Slavery, Servitude, Forced Labour and Compulsory Labour: A Comparative Analysis Within the Context of Turkish Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights

Öz

The concepts of slavery, servitude, forced labour and compulsory labour are among the least addressed topics with a constitutional law perspective. Although prohibited by law for a long time, contemporary forms of slavery, namely “modern slavery” and servitude, forced labour and compulsory labour concepts, unfortunately, continues to maintain its actuality. The Constitution of Republic of Turkey do not prohibits slavery and servitude explicitly, however, international legal order, which Turkey also is an integral part, unequivocally prohibits these two cases. Unlike slavery and servitude, forced labour and compulsory labour are explicitly prohibited by the Constitution. This article focuses on the how these concepts which aiming at protecting the human dignity and personal liberty are dealt with by the European Convention on Human Rights and interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights as well as whether adequate protection provided by the Turkish Constitution

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Slavery
• Servitude
• Forced Labour
• Compulsory Labour
• Human trafficking

KÖLELİK, KULLUK, ZORLA ÇALIŞTIRMA VE ZORUNLU ÇALIŞMA YASAĞI: ANAYASA VE AVRUPA İNSAN HAKLARI SÖZLEŞMESİ BAĞLAMINDA KARŞILAŞTIRMALI ANALİZ

Öz

Kölelik, kulluk, zorla çalıştırma ve zorunlu çalışma kavramları Türkiye’de anayasa hukuku perspektifinden en az çalışan konuların başında gelmektedir. Sayılan kavramlardan kölelik uzun bir süre önce hukuken yasaklanmasına rağmen “modern kölelik olarak adlandırılan çağdaş biçimleri ve kulluk, zorla çalıştırma ve zorunlu çalışma kavramları ne yazık ki güncelliğini korumaya devam etmektedir. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Anayasası’nda kölelik ve kulluk yasağı açıkça tanınmamakla birlikte Türkiye’nin de ayrılmaz bir parçası olduğu uluslararası hukuk düzeni bu iki olguyu tartışmasız bir biçimde yasaklamıştır. Kölelik ve kulluğun aksine zorla çalışma ve zorunlu çalıştırma ise Anayasa’da açıkça yasaklanmıştır. Bu makale, insan onurunu ve kişi özgürlüğünü korumayı amaçlayan bu kavramların Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi metninde nasıl düzenlendiği ve Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi içtihatlarında nasıl yorumlandığı ve Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Anayasası’nın anılan kavramlara yeterli korumayı sağlayıp sağlamadığı sorularına odaklanmaktadır

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kölelik
• kulluk
• zorla çalıştırma
• zorunlu çalışma
• insan ticareti

Kaynakça

1. Kitaplar ve Makaleler
2. Aksoy, Emine Eylem, “İnsan Hakları Avrupa Sözleşmesinin 4. Maddesi: Kölelik, Kulluk, Zorla Çalıştırma ve Zorunlu Çalışma Yasağı”, Av. Dr. Şükrü Alpaslan Armağanı, İstanbul Barosu, Türk Ceza Hukuku Derneği, İstanbul, 2007
3. Jean Allain, “Rantsev v Cyprus and Russia: The European Court of Human Rights and Trafficking as Slavery”, Human Rights Law Review, Volume 10, No. 3, 2010
4. Allain, Jean; Hickey, Robin, “Property and Definition of Slavery”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Volume 61, No. 4, October 2012
5. Canosa Usera, Raul, “Prohibition of Slavery and Forced Labour: An Example of Integration of International Treaties (Commentary on Article 4)”, Europe of Rights: A Compendium of the European Convention of Human Rights, Pablo Santolaya Machetti; Javier García Roca (Eds), Martinus Nijhoff, 2012
6. Cullen, Holly “Siliadin v France: Positive Obligations under Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights”, Human Rights Law Review, Volume 6, No. 3, January 2006
7. Demirbaş, Timur, İnfaz Hukuku, Seçkin Yay., Ankara, 2008
8. Duymaz, Erkan, “Avrupa Konseyi Hukukunda Kölelik, Kulluk ve Zorla Çalıştırma Yasakları Üzerine Bir İnceleme”, Legal Hukuk Dergisi, Cilt: 11, Sayı: 123, Mart 2013

