Uluslararası Adalet Divanı’nın Uluslararası Çalışma Örgütü İdare Mahkemesi’nin 2867 Sayılı Kararına İlişkin Danışma Görüşü Işığında Uluslararası Örgütler ile Personeli Arasındaki Uyuşmazlıkların Çözümü

Yıl 2018, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 2, 285 - 305, 30.11.2019

Nergiz Emir

Öz

Uluslararası Çalışma Örgütü İdare Mahkemesi (“ILOAT” ya da “Mahkeme”) Statüsü Eki’nin 12. maddesi çerçevesinde hareket eden Uluslararası Tarımsal Kalkınma Fonu (“IFAD” ya da “Fon”) Yönetim Kurulu, ILOAT tarafından verilen 3 Şubat 2010 tarihli ve 2867 Sayılı Karar’a itiraz etmiş ve bu kararın geçerliliği sorununu Uluslararası Adalet Divanı’na (“Divan”) taşımıştır. IFAD, Danışma Görüşü talebi çerçevesinde, Divan’a dokuz soru yöneltmiştir. Bu sorular, genel olarak, ILOAT’ın yargılama yetkisi ve verdiği kararın hukuki geçerliliği hakkındadır. Divan, 1 Şubat 2012 tarihli Danışma Görüşü’nde, ILOAT’ın IFAD aleyhine gerçekleştirilen şikayeti yargılamaya yetkili olduğunu ve ILOAT verilen 2867 Sayılı Karar’ın geçerli olduğunu ifade etmiştir. İlgili karar ışığında, uluslararası örgütler ile personeli arasındaki uyuşmazlıkların çözümünde, uluslararası idare mahkemelerinin etkinliği ve uluslararası kurumsal hukukun önemi hukuki uygulamada teyit edilmiştir. Bu kapsamda, uluslararası idare mahkemelerinin gelişimi, uluslararası örgütlerin bağışıklıkları, ILOAT’ın yargılama yetkisinin kapsamı ve uluslararası örgüt personelinin adalete erişim
hakkı Divan’ın 1 Şubat 2012 tarihli danışma görüşü çerçevesinde incelenecektir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Uluslararası Örgütler, Uluslararası İdare Mahkemeleri, Uluslararası Çalışma Örgütü, Uluslararası Örgütlerin Yargı Bağışıklığı, Uluslararası Çalışma Örgütü İdare Mahkemesi’nin Yargılama Yetkisi

The Resolution of Disputes Between International Organizations and Their Staff in the Light of Advisory Opinion of International Court of Justice Concerning Judgment No 2867 of the Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization

Öz

The International Fund for Agricultural Development (“IFAD” or the “Fund”), acting within the framework of Article XII of the Annex to the Statute of the Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization (“ILOAT” or the “Tribunal”), had decided to challenge the decision rendered by the Tribunal on 3 February 2010 in Judgment No. 2867, and to refer the question of the validity of that Judgment to the International Court of Justice (Court). IFAD, had asked the Court nine questions within the framework of the request for Advisory Opinion. These questions are, in general, about the jurisdiction of the ILOAT and the legal validity of its decision. The Court stated that, in its Advisory Opinion of 1 February 2012, the ILOAT was competent to hear the complaint introduced against IFAD and the decision given by the ILOAT in its Judgment No. 2867 is valid. In the light of related decision, the efficiency of international administrative tribunals and the significance of international institutional law in the resolution of disputes between international organizations and their staff have confirmed in legal practice. In this context, the development of
international administrative tribunals, the immunity of international organizations, the extent of the competence of ILOAT’s jurisdiction and the right to access to justice for the staff of international organizations will be examined within the framework Advisory Opinion of the Court’s in 1 February 2012.

Anahtar Kelimeler

International Organizations, International Administrative Tribunals, International Labour Organization, Immunity of International Organizations, The Jurisdiction of the International Labour Organization Administrative Tribunal

