet – Interim measures”, https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/ fs_interim_measures_eng.pdf (19 Ekim 2020).
4. European Court of Human Rights, “Inter-State applications: By date of introduction of the applications”, Strasbourg, Ekim 2020, https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/InterState_applications_ENG.pdf (28 Ekim 2020).
5. European Court of Human Rights Press Unit, Q & A on Inter-State Cases, Ekim 2020, https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Press_Q_A_Inter-State_cases_ENG.pdf (19 Ekim 2020).
6. European Court of Human Rights, Practice Directions, Just satisfaction claims, https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/PD_satisfaction_claims_ENG.pdf (19 Ekim 2020).
7. European Court of Human Rights, Practice Directions, Requests for interim measures (Rule 39 of the Rules of Court), https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/PD_interim_measures_ENG.pdf (19 Ekim 2020).
8. Franck, Thomas M., “On Proportionality of Countermeasures in International Law” The American Journal of International Law Journal, Cilt 102, Sayı 4, 2008.

9. Greer, Steven, The European Convention on Human Rights: Achievements, Problems and Prospects, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006.
10. Koch, Julia, “The Efficacy and Impact of Interim Measures: Ukraine’s Inter-State Application against Russia”, Boston College International and Comparative Law Review, Cilt 39, Sayı 1, 2016.
11. Leckie, Scott, “The Inter-State Complaint Procedure in International Human Rights Law: Hopeful Prospects or Wishful Thinking”, Human Rights Quarterly, Cilt 10, Sayı 2, 1988.
12. Pigrau, Antoni, “Reflections on the effectiveness of peremptory norms and erga omnes obligations before international tribunals, regarding the request for an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on the Chagos Islands” Questions of International Law Journal, Cilt 55, 2018.
13. Prebensen, Søren C., “Inter-State Complaints under Treaty Provisions – The Experience under the European Convention on Human Rights”, Ed: Gudmundur Alfredsson vd., International Human Rights Monitoring Mechanisms, Yenilenmiş İkinci Edisyon, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden, 2009.
14. Risini, Isabella, “The Inter-State Application Under the European Convention on Human Rights: More Than Diplomatic Protection”, The Influence of Human Rights on International Law, Ed: Norman Weiß ve Jean-Marc Thouvenin, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2015.Risini, Isabella, The Inter-State Application under the European Convention on Human Rights: Between Collective Enforcement of Human Rights and International Dispute Settlement, Brill Nijhoff, Leiden, 2018.
15. Schabas, William A., The European Convention on Human Rights – A Commentary, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2015.
16. Tams, Christian J., Enforcing Obligations Erga Omnes in International Law, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005.
17. White, John T., “The European Commission of Human Rights: An Analysis and Appraisal”, Brooklyn Journal of International Law, Cilt 3, Sayı 2, 1977.
18. https://echr.coe.int/Documents/ Stats_month_2020_ENG.PDF (19 Ekim 2020)
19. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{„documentcollectionid2“:[„GRANDCHAMBER“,“CHAMBER“]} (19 Ekim 2020).
20. https://www.achpr.org/legalinstruments/detail?id=49 (19 Ekim 2020).
21. https://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/search-on-treaties/-/conventions/treaty/results/subject/3 (19 Ekim 2020).
22. https://www.cidh.oas.org/basicos/english/basic3.american%20convention.htm (19Ekim 2020).
23. https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_TUR.pdf (19 Ekim 2020).
24. https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Rules_Court_TUR.pdf (19 Ekim 2020).
25. https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Rules_Court_ENG.pdf (19 Ekim 2020).
26. https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Rules_Court_FRA.pdf (19 Ekim 2020).
27. https://www.echr.coe.int/pages/home.aspx?p=court/judges (19 Ekim 2020).
28. https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/50/judgments (19 Ekim 2020).
29. http://www.ksrf.ru/en/Decision/Judgments/Documents/2017_January_19_1-P.pdf (19 Ekim 2020).
30. https://www.ohchr.org/en/hrbodies/tbpetitions/pages/hrtbpetitions.aspx (19 Ekim2020).
31. https://legal.un.org/avl/ha/adp/adp.html (19 Ekim 2020).
32. https://legal.un.org/avl/ha/rsiwa/rsiwa.html (19 Ekim 2020).