Yumuşak Hukuk Tartışmaları Çerçevesinde BM İş Dünyası ve İnsan Hakları Rehber İlkeleri’nin Değerlendirilmesi

Cansu Atılgan Pazvantoğlu

doi:10.33433/maruhad.994733

Yumuşak Hukuk Tartışmaları Çerçevesinde BM İş Dünyası ve İnsan Hakları Rehber İlkeleri’nin Değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, BM İş Dünyası ve İnsan Hakları Rehber İlkeleri’ni, yumuşak hukuk ve sert hukuk ilişkisi çerçevesinde uluslararası hukukta güncelliğini koruyan yumuşak hukuk tartışmaları ve eleştirileri kapsamında değerlendirmek, Rehber İlkeleri’nin güncel durumunu irdeleyerek, var olan etkinliğinin söz konusu tartışmalarla ilişkisini çözümlemektir. Çalışma kapsamında yumuşak hukukun tanım ve kapsamına yer verilmiş, yumuşak hukuka ilişkin tartışmalar sınıflandırılmış ve örneklenmiştir. Uluslararası alanda insan hakları ve iş dünyası alanlarının etkileşiminin ve bununla birlikte yumuşak hukukun önemli bir örneğini oluşturan BM İş Dünyası ve İnsan Hakları Rehber İlkeleri (UNGPs) çalışmanın çözümleme ögesi olarak ele alınmış, Rehber İlkeleri’ne yönelik sert hukuk, yumuşak hukuk ve karma yaklaşımları uluslararası hukuktaki yumuşak hukuk tartışmalarıyla ilişkilendirilmiştir. Tarihsel süreçte insan hakları ve iş dünyası etkileşimi konuya ilişkin BM düzenlemelerinin incelenmesiyle aktarılmış, BM İş Dünyası ve İnsan Hakları Rehber İlkeleri’nin bu süreçteki yeri, güncel COVID 19 krizindeki etkinliği sorgulanarak temellendirilmiştir. Yumuşak hukukun bağlayıcılığının olmaması ve denetim işleyişinin yokluğu Rehber İlkeleri konusunda en önemli eleştiriler arasında yer alırken bir uluslararası antlaşma yapılabilmesi konusunda da uluslararası bir uzlaşı sağlanamamaktadır. Değerlendirme, BM İş Dünyası ve İnsan Hakları Rehber İlkeleri’nin yumuşak hukuk olarak etkinliğini sürdürmesini, sert hukuka dönüşmesini ya da karma biçimde varlık göstermesini savunan görüşlerle süregiden tartışmalar doğrultusunda yapılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kaynakça

Abbott KW and Duncan S, ‘Hard and Soft Law in International Governance’ (2000) 54 International Organization 421-456.
Backer LC, ‘Moving Forward the UN Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights: Between Enterprise Social Norm, State Domestic Legal Orders, and the Treaty Law That Might Bind Them All’ (2015) 38(2) Fordham International Law Journal 457-542.
Barakat N, ‘The U.N. Guiding Principles: Beyond Soft Law’ (2016) 12(3) Hastings Business Law Journal, 591-613.
Betts A, ‘Towards a ‘soft law’ Framework for the Protection of Vulnerable Migrants’ (2008) 13 (162) New Issues in Refugee Research (Policy Development and Evaluation Service, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees) 1-26.
Blutman L, ‘In the Trap of a Legal Metaphor: International Soft Law’ (2010) 59 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 605-624.
Bialek J, ‘Evaluating the Zero Draft on a UN Treaty on Business and Human Rights: What Does it Regulate and how Likely is its Adoption by States?’ (2019) (9) Goettingen Journal of International Law 501-536.
Bodonsky D, ‘The Art and Craft of International Environmental Law’ (Harvard University Press 2011).
Boyle AE, ‘Some Reflections on the Relationship of Treaties and Soft Law’ (1999) 48(4) International and Comparative Law Quarterly 901-913.