Kaynakça

• Blokker, Niels, “International Organizations: The Untouchables?”, (Ed) Niels Blokker / Nico Schrijver, Immunity of International Organizations, Leiden, Brill-Nijhoff, 2015.
• Bowett, D. W., The Law of International Institutions, London, Stevens & Sons, 1963.
• Cogan, Jacob Katz, “Current Developments the 2012 Judicial Activity of the International Court of Justice”, American Journal of International Law, 2013, C. 107, S. 1.
• Çağıran, Mehmet Emin, Uluslararası Örgütler, 2. Bası, Ankara, Turhan Kitabevi Yayınları, 2014.
• Friedmann, Wolfgang / Fatouros, Arghyrios A., The United Nations Administrative Tribunal, International Organization, 1957, C. 11, S. 1.
• Gallo, Daniele, “The Right of Access to Justice for the Staff of International Organizations: The Need for a Reform in the Light of the ICJ Advisory Opinion of 1 Feb. 2012”, (Ed) Roberto Virzo / Ivan Ingravallo, Evolutions in the Law of International Organizations, Leiden, Brill-Nijhoff, 2015.
• Gomula, Joanna, “The International Court of Justice and Administrative Tribunals of International Organizations”, Michigan Journal of International Law, 1991, C. 13, S. 1.
• Klabbers, Jan, An Introduction to International Organizations Law, 3rd Edition,Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2015.
• Pazarcı, Hüseyin, Uluslararası Hukuk Dersleri 4. Kitap, 2. Bası, Turhan Kitabevi Yayınları, 2006.
• Reinisch, August / Knahr, Christina, From the United Nations Administrative Tribunal to the United Nations Administrative Tribunal to the United Nations Appeals Tribual - Reform of the Administration of Justice System within the United Nations, (Eds) A. Von Bogdandy / R. Wolfrum, Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law, C. 12, 2008.
• Reinisch, August, “Privileges and Immunities (Privileges)”, (Ed) Jacob Katz Cogan / Ian Hurd / Ian Johnstone, The Oxford Handbook of International Organizations, New York, Oxford University Press, 2016.
• Reinisch, August, “The Immunity of International Organizations and Jurisdiction of Their Administrative Tribunals (The Immunity)”, Chinese Journal of International Law, 2008.
• Thomas, Melissa Su / Elias, Olufemi, “Concluding Remarks the Role of International Administrative Law”, (Ed) Olufemi Elias, The Development and Effectiveness of International Administrative Law, Leiden, Brill-Nijhoff, 2012.
• Tomuschat, Christian, “International Courts and Tribunals”, The Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law Volume V, (Ed) Rüdiger Wolfrum, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012.
• Villalpando, Santigo, “International Administrative Tribunals”, (Ed) Jacob Katz Cogan / Ian Hurd / Ian Johnstone, The Oxford Handbook of International Organizations, New York, Oxford University Press, 2016.
• Agreement between the United Nations and the International Fund for Agricultural Development, UNGA Resolutions 32/107, 15 December 1977. https://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/32/ares32.htm 19.08.2019.
• Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, 13 February 1946. https://www.icj-cij.org/en/other-texts/convention-on-the-privileges 18.08.2019.
• Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies, 21 November 1947. http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.phpURL_ID=48887&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html 18.08.2019.
• Effect of Awards of Compensation Made by the U. N. Administrative Tribunal, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1954, p. 47. https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/21 18.07.2019.
• European Convention on Human Rights, 4 November 1950. https://www.echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p=basictexts&c=#n1359128122487_pointer 20.07.2019.
• International Bill of Human Rights, UNGA Resolutions 217/3, 10 December 1948. https://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/3/ares3.htm 20.07.2019.
• Judgments of the Administrative Tribunal of the ILO upon Complaints Made against UNESCO, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1956, p. 77. https://www.icjcij.org/en/case/30 18.08.2019.
• Judgment No.2867 of the Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization upon a Complaint Filed against the International Fund for Agricultural Development, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2012, p. 10. https://www.icjcij.org/en/case/146 18.07.2019.
• Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the Nations, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports 1949, p. 174. https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/4 18.07.2019.
• Separate Opinion of Judge Cançado Trinidade: https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/146 20.07.2019.
• Statute of the Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization, Article 2/5. https://www.ilo.org/tribunal/about-us/WCMS_249194/lang--en/index.htm#art2 08.07.2019.
• Tarımsal Kalkınma Fonu ile ilgili bilgi için: http://www.mfa.gov.tr/uluslararasitarimsal-kalkinma-fonu.tr.mfa 08.07.2019.
• UNGA Resolutions 351 (IV), 24 November 1949. https://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/4/ares4.htm 18.08.2019.
• UNGA Resolutions 61/261, 4 April 2007. https://www.un.org/en/ga/sixth/62/AdminJust.shtml 18.08.2019.
• UNGA Resolutions 62/228, 22 December 2007. https://www.un.org/en/ga/sixth/62/AdminJust.shtml 18.08.2019.
• UNGA Resolutions 63/253, 24 December 2008. https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/63/253 18.08.2019.
• UN Staff Rule 11/2, a. https://hr.un.org/handbook/staff-rules 18.08.2019.