Birleşmiş Milletler Deniz Hukuku Sözleşmesi Işığında Denizdeki Göçmen ve Mültecilere İlişkin Uluslararası Düzenlemeler ve Hukuk Boşlukları

Abstract

Bu makale, deniz yoluyla düzensiz olarak göç eden göçmen ve mültecilerin uluslararası deniz hukuku, özellikle de 1982 tarihli Birleşmiş Milletler Deniz Hukuku Sözleşmesi (BMDHS) kapsamında sahip olduğu hukuki korumayı ve devletlerin bu konudaki yükümlülüklerini incelemektedir. Son yıllarda seyrüsefer güvenliği bulunmayan bot ve gemilerle denize açılan düzensiz göçmen sayısındaki büyük artış, denizde kaybolma ve ölüm vakalarını önemli bir boyuta taşımıştır. Bu can kayıpları sadece denizin zorlu koşullarından değil, devletlerin ve gemi kaptanlarının arama ve kurtarma yükümlülüklerini ihmal etmelerinden de kaynaklanmaktadır. Dahası, bu tehlikeli yolculuklar esnasında kırılgan durumdaki göçmen ve mülteciler; göçmen kaçakçılığı ve insan ticareti gibi sınır aşan örgütlü suçların doğrudan hedefi haline gelmektedir. Bu çalışmada, BMDHS hükümlerinin arama ve kurtarma yükümlülüğü, insan ticareti ve göçmen kaçakçılığı bağlamında denizdeki göçmenleri korumada neden yetersiz kaldığı sorusuna odaklanılmakta ve etkili bir korumanın nasıl sağlanabileceği tartışılmaktadır. Bu çerçevede, Sözleşme’nin 98. Maddede yer alan yardım etme ödevinin temelini teşkil eden ‘tehlike’ ve ‘güvenli yer’ gibi kavramların tanımlanmadığı ve kapsamlarının muğlak bırakıldığı ortaya konmaktadır. Yükümlülüklerin esnetilmesinin yanı sıra, devletlerin ve gemi kaptanlarının sorumluluklarını ihlal etmeleri durumunda başvurulacak yaptırım ve tazminat mekanizmalarının bulunmaması, normatif bir koruma boşluğu yaratmaktadır. Çalışmada ayrıca, devletlerin göçmen kaçakçılığı ve insan ticaretiyle mücadelede iç sular, kara suları, bitişik bölge ve açık deniz gibi farklı deniz yetki alanlarında sahip olduğu müdahale ve cezai uygulama yetkileri incelenmiştir. BMDHS’nin mülteci ve göçmen odaklı doğrudan koruma normları içermediği saptandığından, tespit edilen eksikliklerin giderilmesi amacıyla insan hakları ve sınıraşan suçlar hukukuna ilişkin tamamlayıcı uluslararası sözleşmelere başvurulmuştur. Sonuç olarak, bu hukuki boşlukların diğer uluslararası mekanizmalarla giderilmesinin yanı sıra, BMDHS’nin de yaşayan bir enstrüman olarak kabul edilip çağın ihtiyaçlarına cevap verecek şekilde yorumlanması gerektiği kanaatine varılmıştır.