Boyle AE and Chinkin C, ‘The Making of International Law’ (Oxford University Press 2007).
Brabant S and Sousa M and Eaton C, ‘Business and Human Rights: A (R)evolution of the Law?’ (Herbert Smith Freehills 2021) accessed 03 September 2021.
Broek OV, ‘Soft Law Engagements and Hard Law Preferences: Comparing EU Lobbying Positions between UN Global Compact Signatory Firms and Other Interest Group Types’ (2021) 23 Business and Politics 383-405.
Cassel D, ‘Does the World Need a Treaty on Business and Human Rights? Weighing the Pros and Cons’ (Notre Dame Law School Notre Dame London Centre 14 May 2014).
Choudhury B, ‘Balancing Soft and Hard Law for Business and Human Rights’ (2018) 67(4) International and Comparative Law Quarterly 961-986.
Cirlig RE, ‘Business and human rights: from soft law to hard law?’ (2016) 6(2) 228-246.
European Parliament, Directorate-General for External Policies, Policy Department, ‘Implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights’ (February 2017) EP Doc EP/EXPO/B/COMMITTEE/FWC/2013-08/Lot8/09, doi:10.2861/29813
Fastenrath U, ‘Relative Normativity in International Law’ (1993) 4(1) European Journal of International Law, 324-339.
Gabriel HD, ‘The Advantages of International Commercial Law: The Role of UNIDROIT, UNCITRAL and The Hague Conference’ (2009) 34(3) Brooklyn Journal of International Law 655-672.
Ghafele R and Mercer A, ‘’Not Starting in Sixth Gear’: An Assesment of the UN Global Compact’s Use of Soft Law as a Global Governance Structure for Corporate Social Responsibility’ (2011) 17(1) U.C. Davis J. Int'l L. & Pol'y 41-60.
Goldmann M, ‘We Need to Cut Off theHead of the King: Past, Present, and Future Approaches to International Soft Law’ (2012) 25 335-368.
Grant JP and Barker JC, Encyclopaedic Dictionary of International Law (Oxford University Press 2009).
Grnchalla-Wesierski T, ‘A Framework for “Understanding Soft Law’ (1984) 30 McGill Law Journal 37-88.
Guruparan K and Zerk J, ‘Influence of soft law grows in International governance’ (Chatham House, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 17 June 2021) accessed 02 September 2021.
Guzman AT, ‘The Design of International Agreements’ (2005) 16(4) The European Journal of International Law 583-591.
Hamm B, ‘The Struggle for Legitimacy in Business and Human Rights Regulation—a Consideration of the Processes Leading to the UN Guiding Principles and an International Treaty’ (2021) Human Rights Review.
Hurwitz AG, ‘The Collective Responsibility of States to Protect Refugees’ (Oxford University Press 2009).
International Labour Organization, ‘ILO Conventions and Recommendations’ (ILO) accessed 10 July 2021
International Organisation of Employers (IOE), ‘#UNGPsPlus10, Achievements, challenges, and the way forward in the uptake and implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights’ (European Union February 2021).
İlhami Alkan Olsson, ‘Four Competing Approaches to International Soft Law’ (2013) 58 Scandinavian Studies in Law 177-196.
Keller H, ‘Codes of Conduct and their Implementation: the Question of Legitimacy’ in Rüdiger Wolfrum and Volker Röben (eds) Legitimacy in International Law (Max-Planck Institut, Springer 2008).
Klabbers J, ‘The Redundancy of Soft Law’ (1996) 65(2) Nordisk Journal of International Law 167-182.
Klabbers J, ‘Reflections on Soft International Law in a Privatized World’ in Jan Klabbers (ed), Finnish Yearbook of International Law c. XVI (Leiden: Koninklijke Brill NV 2008) 313-328.
Lindsay R, Kirkpatrick A and Low JE, ‘Hardly Soft Law: The Modern Slavery Act 2015 and the Trend Towards Mandatory Reporting on Human Rights’ (2017) 18(1) Business Law International 29-50.
Marochkin S and Khalafyan R, ‘The Norms of International Soft Law in the Legal System of the Russian Federation’ (2013) 6(2) Journal of Politics and Law 90-104.
Matsushita M, ‘A View on Future Roles of The WTO: Should There be More Soft Law in The WTO?’ (2014) 17 Journal of International Economic Law 701-715.