9. Göçmen, İlke, “Bir Temel Hak Olarak İnsan Ticareti Yasağı: Avrupa Özelinde Bir İnceleme”, Milletlerarası Hukuk ve Milletlerarası Özel Hukuk Bülteni, Yıl 34, Sayı 1, İstanbul, 2014
10. Harris, David; O’Boyle, Michael; Bates, Ed; Buckley, Carla, Harris, O’Boyle and Warbrick, Law of the European Convention on Human Rights, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2014
11. Mantouvalou, Virginia, “Labour Rights in the European Convention on Human Rights: An Intellectual Justification for an Integrated Approach to Interpretation”, Human Rights Law Review, Volume 13, No. 3, 2013
12. Milano, Valentina, “The European Court of Human Rights’ Case Law on Human Trafficking in Light of L.E. v Greece: A Disturbing Setback?” Human Rights Review, Volume 17, No. 4, December 2017
13. Muzny, Petr, “Bayatyan v. Armenia: The Grand Chamber Renders a Grand Judgment”, Human Rights Law Review, Volume 12, Issue 1, 2012
14. Özdemir, Süleyman “Türkiye’de Zorunlu Çalışma Uygulamaları”, Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi, Sayı 41-42, İstanbul, 1998
15. Piotrowicz, Ryszard, “States’ Obligations under Human Rights Law towards Victims of Trafficking in Human Beings: Positive Developments in Positive Obligations”, International Journal of Refugee Law, Volume 24, No. 2, 2012
16. Rainey, Bernadette; Wicks, Elizabeth; Ovey, Clare, Jacobs, White and Ovey, The European Convention on Human Rights, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2014
17. Siller, Nicole, “‘Modern Slavery’: Does International Law Distinguish between Slavery, Enslavement and Trafficking?”, Journal of International Criminal Justice, No. 14, 2006
18. Van Dijk, P.; Van Hoof, G.J.H.; Van Rijn, Arjen; Zwaak, Leo, Theory and Practice of the European Convention on Human Rights, Intersentia, Antwerpen, Oxford 2006
19. Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi Kararları
20. Adyan and Others v. Armenia, Appl. No. 75604/11, 12.10.2017
21. Bayatyan v. Armenia, Appl. No. 23459/03, 07.07.2011
22. Bucha v. Slovakia, (admissibility), Appl. No. 43259/07, 20.09.2011
23. Buldu and Others v. Turkey, Appl. No. 14017/08, 03.06.2014
24. C. N. v. the United Kingdom, Appl. No. 4239/08, 13.11.2012
25. C. N. and V. v. France, Appl. No. 67724, 11.10.2012
26. Chitos v. Greece, Appl. No. 51637/12, 04.06.2015
27. Chowdury and Others v. Greece, Appl. No. 21884/15, 30.03.2017
28. D. H. v. Finland, (admissibility), Appl. No. 30815/09, 28.06.2011
29. De Wilde, Ooms and Versyp v. Belgium, Appl. No. 2832/66, 18.06.1971
30. Erçep v. Turkey, Appl. No. 43965/04, 22.11.2011
31. Feti Demirtaş v. Turkey, Appl. No. 5260/07, 17.01.2012
32. Floroiu v. Romania, (admissibility), Appl. No. 15303/10, 12.03.2013
33. Graziani-Weiss v. Austria, Appl. No. 31950/06, 18.10.2011
34. J. A. v. France, (admissibility), Appl No. 45010/11, 27.05.2014
35. J and Others v. Austria, Appl. No. 58216/12, 17.01.2017
36. Karlheinz Schmidt v. Germany, Appl. No. 13580/88, 18.07.1994
37. L. E. v. Greece, Appl. No. 71545/12, 21.01.2016
38. Lazaridis v. Greece, (admissibility), Appl. No. 61838/14, 12.01.2016
39. L. R. v. the United Kingdom, (admissibility), Appl. No. 49113/09, 14.07.2011
40. M and Others v. Italy and Bulgaria, Appl. No. 40020/03, 31.07.2012
41. Meier v. Switzerland, Appl. No. 10109/14, 09.02.2016
42. Mihal v. Slovakia, (admissibility), Appl. No. 23360/08, 28.06.2011
43. Nespala v. the Czech Republic, (admissibility), Appl. No. 68198/10, 24.09.2013
44. O.G.O. v. the United Kingdom, (admissibility), Appl. No. 13950/12, 18.02.2014
45. Papavasilakis v. Greece, Appl. No. 66899/14, 15.09.2016
46. Radi and Ghergina v. Romania, (admissibility), Appl. No. 34655/14, 05.01.2016
47. Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, Appl. No. 25965/04, 07.01. 2010