Keywords

• göçmen
• mülteci
• tehlike
• 1982 tarihli Birleşmiş Milletler Deniz Hukuku Sözleşmesi
• arama ve kurtarma yükümlülüğü
• insan ticareti
• göçmen kaçakçılığı
• köle taşınması yasağı

International Legal Framework and Protection Gaps Concerning Migrants and Refugees at Sea in the Light of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

Abstract

This article examines the protection afforded to migrants and refugees arriving irregularly by sea under international law of the sea, particularly within the framework of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and examines the obligations imposed on states in this regard. The recent upsurge in sea arrivals in unseaworthy vessels has led to a significant rise in the number of deaths and disappearances at sea. These are caused not only by the perilous maritime conditions at sea but also by the failure of states and ship masters to adequately discharge their search and rescue obligations. Moreover, during these maritime arrivals, vulnerable migrants and refugees become direct targets of transnational organized crime, including human trafficking and migrant smuggling. This article seeks to answer the questions of why the provisions of UNCLOS fail to effectively protect migrants and refugees in the context of search and rescue obligations, human trafficking, and migrant smuggling, and how such protection may be ensured. Regarding the search and rescue obligations in Article 98 of UNCLOS, it has been determined that key terms such as ‘distress’ and ‘place of safety’, which are important for fulfilling the obligations, remain undefined and ambiguous in scope. The lack of sanctions and compensation mechanisms in cases where states and ship masters fail to fulfil their obligations as well as the weakening of these obligations creates a normative protection gap. It then evaluates the powers of states to intervene and exercise criminal enforcement jurisdiction within the different maritime zones, such as internal waters, territorial sea, contiguous zone and the high seas in combating migrant smuggling and human trafficking. Given that UNCLOS lacks direct provisions on the protection of migrants and refugees, reference was made to other relevant international conventions regarding human rights and transnational organized crime in order to address identified gaps. It is concluded that, in addition to addressing the identified shortcomings through such instruments, UNCLOS must be accepted as a living instrument and interpreted in a manner that responds to the needs of this era.

Keywords

• migrant
• refugee
• distress
• United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (1982)
• search and rescue obligation
• human trafficking
• migrant smuggling
• prohibition on slave transport

References

1. Aksar Y, Uluslararası Hukuk II (6th edn, Seçkin Yayıncılık 2021). google scholar
2. Arslan Ç, ‘'İnsan Ticareti Suçu' (TCK md.201/b)’ (2004) 53(4) AÜHFD 19-83. google scholar
3. Attard FG, The Duty of the Shipmaster to Render Assistance at Sea under International Law (Brill/Nijhoff 2020). google scholar
4. Aydın G, ‘Deniz Yoluyla Gerçekleştirilen Düzensiz Göç ile Mücadelede Devletlerin Yetki ve Uygulamaları’ (2016) 4 Göç Araştırmaları Dergisi 120-211. google scholar
5. Barnes R, ‘Refugee Law at Sea’ (2004) 53(1) The International and Comparative Law Quarterly 47-77. google scholar
6. — — ‘The International Law of the Sea and Migration Control’ in Richard Barnes (eds) Extraterritorial Immigration Control (Brill/Nijhoff 2010) 100-146. google scholar
7. Barrett J and R Barnes (eds.), Law of the Sea: UNCLOS as a Living Treaty (BIICL 2016). google scholar
8. Bilgin AA, ‘Göçmenlere Yönelik Deniz Operasyonlarında Frontex’in Müdahale Yetkisinin Uluslararası Hukuk Kapsamında Değerlendirilmesi’ (2017) 7(2) Hacettepe Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 55-82. google scholar