Meyer T, ‘Soft Law as Delegation’ (2009) 32 Fordham Int'l L.J. 888-940.
NautaDutilh, ‘Soft Law, sometimes harder’ (NautaDutilh International Law Firm) accessed 03 September 2021.
Neuhold H, ‘The Inadequacy of Law Making by International Treaties: Soft Law as an Alternative?’ in Rüdiger Wolfrum and Volker Röben (eds) Developments of International Law in Treaty Making (Springer 2005).
Parella K, ‘Hard and Soft Law Preferences in Business and Human Rights’ (2020) 114 AJIL Unbound 168-173.
Paulo S and Reisen H, ‘Eastern Donors and Western Soft Law: Towards a DAC Donor Peer Review of China and India?’ (2010) 25(5) Development Policy Review 535-552.
Raustiala K, ‘Form and Substance in International Agreements’ (2005) 99(58) The American Journal of International Law 581-614.
Robilant AD, ‘Genealogies of Soft Law’ (2006) 54(3) The American Journal of Comparative Law 499-554.
Ruggie JG, ‘Business and Human Rights: The Evolving International Agenda’ (2007) 101(4) The American Journal of International Law 819-840.
Ruggie JG and Sherman JF, ‘Adding Human Rights Punch to the New Lex Mercatoria : The Impact of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights on Commercial Legal Practice’ (2015) 6(3) Journal of International Dispute Settlement 455-461.
Ruggie JG, ‘Social Norms, Soft Law, Hard Law: The Evolution of Business and Human Rights’, (The Castan Centre for Human Rights Law, Monash Business School and Global Compact Network Australia, Public Lecture, Docklands, 30 April 2019)
Schutter O, ‘Towards a New Treaty on Business and Human Rights’ (2015) 1 Business and Human Rights Journal 41-67.
Shaffer GC and Pollack MA, ‘Hard Versus Soft Law in International Security’ (2011) 52(4) Boston Collage Law Review 1147-1167.
Shaffer GC and Pollack MA, ‘Hard vs. Soft Law: Alternatives, Complements and Antogonists in International Governance’ (2010) 9 (23) University of Minnesota Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series 706-799.
Schäfer A, ‘Resolving Deadlock: Why International Organisations Introduce Soft Law’ (2006) 12(2) European Law Journal 194-208.
Shaw MN, ‘International Law’ (Cambridge University Press 2008).
Shelton DL, ‘Encyclopedia of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity’ (Thomson Gale, 2005) 567; Finn Seyersted, Common Law of International Organizations ( Nijhoff 2008).
Shift, Oxfam and Global Compact Network Hollanda, ‘İnsan Haklarına Saygılı İş Yapma: Şirketlere Yönelik Kılavuz’ (2016).
Simma B, ‘Consent, Strains in the Treaty System’ in Ronald St. J. Macdonald and Douglas M. Johnston (eds) The Structure and Process of International Law: Essays in Legal Philosophy Doctrine and Theory (Martinus Nijhoff 1983).
Triponel A, ‘When soft law is not so soft: The rapid legalisation of business and human rights’ (Triponel Consulting, 14 October 2019) accessed 03 September 2021.
Trubek DM and Trubek LG, ‘Hard and Soft Law in the Construction of Social Europe: the Role of the Open Method of Co-ordination’ (2005) 11(3) European Law Journal 343-364.
United Nations Economic and Social Council ‘Norms on the responsibilities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises with regard to human rights’ (26 August 2003) UN Doc E/CN.4/Sub.2/2003/12/Rev.2
United Nations General Assembly, ‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights, General Assembly resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948’ (OHCHR) https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet2Rev.1en.pdf
UNGA, ‘Towards global partnerships: a principle-based approach to enhanced cooperation between the United Nations and all relevant partners’ (7 February 2014) UN Doc A/RES/68/234
United Nations Global Compact, ‘What is the UN Global Compact’ accessed 05 July 2021; Ayrıca bknz: UN Global Compact Network Türkiye, ‘Hakkımızda’, https://www.globalcompactturkiye.org/un-global-compact/ Erişim Tarihi: 05 Temmuz 2021.