48. Savda v. Turkey, Appl. No. 42730/05, 12.06.2012
49. Schuitemaker v. the Netherlands, (admissibility), Appl. No. 15906/08, 04.05.2010
50. Siliadin v. France, Appl. No. 73316/01, 26.07.2005
51. Steindel v. Germany, (admissibility), Appl. No. 29878/07, 14.09.2010
52. Stummer v. Austria, Appl. No. 37452/02, 07.07.2011
53. Tibet Menteş and Others v. Turkey, Appl. Nos. 57818/10, 57822/10, 57825/10,
54. /10 and 57829/10, 24.10.2017
55. V. F. v. France, (admissibility), Appl No. 7196/10, 29.11.2011
56. Van der Mussele v. Belgium, Appl. No. 8919/80, 23.11.1983
57. Van Droogenbroeck v. Belgium, Appl. No. 7906/77, 24.06.1982
58. Zarb Adami v. Malta, Appl. No. 17209/02, 20.06.2006
59. Avrupa İnsan Hakları Komisyonu Kararları
60. Four Companies v. Austria, (admissibility), Appl. No. 7427/76, 27.09.1976
61. Johansen v. Norway, (admissibility), Appl. No. 10600/83, 14.10.1985
62. S. v. Germany, (admissibility), Appl. No. 9686/82, 04.10.1984
63. Talmon v. the Netherlands, (admissibility), Appl. No. 30300/96, 26.02.1997
64. Twenty-one detained Persons v. Germany, (admissibility), Appl. No. 3134/67, 3172/67, 3188/67, 3189/67, 3190/67, 3191/67, 3192/67, 3193/67, 3194/67, 3195/67, 3196/67, 3197/67, 3198/67, 3199/67, 3200/67, 3201/67, 3202/67, 3203/67, 3204/67, 3205/67, 3206/67, 06.04.1968
65. W., X., Y. and Z. v. the United Kingdom, (admissibility), Appl. No. 3435/67, 3436/67, 3437/67, 3438/67, 19.07.1968
66. X v. Switzerland, Appl. No. 8500/79, 14.12.1979
67. X v. the Federal Republic of Germany, (admissibility), Appl. No. 4653/70, 01.04.1974 - X
68. v. the Federal Republic of Germany, (admissibility), Appl. No. 8410/78, 13.12.1979
69. Van Droogenbroeck v. Belgium, (admissibility), Appl. No. 7906/77, 05.07.1979.
70. Anayasa Mahkemesi Kararları
71. E. 1963/172, K. 1963/244, 21.10.1963
72. E. 1963/198, K. 1965/1, 05.01.1965
73. E. 1963/358, K. 1864/17, 06.03.1964
74. E. 1971/28, K. 1971/64, 08.07.1971
75. E. 1979/23, K. 1980/9, 29.01.1980
76. E. 1980/42, K. 1981/5, 27.01.1981
77. E. 1980/47, K. 1981/6, 27.01.1981
78. E. 1980/52, K. 1981/7, 27.01.1981
79. E. 1980/53, K. 1981/8, 27.01.1981
80. E. 1992/8, K. 1992/39, 16.06.1992
81. E. 2006/21, K. 2006/38, 13.03.2006
82. E. 2007/24, K. 2010/113, 16.12.2010
83. E. 2010/29, K. 2010/90, 16.07.2010
84. E. 2010/113, K. 2011/164, 08.12.2011
85. E. 2011/150, K. 2013/30, 14.02.2013
86. E. 2011/150, K. 2013/30, 14.02.2013
87. E. 2012/103, K. 2013/105, 03.10.2013
88. E. 2013/66, K. 2014/19, 29.01.2014
89. E. 2014/61, K. 2014/166, 07.11.2014
90. E. 2014/177, K. 2015/49, 14.05.2015
91. E. 2015/13, 2015/108, 25.11.2015
92. E. 2015/17, K. 2015/20, 05.03.2015
93. Ali Rıza Baylı Kararı, B. No: 2014/2458, 05.07.2017
94. Arzu Batmaz Kararı, B. No: 2013/7915, 16.09.2015
95. Atilla İnan Kararı, B. No: 2012/615, 21.11.2013
96. Aydın Koloğlu Kararı, B. No: 2014/2456, 10.05.2017
97. Aysun Toka Kararı, B. No: 2013/2364, 07.03.2014
98. Feride Sağlam Kararı, B. No: 2013/7913, 23.02.2016
99. Fuat Tanrıkulu Kararı, B. No: 2013/7916, 18.02.2016
100. Hafize Aslan Kararı, B. No: 2014/2457, 19.04.2017
101. Hale Koloğlu Kararı, B. NO: 2014/2460, 11.05.2017
102. Halil Üstündağ Kararı, B. No: 2013/5062, 14.01.2014
103. Hatun Özdemir Kararı, B. No: 2013/7904, 10.03.2016
104. İbrahim Çalışkan Kararı, B. No: 2014/2462, 11.05.2017
105. İsa Reçber Kararı, B. No: 2013/4518, 21.01.2015
106. İsmail Kuşçu Kararı, B. No: 2014/2459, 11.05.2017
107. Meltem Sukan Kararı, B. No: 2013/9459, 21.04.2016
108. Muzaffer Eygay Kararı, B. No: 2014/2461, 10.05.2017
109. Münis Düşenkalkar Kararı, B. No: 2013/1244, 17.07.2014
110. Serkan Acar Kararı, B. No: 2013/1613, 02.10.2013
111. Yasemin Balcı Kararı, B. No: 2014/8881, 25.07.2017