9. Bozovalı E, Sığınma Hukuku ve Geri Göndermeme İlkesi: AİHM ve AYM İçtihadı Işığında Düzensiz Göçe Yönelik Uygulamaların ve Türkiye’deki Uluslararası Koruma Mevzuatının Değerlendirilmesi (On İki Levha Yayıncılık 2020). google scholar
10. Button R, ‘International Law and Search and Rescue’ (2017) 70(1) Naval War College Review 101-138. google scholar
11. Churchill RR, Lowe AV and Sander A, The Law of the Sea (Manchester University Press 2022). google scholar
12. Coppens J, ‘Interception of Migrant Boats at Sea’ in Violeta Moreno-Lax-Efthymios Papastavridis (eds), ‘Boat Refugees’ and Migrants at Sea: A Comprehensive Approach (Brill/Nijhoff 2016) 197-221. google scholar
13. Coventry T, ‘Seizing Stateless Smuggling Vessels on the Mediterranean High Seas’ (2023) 36(4) Leiden Journal of International Law 925-946. google scholar
14. Çiçekli B, 6458 Sayılı Kanunla Güncellenmiş Yabancılar ve Mülteci Hukuku (Seçkin Yayınları 2016). google scholar
15. Den Heijer M, ‘Europe and Extraterritorial Asylum’ (Phil Thesis, Leiden University 2011). google scholar
16. Di Pepe LS, ‘Chapter 8 Human Trafficking and Migrant Smuggling at Sea: Safety Aspects and Role of the European Union’ in Keyuan Zou (eds), Maritime Cooperation in Semi-Enclosed Seas (Brill/Nijhoff 2019) 131-149. google scholar
17. Doğan V, Türk Yabancılar Hukuku (2nd edn, Savaş Yayınevi 2017). google scholar
18. Dursun A, ‘Uluslararası Deniz Hukukunda Düzensiz Göç Halinde Devletlerin Arama ve Kurtarma Yükümlülüğü’ (Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi 2024). google scholar
19. — — Uluslararası Deniz Hukukunda Düzensiz Göç Halinde Devletlerin Arama ve Kurtarma Yükümlülüğü (Adalet Yayınevi 2025). google scholar
20. Ekşi N, Yabancılar ve Uluslararası Koruma Hukuku (Beta Basım 2018). google scholar
21. Elserafy S, ‘The Smuggling of Migrants across the Mediterranean Sea: States’ Responsibilities and Human Rights’ (Master Thesis, the Archtic University of Norway 2018). google scholar
22. Ergüven NS, ‘Devletlerin ve Hükümet Dışı Örgütlerin Deniz Yoluyla Düzensiz Göç ile İlgili Faaliyetlerinin Deniz Hukuku Açısından Değerlendirilmesi’ (2020) 3(1) DEHUKAM Deniz Hukuku Dergisi 261-309. google scholar
23. Evans M, International Law (6th ed., OUP 2024). google scholar
24. Gallagher AT and David F, The International Law of Migrant Smuggling (Cambridge University Press 2014). google scholar
25. Gallagher AT, The International Law of Human Trafficking (Cambridge University Press 2011). google scholar
26. Goodwin-Gill GS and McAdam J, The Refugee in International Law (OUP 2021). google scholar
27. Gündüz A, Milletlerarası Hukuk ve Milletlerarası Teşkilatlar Hakkında Temel Metinler (Gözden Geçirilmiş 2nd edn, Beta Basım 1994). google scholar
28. Gözlügöl SV, ‘Avrupa İnsan Hakları Hukuku Açısından Kıyı Devletinin Denizlerde Kontrol Uygulama Yetkisi’ (2012) 20(1) Selçuk Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 201-230. google scholar
29. Gözügüzelli E, ‘Denizlerde Göçmen Kaçakçılığı ve Türk Kara sularından Açık Denizlere Sahil Güvenliğin Müdahale Yetkileri’ (2022) 30(4) Selçuk Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 1883-1931. google scholar
30. Guilfoyle D, ‘Article 98: Duty to Render Assistance’ in Alexander Proelss (eds.), The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: A Commentary (1st edn, Bloomsbury Publishing 2017) 725-730. google scholar
31. — — Shipping Interdiction and the Law of the Sea (Cambridge University Press 2009). google scholar
32. IOM, ‘Denizde Göçmenlerin Korunması’ (yayımlanmadı). google scholar
33. Kangal ZT, ‘Göçmen Kaçakçılığı Suçu’ (2019) 21 Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 221-277. google scholar
34. Katiç SM, ‘Mülteci Hukuku Bağlamında Denizden Gelenler ve Avrupa Birliği Uygulaması’ (Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Anadolu Üniversitesi 2023). google scholar
35. — — Mülteci Hukuku Bağlamında Denizden Gelenler ve Avrupa Birliği Uygulaması (On İki Levha Yayıncılık 2024). google scholar