UN Global Compact Office, ‘The Global Compact Brochure’ (United Nations 2004).
UN Global Compact, “Guidance on Responsible Business in Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas: A Resource for Companies and Investors”, UN Global Compact Office-PRI Publication, 2010.
UN Global Compact, Annie Golden Bersagel, “Meeting the Responsibility to Respect in Situations of Conflicting Legal Requirements”, A Good Practice Note endorsed by the United Nations Global Compact Human Rights Working Group on 13 June 2011.
UN Global Compact and OCHR, ‘A Guide for Business: How to Develop a Human Rights Policy’, (United Nations Global Compact Office and Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2015).
UN Global Compact, ‘The Ten Principles of the UN Global Compact, Principle One: Human Rights’ (UN Global Compact) accessed 02 August 2021.
UN Global Compact, ‘The Ten Principles of the UN Global Compact, Principle Two: Human Rights’ (UN Global Compact) accessed 02 August 2021.
UN Global Compact, ‘UN Global Compact Strategy 2021-2023’ (19 January 2021) accessed 20 August 2021.
UN Global Compact, ‘#UnitingBusiness to Respond to COVID 19’ accessed 21 August 2021.
United Nations, ‘Global Compact Summit Concludes with Emphasis on Need to Fight Corruption, Global Compact Leaders Summit Press Release’ (24 June 2004) UN Doc ECO/70
United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) ‘Mandate of the Special Representative of the Secretary General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises’ (18 June 2008) UN Doc A/HRC/RES/8/7
UNHRC ‘Report of the Special Representative of the SecretaryGeneral on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, John Ruggie, Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework’ (21 March 2011) UN Doc A/HRC/17/31
UNHRC ‘Human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises’ (06 July 2011) UN Doc A/HRC/RES/17/4
UNHRC ‘Contribution of the United Nations system as a whole to the advancement of the business and human rights agenda and the dissemination and implementation of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights’ (16 October 2012) UN Doc A/HRC/RES/21/5
UNHRC ‘Elaboration of an international legally binding instrument on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights’ (14 July 2014) UN Doc A/HRC/RES/26/9
UNHRC ‘Human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises’ (15 July 2014) UN Doc A/HRC/RES/26/22
UNHRC ‘Business and human rights: improving accountability and access to remedy’ (15 July 2016) UN Doc A/HRC/RES/32/10
UNHRC ‘Business and human rights: mandate of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises’ (14 July 2017) UN Doc A/HRC/RES/35/7
UNHRC ‘Business and human rights: improving accountability and access to remedy’ (18 July 2018) UN Doc A/HRC/RES/38/13
UNHRC ‘Business and human rights: the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, and improving accountability and access to remedy’ (23 July 2020) UN Doc A/HRC/RES/44/15
United Nations ‘Secretary-General Proposes Global Compact on Human Rights, Labaour, Environment, in Address to World Economic Forum in Davos, Press Release’ (1 February 1999) UN Doc SG/SM/6881
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1446 (2002) (4 December 2002) UN Doc S/RES/1446
UNSC Resolution 1459 (2003) (28 January 2003) UN Doc S/RES/1459
UNSC Resolution 1472 (2003) (28 March 2003) UN Doc S/RES/1472
United Nations, ‘Transcript of Press Conference by Secretary-General Kofi Annan at Headquarters’ (26 July 2000) UN Doc SG/SM/7496
White & Case, ‘Soft Law gets a hard look’ (White&Case Legal Education, 24 March 2017) accessed 02 September 2021.
Williamson JrRL, ‘Hard Law, Soft Law, and Non-Law in Multilateral Arms Control: Some Compliance Hypotheses’ (2003) 4(1) 5982.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

