ULUSLARARASI ADALET DİVANI’NIN PETROL PLATFORMLARI’NA İLİŞKİN KARARININ DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Yıl 2013, Cilt: 17 Sayı: 2, 1155 - 1180, 01.01.2013

Saeed Bagheri

Öz

Bu çalışmada 1992’de İran ve ABD tarafından Birleşmiş Milletler (BM)’in başlıca yargı organı olan Uluslararası Adalet Divanı’na sunulan Petrol Platformları Davası incelenmiştir. Tarafl ar, Divan’ın zorunlu yargı yetkisini yürürlükte olan, uyuşmazlıkların zorunlu çözümünü düzenleyen Dostluk Antlaşması (1955) ile kabul etmişlerdir. Divan, tarafl arın iddialarını, itirazlarını ve taleplerini değerlendirdikten sonra Kasım 2003 tarihindeki kararında ABD’nin silâhlı kuvvetlrinin 19 Ekim 1987 ve 18 Nisan 1988 tarihlerinde İran petrol platformlarına yönelik saldırılarının iki taraf arasındaki 1955 tarihli Dostluk Antlaşması hükümleri ve uluslararası hukuka aykırı bulmuştur.Çalışmanın amacı iki ülke arasında ortaya çıkan uyuşmazlığın tarihi arka planı, Divan’ın bu davaya ilişkin yargı yetkisini, tarafl arın iddialarını, özellikle ABD’nin meşru müdafaa iddiası konusunu değerlendirmektir

Anahtar Kelimeler

Uluslararası Adalet Divanı, Uluslararası Hukuk, Kuvvet Kullanma Yasağı, Meşru Müdafaa Hakkı, 1955 Dostluk Antlaşması.

EVALUATING THE DECISION OF INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE CONCERNING THE OIL PLATFORMS

Öz

In this study Oil Platforms Case that was presented to ICJ as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations (UN) by Iran and United States in 1992 is discussed. The parties have recognized the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court under 1955 Treaty Amity between Iran and US. After evaluating the claims and requests of the dispute parties, in its November 2003 decision the Court found the attacks of US Military Forces on Iranian oil platforms on 19 October 1987 and 18 April 1988 contrary to the provisions of 1955 Treaty Amity and rules of international law.The purpose of the study is evaluate of historical back ground of the dispute arising between the two countries, the jurisdiction of the Court in this case, claims of the paties, in particular the United States claim of self-defense

Anahtar Kelimeler

International Court of Juctice, International Law, Use of Force, Right of Self Defence, Oil Platforms Case, 1955 Treaty Amity.