36. Kızılsümer Özer D, ‘Denizden Gelen Sığınmacılar ve Uluslararası Hukuk’ (2007) 3(10) Uluslararası Hukuk ve Politika 75-95. google scholar
37. Khaliq U, ‘Jurisdiction, Ships and Human Rights Treaties’ in Henrik Ringbom (eds), Jurisdiction over Ships Post-UNCLOS Developments in the Law of the Sea (Brill/Nijhoff 2015) 324-360. google scholar
38. Kojima C, ‘Modern Slavery and the Law of the Sea: Proposal for a Functional Approach’ (2021) 9(1) Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law 4-17. google scholar
39. Komp LM, ‘The Duty to Assist Persons in Distress: An Alternative Source of Protection against the Return of Migrants and Asylum Seekers to the High Seas?’, in Violeta Moreno-Lax- Efthymios Papastavridis (eds), ‘Boat Refugees’ and Migrants at Sea: A Comprehensive Approach (Brill/Nijhoff 2017) 222-247. google scholar
40. Kuran S, Uluslararası Deniz Hukuku (8th edn, Beta Basım 2022). google scholar
41. Mallia P, Migrant Smuggling by Sea: Combating a Current Threat to Maritime Security through the Creation of a Cooperative Framework (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 2010). google scholar
42. Moreno-Lax V, ‘Protection at Sea and the Denial of Asylum’, in Cathryn Costello- Michelle Foster- Jane McAdam (eds), The Oxford Handbook of International Refugee Law (Oxford University Press 2021) 483-501. google scholar
43. — — ‘Seeking Asylum in the Mediterranean: Against a Fragmentary Reading of EU Member States’ Obligations Accruing at Sea’ (2011) 23(2) International Journal of Refugee Law 174-220. google scholar
44. — — ‘The Interdiction of Asylum Seekers at Sea: Law and (mal)practice in Europe and Australia’ (2017) Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law. google scholar
45. O’Connell D, The International Law of the Sea, Vol II (OUP 1984). google scholar
46. Obokata T, ‘Boat Migrants as the Victims of Human Trafficking: Exploring Key Obligations through a Human Rights Based Approach’ in Violeta Moreno-Lax and Efthymios Papastavridis (eds), ‘Boat Refugees’ and Migrants at Sea: A Comprehensive Approach Integrating Maritime Security with Human Rights (Brill/Nijhoff 2016) 145-168. google scholar
47. — — ‘Smuggling of Human Beings from a Human Rights Perspective: Obligations of Non-State and State Actors under International Human Rights Law’ (2005) 17(2) International Journal of Refugee Law 394-415. google scholar
48. — — ‘The Legal Framework Concerning the Smuggling of Migrants at Sea under the UN Protocol on the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Sea, and Air’in Bernard Ryan and Valsamis Mitsilegas (eds), Extraterritorial Immigration Control (Martinus Nijhoff 2010) 151-168. google scholar
49. Özbek D, ‘Uluslararası Deniz Hukukunda Devletlerin ve Denizcilerin Yükümlülükleri’ içinde IOM- Sahil Güvenlik Komutanlığı, Karma Göç ve Göçmen Hakları Eğitim Kılavuzu (2021) 39-78. google scholar
50. Pallis M, ‘Obligations of States towards Asylum Seekers at Sea: Interactions and Conflicts between Legal Regimes’ (2022) 14(2) International Journal of Refugee Law 329-364. google scholar
51. Papanicolopulu I, International Law and the Protection of People at Sea (Oxford University Press 2018). google scholar
52. Papastavridis E, ‘'Fortress Europe' and Frontex: Within or Without International Law?’ (2010) 79(1) Nordic Journal of International Law 75-111. google scholar
53. — — ‘Rescuing Migrants at Sea and the Law of International Responsibility’ in Thomas Gammeltoft-Hansen ve Jens Vedsted-Hansen (eds), Human Rights and the Dark Side of Globalisation: Transnational Law Enforcement and Migration Control (Routledge 2016) 161-190. google scholar
54. — — ‘Rescuing Migrants at Sea: The Responsibility of States Under International Law’ (2011) SSRN Electronic Journal 1-41, Erişim Tarihi 9 January 2025. google scholar
55. — — The Interception of Vessels on the High Seas: Contemporary Challenges to the Legal Order of the Oceans (Hart Publishing 2013). google scholar
56. Pazarcı H, Uluslararası Hukuk Dersleri 2. Kitap (Turhan Kitabevi 2021). google scholar