Türkçe

Konular

Hukuk

Bölüm

Araştırma Makalesi

Yazarlar

Cansu Atılgan Pazvantoğlu ^*
0000-0002-5404-8064
Türkiye

Yayımlanma Tarihi

3 Aralık 2021

Gönderilme Tarihi

13 Eylül 2021

Kabul Tarihi

8 Kasım 2021

Yayımlandığı Sayı

Yıl 2021 Cilt: 27 Sayı: 2

DOI

https://doi.org/10.33433/maruhad.994733

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA43BU47PW

Kaynak Göster

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Atılgan Pazvantoğlu, C. (2021). Yumuşak Hukuk Tartışmaları Çerçevesinde BM İş Dünyası ve İnsan Hakları Rehber İlkeleri’nin Değerlendirilmesi. Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi, 27(2), 1131-1155. https://doi.org/10.33433/maruhad.994733

AMA

1.Atılgan Pazvantoğlu C. Yumuşak Hukuk Tartışmaları Çerçevesinde BM İş Dünyası ve İnsan Hakları Rehber İlkeleri’nin Değerlendirilmesi. Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi. 2021;27(2):1131-1155. doi:10.33433/maruhad.994733

Chicago

Atılgan Pazvantoğlu, Cansu. 2021. “Yumuşak Hukuk Tartışmaları Çerçevesinde BM İş Dünyası ve İnsan Hakları Rehber İlkeleri’nin Değerlendirilmesi”. Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi 27 (2): 1131-55. https://doi.org/10.33433/maruhad.994733.

EndNote

Atılgan Pazvantoğlu C (01 Aralık 2021) Yumuşak Hukuk Tartışmaları Çerçevesinde BM İş Dünyası ve İnsan Hakları Rehber İlkeleri’nin Değerlendirilmesi. Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi 27 2 1131–1155.

IEEE

[1]C. Atılgan Pazvantoğlu, “Yumuşak Hukuk Tartışmaları Çerçevesinde BM İş Dünyası ve İnsan Hakları Rehber İlkeleri’nin Değerlendirilmesi”, Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi, c. 27, sy 2, ss. 1131–1155, Ara. 2021, doi: 10.33433/maruhad.994733.

ISNAD

Atılgan Pazvantoğlu, Cansu. “Yumuşak Hukuk Tartışmaları Çerçevesinde BM İş Dünyası ve İnsan Hakları Rehber İlkeleri’nin Değerlendirilmesi”. Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi 27/2 (01 Aralık 2021): 1131-1155. https://doi.org/10.33433/maruhad.994733.

JAMA

1.Atılgan Pazvantoğlu C. Yumuşak Hukuk Tartışmaları Çerçevesinde BM İş Dünyası ve İnsan Hakları Rehber İlkeleri’nin Değerlendirilmesi. Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi. 2021;27:1131–1155.

MLA

Atılgan Pazvantoğlu, Cansu. “Yumuşak Hukuk Tartışmaları Çerçevesinde BM İş Dünyası ve İnsan Hakları Rehber İlkeleri’nin Değerlendirilmesi”. Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi, c. 27, sy 2, Aralık 2021, ss. 1131-55, doi:10.33433/maruhad.994733.

Vancouver

1.Cansu Atılgan Pazvantoğlu. Yumuşak Hukuk Tartışmaları Çerçevesinde BM İş Dünyası ve İnsan Hakları Rehber İlkeleri’nin Değerlendirilmesi. Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi. 01 Aralık 2021;27(2):1131-55. doi:10.33433/maruhad.994733

Cited By

ULUSLARARASI SUÇLARA YÖNELİK KRİMİNOLOJİK YAKLAŞIMLARIN ULUSLARARASI HUKUK KAPSAMINDA DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Kırıkkale Hukuk Mecmuası

https://doi.org/10.59909/khm.1347204

International Cultural Heritage Law: A Systematic Review of Its Effectiveness

The Historic Environment: Policy & Practice

https://doi.org/10.1080/17567505.2025.2490875

Kurumsal Yönetim Kapsamında İklim Değişikliği Raporlaması: Düzenleyici Perspektiften Halka Açık Anonim Şirketlerde Raporlamaya İlişkin Güncel Standartların Değerlendirilmesi

Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi

https://doi.org/10.34246/ahbvuhfd.1463154

İKLİM DEĞİŞİKLİĞİ VE ÇOCUK HAKLARI EKSENİNDE BİRLEŞMİŞ MİLLETLER ÇOCUK HAKLARI KOMİTESİNİN 26 SAYILI GENEL YORUMUNUN TÜRKİYE’DE UYGULANMASININ ÖNÜNDEKİ HUKUKİ BOŞLUKLAR VE ENGELLER

Kırklareli Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi

https://doi.org/10.62124/kluhfd.1801104

Şirketlerin İklimsel Özen Yükümlülüğü ve İklim Kriziyle Mücadelede Karbon Denkleştirme Mekanizmaları

Hacettepe Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi

https://doi.org/10.32957/hacettepehdf.1698796