Kaynakça

• ALEXANDROV, Stanimir, Self – Defense Against the Use of Force in International Law, First ed., Netherlands 1996.
• ARAL, Berdal, Uluslararası Hukukta Meşru Müdafaa Hakkı, Ankara 1999.
• BROWNLIE, Ian, Law and the Use of Force by the States, First ed., Oxford 1963.
• BROWNLIE, Ian, Principle Public International Law, 4th ed., Oxford 1995.
• BROWNLIE, Ian, The Principle of Non – Use of Force, (Edit) William BUTLER; The Non- Use of Force International Law, London 1989.
• DAY, Erin, Economic Sanctions Imposed by the United States Against Specifi c Countries: 1979 Through 1992, Washington 1992.
• D. GILL, Terry, “Litigation Strategy in the Nicaraguan Case at the International Court”, in: Yoram Dinstein & Mala Tabory; International Law at a Time of Perplexıty, Netherlands 1989.
• GREIG, D. Westlake, Internatioanal Law, London 1970.
• F. DAMROSCH, Lori & Others, International Law: Cases and Materials, Fourth ed., United States 2001.
• HYDE, Charles Cheney, International Law Chiefl y as Interpreted and Applied by the United States, Vol. 3, Boston 1945.
• H. BAŞEREN, Sertaç, Uluslararası Hukukta Devletlerin Münferiden Kuvvet Kullanmalarının Sınırları, Ankara 2003.
• İNAN, Yüksel, Uluslararası Adalet Divanı’nın Yargı Yetkisi, Ankara 1982.
• J. SCHEFFER, David, Introduction: The Gerat Debate of the 1980s, Louis Henkin & Others (Ed.), Right v. Might, International Law and the Use of Force, New York 1989.
• KESKİN, Funda, Uluslararası Hukukta Kuvvet Kullanma: Savaş, Karışma ve Birleşmiş Milletler, Ankara 1998.
• PAZARCI, Hüseyin, Uluslararası Hukuk Dersleri, Cilt: 3, Ankara 1999.
• E. FOSTER, Caroline, The Oil Platforms Case and the Use of Force in International Law, Singapore Journal of International & Comparative Law, Vol. 7, 2003, ss. 579-588.
• H. F. BEKKER, Pieter, The World Court Finds that U.S. Attacks on Iranian Oil Platforms in 1987-1988 Were Not Justifiable as Self-Defense, but the United States Did Not Violate the Applicable Treaty With Iran, ASIL Insights, 2003, (http://www.asil.org/insigh119.cfm, erişim 12.11.2012)
• H. TAFT, William, Self-Defense and the Oil Platforms Decision, The Yale Journal of International Law, Vol. 29: 291, 2004, ss. 295-306.
• HENKIN, Louis, The Reports of the Death of Article 2 (4) Are Greatly Exaggreated, AJIL, Vol. 65, 1971, ss. 544-548.
• INTOCCIA, Gregory Francis, American Bombing of Libya: An International Legal Analysis, Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, Vol. 19, 1987, ss. 177-213.
• JENNINGS, R.Y, The Caroline and McLeod Cases, AJIL, Vol. 32, No. 1, 1938, ss. 82-84.
• L. KUNZ, Josef, Individual and Collective Self-Defence in Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, AJIL, Vol. 87, 1947, ss. 872- 873.
• LOBEL, Jules, The Use of Force to Respond to Terrorist Attacks: The Bombing of Sudan and Afghanistan, The Yale Journal of International Law, Vol. 24, 1999, ss. 537-543.
• M. FRANK, Thomas, Who Killed Article 2 (4)? Or: Changing Norms Governing the Use of Force by States, AJIL, Vol. 64, 1970, ss. 809, 837.
• OCHOA, Natalia & Others, Exploring the Limits of International Law Relating to the Use of Force in Self-defence, EJIL, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2005, ss. 499-524.
• REİSMANN, W. Michael, The Raid on Baghdad: Some Refl ections on Its Lawfulness and Implications, EJIL, Vol. 5, 1994, ss. 120, 125.
• RİSHİKOFT, Harvey, When Naked Came the Doctrine of Self-Defense: What Is the Proper Role of the International Court of Justice in Use of Force Cases?, The Yale Journal of International Law, Vol. 29: 291, 2004, ss. 331-342.
• SCHACHTER, Oscar, The Right of States to Use Armed Force, The Michigan Law Review, Vol. 82, 1984, ss. 1620-1635.
• STONE, Julius, Hopes and Loopholes in the 1974 Defi nition of Aggression, AJIL, Vol. 71, 1977, ss. 224-246.
• Advisory Opinion on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, ICJ Reports, 2004.
• Advisory Opinion on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, ICJ Report 66, 1996.
• Case Concerning Corfu Channel (United Kingdom v. Albania), ICJ Report 4 (1949).
• Case Concernıng Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America), ICJ Reports (II), 17 September 1996.
• Case Concernıng Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America), ICJ Reports 6 November 2003.
• Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) ICJ Reports, 1986.
• Case Concerning Armed Activitise on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of Congo v. Uganda) ICJ Reports, 2005.
• Executive Order 12613, signed October 29, 1987, prevents goods of Iranian origin to be imported into the United States. Specifi c restrictions, such as the 1987 Iranian Transactions Regulations (31 CFR Part 560) and subsequent amendments, place limits on transactions relating to the development of Iran’s petroleum facilities (http://www.archives.gov/federalregister/codifi cation/ executiveorder/12613.html, erişim 15.05.2012).
• Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation Among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, G.A. Res. 2625, U.N. GAOR, 25th Sess., Supp. No. 28
• U.N. Doc. A/8028 (1970),http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/topic,459d17822,45 9d17a82,3dda1f104,0.html, erişim 16.05.2012).
• Rules of ICJ (1978), Adopted on 14 April 1978 and Entered Into Force on 1 July 1978 (http://www.icj-cij.org/documents/index.php?p1=4&p2=3&p3=0, erişim 11.12.2012).
• Treaty Amity, Economic Realtions and Consular Rights between the United States of America and Islamic Republic of Iran (1955, http://www. parstimes.com/law/iran_us_treaty.html, erişim 15.05.2012).
• Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Navigation (with protocol) signed 21 January 1956, Nicaragua - United States of America, Enterede into Force 24 May 1958 UNTS, Vol. 367, No. 3. 1960.
• Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, May 23, 1969, art. 31 (3)(c), U.N. Doe. A/CONF. 39/27, 1155 U.N.T.S. 331, 340 (1980); United Nations Treaty Series (UNTS), Volume. 1155, 1980.