57. Ratcovich M, ‘International Law and the Rescue of Refugees at Sea’ (DPhil Thesis, Stockholm University 2019). google scholar
58. Rothwell D, ‘The Law of the Sea and the MV Tampa Incident: Reconciling Maritime Principles with Coastal State Sovereignty’ (2002) 13(2) Public Law Review 118-127. google scholar
59. — — and Stephens T, The International Law of the Sea (Bloomsbury Academic, 2010). google scholar
60. Shaw MN, International Law (Yücel Acer ve diğerleri TR, 8th edn, Cambridge University Press 2019). google scholar
61. Shearer IA, ‘Problems of Jurisdiction and Law Enforcement against Delinquent Vessels’ (1986) 35(2) The International and Comparative Law Quarterly 320-343. google scholar
62. Sur M, Uluslararası Hukukun Esasları (17th edn, Beta Basım 2024). google scholar
63. Tanaka Y, ‘Jurisdiction of States and the Law of the Sea: Essentials of the Law of the Sea’ (2023) Issue 7(2022) CEPRI Studies on Private Governance 1-43. google scholar
64. — — ‘Jurisdiction of States and the Law of the Sea’ in Alexander Orakhelashvili (eds), Research Handbook on Jurisdiction and Immunities in International Law (Edward Elgar Publishing 2015) 110-150. google scholar
65. White M, ‘M/V Tampa Incident and Australia's Obligations - August 2001’ (2002) 122 Maritime Studies 7-17. google scholar
66. Willheim E, ‘MV Tampa: The Australian Response’ (2003) 15(2) International Journal of Refugee Law 159-191. google scholar
67. /M/V "Norstar" Case (Panama v. Italy) (No 25) (Judgement of 10 April 2019) ITLOS Reports 2018–2019. google scholar
68. /M/V ‘Saiga’ (No 2) (Saint Vincent and the Grenadines v. Guinea) (Judgement of 1 July 1999) ITLOS Reports 1999. google scholar
69. Naim Molvan v. Attorney General for Palestine (The ‘Asya’) [1948] AC 351 (UK). google scholar
70. Hirsi Jamaa v. Italy, App 27765/09 (ECtHR, 23 February 2012). google scholar
71. Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, App 25965/04 (ECtHR, 7 January 2010). google scholar
72. Prosecutor v. Dragoljub Kunarac, Radomir Kovac and Zoran Vukovic (Trial Judgement) IT-96-23-T & IT-96-23/1-T, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) (22 February 2001). google scholar
73. Request for an Advisory Opinion Submitted by the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission (SRFC) (Request for Advisory Opinion Submitted to the Tribunal), ITLOS Case No. 21, Advisory Opinion of 2 April 2015 (2015 tarihli ITLOS Danışma Görüşü). google scholar
74. Safi and Others v. Greece App no 5418/15 (ECHR, 7 July 2022). google scholar
75. The MV Toledo [1995] 2 ILRM 30. google scholar
76. UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), Decision adopted by the Committee under the Optional Protocol, Concerning Communication No. 3043/2017, CCPR/C/128/D/3043/2017, 27 January 2021. google scholar
77. UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), Views adopted by the Committee under article 5 (4) of the Optional Protocol, Concerning Communication No. 3042/2017, CCPR/C/130/D/3042/2017, 28 April 2021. google scholar
78. Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights, as amended) (ECHR). google scholar
79. Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (adopted 28 July 1951, entered into force 22 April 1954) 189 UNTS 137. google scholar
80. International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (adopted 1 November 1974, entered into force 25 May 1980) 1184 UNTS 276. google scholar
81. International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue (adopted 27 April 1979, entered into force 22 June 1985) 1405 UNTS 118. google scholar
82. International Convention on Salvage (adopted 28 April 1989, entered into force 14 July 1996) 1953 UNTS 165. google scholar
83. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 23 March 1976) 999 UNTS 171. google scholar
84. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 3 January 1976) 993 UNTS 3. google scholar
85. International Law Commission (ILC), ‘Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts’, UN General Assembly Official Records; 56th Session, Supp. No. 10 at UN. Doc A/56/10. google scholar
86. International Law Commission (ILC), ‘Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, with commentaries’ (2001) II (2) Yearbook of the International Law Commission (Draft ARSIWA with commentaries). google scholar
87. Protocol against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Sea, and Air, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (adopted 15 November 2000, entered into force 28 January 2004) 2241 UNTS 507. google scholar
88. Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (adopted 15 November 2000, entered into force 25 December 2003) 2237 UNTS 319. google scholar
89. Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (adopted 17 July 1998, entered into force 1 July 2002) 2187 UNTS 3. google scholar
90. Slavery Convention (adopted 25 September 1926, entered into force 9 March 1927) 60 UNTS 254. google scholar
91. United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (adopted 15 November 2000, entered into force 29 September 2003) 2225 UNTS 209. google scholar
92. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (adopted 10 December 1982, entered into force 16 December 1994) 1833 UNTS 3. google scholar
93. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (adopted 10 December 1948) UNGA Res 217 A(III) (UDHR). google scholar
94. Amy Weatherburn, ‘Smuggling, and Trafficking of Human Beings’, Odysseus Summer School on EU Migration and Asylum Law and Policy. google scholar
95. Anna Petrig, ‘Coastal State Jurisdiction in the Territorial Sea and the Protection of People on Board Foreign-Flagged Vessels’ (EJIL:Talk!, 10 December 2024) < https://www.ejiltalk.org/coastal-state-jurisdiction-in-the-territorial-sea-and-the-protection-of-people-on-board-foreign-flagged-vessels/> Erişim Tarihi 9 January 2025. google scholar
96. Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, ‘General Comment No. 14 (2000) The right to the highest attainable standard of health (article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights)’ (11 August 2000) UN Doc E/C.12/2000/4. google scholar
97. Department of the Navy Office of the Chief of Naval Operations Headquarters, U.S. Marine Corps Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Coast Guard, The Commander's Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations (NWP 1-14M/MCTP 11-10B/COMDTPUB P5800.7A, Department of the Navy 2022). google scholar
98. BM Mülteciler Yüksek Komiserliği Türkiye Temsilciliği, ‘Mültecilerin Hukuki Statüsüne İlişkin Sözleşme (Türkçe Çevirisi)’, (T.C. İçişleri Bakanlığı Göç İdaresi Başkanlığı Resmi Sitesi) https://www.goc.gov.tr/kurumlar/goc.gov.tr/files/multec%c4%b1ler%c4%b1nhukuk%c4%b1statusune%c4%b1l%c4%b1sk%c4%b1nsozlesme.pdf> Erişim Tarihi 9 January 2025. google scholar
99. IMO, ‘Mediterranean Human Trafficking and Exploitation Prevalence Survey: IOM’ (IOM UN Migration, 30 January 2019) Erişim Tarihi 9 January 2025. google scholar
100. International Criminal Court, ‘Elements of Crimes’, Erişim Tarihi 19 August 2025. google scholar
101. International Maritime Organization (IMO) Assembly, Resolution A.867(20). Adopted on 27 November 1997: Combating Unsafe Practices Associated with the Trafficking or Transport of Migrants by Sea” 20th Session Agenda Item 9 (5 December 1997) https://wwwcdn.imo.org/localresources/en/KnowledgeCentre/IndexofIMOResolutions/AssemblyDocuments/A.867(20).pdf Erişim Tarihi 24 December 2025. google scholar
102. International Maritime Organization (IMO), Interim Measures for Combating Unsafe Practices Associated with the Trafficking or Transport of Migrants by Sea, Ref. T1/1.02, MSC/Circ.896/Rev.1, 12 June 2001. https://wwwcdn.imo.org/localresources/en/OurWork/Security/Documents/MSC.1.Circ.896.REV1.pdf Erişim Tarihi 24 December 2025. google scholar
103. International Relations and Defence Committee, UNCLOS: The Law of the Sea in the 21st Century, (HL 2021-22, 159-II), Erişim Tarihi 20 November 2024. google scholar
104. IOM, ‘Göç Terimleri Sözlüğü’ Erişim Tarihi 9 January 2025. google scholar
105. Migration Data Portal, ‘Smuggling of Migrants’ (21 May 2024) Erişim Tarihi 9 January 2025. google scholar
106. Mülteci Hakları Merkezi, ‘Uluslararası ve Ulusal Hukukta İnsan Ticareti: Hukukçular İçin El Kitabı’, Erişim Tarihi 9 January 2025. google scholar
107. Operational Data Portal, ‘Europe Sea Arrivals’ (ODP, 20 November 2020) Erişim Tarihi 22 Mart 2025. google scholar
108. Papastavridis E, “The Aquarius Incident and the Law of the Sea: Is Italy in Violation of the Relevant Rules?”, (EJIL:Talk!, 27 June 2018) https://www.ejiltalk.org/the-aquarius-incident-and-the-law-of-the-sea-is-italy-in-violation-of-the-relevant-rules/ Erişim Tarihi 24 December 2025. google scholar
109. Pınar Ö, ‘Denizde Mahsur Kalan 49 Göçmen Haftalar Sonra Karaya Çıkabildi’ (BBC, 9 Ocak 2019) Erişim Tarihi 9 January 2025. google scholar
110. Preparatory Commission for the International Criminal Court, Report of the Preparatory Commission for the International Criminal Court. Addendum. Part II, Finalized draft text of the Elements of Crimes, PCNICC/2000/1/Add.2, International Criminal Court (ICC), 2 November 2000, Erişim Tarihi 19 December 2024. google scholar
111. Regulation (EU) No 656/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 Establishing Rules for the Surveillance of the External Sea Borders in the Context of Operational Cooperation Coordinated by the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union, OJ L 189, 27 June 2014 93–107. google scholar
112. Report by Ricardo J. Alfaro, Special Rapporteur, Question Of International Criminal Jurisdiction Document A/Cn.4/15, 1950 Yearbook of the International Law Commission, Volume II. google scholar
113. Resolution MSC.167(78) (adopted on 20 May 2004) Guidelines on the Treatment of Persons Rescued at Sea. google scholar
114. Richard Barnes and Elizabeth Kirk, “House of Lord’s International Relations and Defence Committee, Enquiry: UNCLOS: fit for Purpose in the 21st Century?” Erişim Tarihi 20 November 2024. google scholar
115. Secretary-General of the European Commission, ‘Commission Staff Working Document Study on the International Law Instruments in Relation to Illegal Immigration by Sea’ SEC (2007) 691, Annex. google scholar
116. TİHEK, ‘İnsan Ticaretiyle Mücadele Türkiye Ulusal Raporu’ (Mart 2023) < https://www.tihek.gov.tr/public/editor/uploads/insan%20ticaretiyle%20mu%CC%88cadele%20tu%CC%88rkiye%20ulusal%20raporu%20v06.pdf> Erişim Tarihi 20 November 2024. google scholar
117. Tommy Koh, President of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, ‘A Constitution for the Oceans’ (Speech, 6 and 11 December 1982) reproduced in the Law of the Sea: Official Text of the UNCLOS, UN Sales No E.83.V.5 (United Nations, 1983) xxxiii. google scholar
118. UN General Assembly, Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children :Note / by the Secretary-General, A/64/290, 12 August 2009, https://www.refworld.org/reference/themreport/unga/2009/en/69879 Erişim Tarihi 21 January 2025. google scholar
119. UNHCR and Regional Support Office The Bali Process, ‘Co-Chairs’ Summary “Mapping Disembarkation Options: Towards Strengthening Cooperation in Managing Irregular Movements by Sea”’, 3-4 March 2014 Bangkok, Thailand, Erişim Tarihi 9 January 2025. google scholar
120. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea Erişim Tarihi 05 January 2025. google scholar
121. UNODC, ‘Toolkit to Combat Trafficking in Persons’, UN Office on Drugs and Crime, New York, 2008. google scholar
122. Vassallo R, ‘Between A Rock and A Hard Place’ (Maltatoday on Sunday, 13 Eylül 2009, Erişim Tarihi 5 May 2024. google scholar
123. Yea S, ‘Troubled Waters: Trafficking of Filipino Men into the Long Haul Fishing Industry through Singapore’ (December 2012) TWC2 1-95 Erişim Tarihi 9 January 2025. google scholar