Uluslararası hukuk perspektifinden Türkiye’de geçici koruma altındaki Suriyelilerin geri dönüşü: karşılaştırmalı deneyimler ışığında bir değerlendirme

Öz

Aralık 2024’te Suriye’deki savaşın resmen sona erdiğinin ilanı, Türkiye’de geçici koruma altındaki milyonlarca Suriyelinin geri dönüş ihtimalini yeniden ulusal ve uluslararası tartışmaların merkezine taşımıştır. Bu çalışma, geri dönüş olgusunu uluslararası hukuk perspektifinden ele alarak 1951 Mülteci Sözleşmesi’nin statünün sona erdirilmesine dair hükümleri, geri göndermeme kuralı ve BMMYK’nin gönüllülük, güvenlik ve onur ilkeleri arasındaki ilişkiyi tartışmakta; geçici koruma statüsünün sona erdirilmesine ilişkin hukuki sınırları ve imkanları değerlendirmektedir. Makalede, Bosnalı mültecilerin Almanya’dan geri dönüş deneyimlerinin ve Ukraynalı mültecilere yönelik AB geçici koruma rejiminin karşılaştırmalı bir incelemesi üzerinden, geçici korumanın sonlandırılmasına dair hukuki ve pratik belirsizlikler tartışılmaktadır. Son bölümde Türkiye’nin Suriyelilere yönelik geçici koruma rejimi, 1951 Mülteci Sözleşmesi’ne koyduğu coğrafi çekince ve ulusal mevzuat temelinde değerlendirilmekte, bu özel hukuki statünün geri dönüş planlamaları üzerindeki hukuki ve pratik etkileri analiz edilmektedir. Çalışma, Türkiye özelinde yürütülen dönüş tartışmalarına normatif ilkeler ve uygulama arasındaki gerilimi görünür kılan, eleştirel ve yapıcı bir katkı sunmayı amaçlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Geri dönüş
• gönüllü geri dönüş
• geçici koruma
• mülteci hukuku
• uluslararası hukuk
• Suriyeliler

An international law perspective on the return of Syrians under temporary protection in Türkiye: an assessment based on comparative experiences

Abstract

The official declaration of the end of the war in Syria in December 2024 has once again brought the prospect of return for millions of Syrians under temporary protection in Türkiye to the forefront of national and international debates. This article delves into the question of return from the perspective of international law, discussing the relationship between the cessation clauses of the 1951 Refugee Convention, the principle of non-refoulement, and UNHCR’s standards of voluntariness, safety, and dignity. It further evaluates the legal limits and possibilities concerning the termination of temporary protection. Drawing on a comparative analysis of the repatriation of Bosnian refugees from Germany in the 1990s and the European Union’s temporary protection regime for Ukrainian refugees, the article highlights the legal and practical uncertainties surrounding the termination of temporary protection. The final section focuses on Türkiye’s temporary protection regime for Syrians, assessing its foundations in the geographical limitation to the 1951 Refugee Convention and domestic legislation, and analysing the legal and practical implications of this special status for return planning. The study aims to offer a critical yet constructive contribution to debates on return in Türkiye by making visible the tension between law, normative principles and state practices.

Keywords

• Return
• voluntary return
• temporary protection
• refugee law
• international law
• Syrians.

Kaynakça

1. Amnesty International. (1997). Bosnia-Herzegovina: “Who’s living in my house?” Obstacles to the safe return of refugees and internally displaced people (AI Index: EUR 63/001/1997). Amnesty International. Erişim adresi: https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/eur63/001/1997/en/
2. Amnesty International. (2019). Turkey: Syrians illegally deported into war ahead of anticipated ‘safe zone’ [Press release]. Amnesty International. Erişim adresi: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/press-release/2019/10/turkey-syrians-illegally-deported-into-war-ahead-of-anticipated-safe-zone/ Ausländergesetz [Aliens Act]. (1965). Bundesgesetzblatt, Teil I, 353. Erişim adresi: https://perma.cc/ETG7-ELMS Baban, F., Ilcan, S., & Rygiel, K. (2017). Syrian refugees in Turkey: Pathways to precarity, differential inclusion, and negotiated citizenship rights. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 43(1), 41–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2016.1192996
3. Barutciski, M. (1998). Involuntary repatriation when refugee protection is no longer necessary: Moving forward after the 48th session of the Executive Committee. International Journal of Refugee Law, 10(1/2), 236–255. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/10.1-2.236
4. Council Directive 2001/55/EC of 20 July 2001 on minimum standards for giving temporary protection in the event of a mass influx of displaced persons and on measures promoting a balance of efforts between Member States in receiving such persons and bearing the consequences thereof. Official Journal of the European Communities, L 212, 12–23. Erişim adresi: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32001L0055
5. Council of the European Union. (2022). Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/382 of 4 March 2022 establishing the existence of a mass influx of displaced persons from Ukraine within the meaning of Article 5 of Directive 2001/55/EC, and having the effect of introducing temporary protection (OJ L 71, 4.3.2022, pp. 1–6). EUR-Lex. Erişim adresi: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32022D0382
6. Cowell, A. (1996). Germans plan to return refugees to Bosnia. The New York Times. Erişim adresi: https://www.nytimes.com/1996/09/20/world/germans-plan-to-return-refugees-to-bosnia.html
7. Crisp, J. (2003). A new asylum paradigm? Globalization, migration and the uncertain future of the international refugee regime (New Issues in Refugee Research, Working Paper No. 100). UNHCR. Erişim adresi: https://www.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/legacy-pdf/3fe16d835.pdf
8. Durieux, J.-F., & Hurwitz, A. (2004). How many is too many? African and European legal responses to mass influxes of refugees. German Yearbook of International Law, 47, 105–159.

9. European Commission. (2000). Proposal for a Council Directive on minimum standards for giving temporary protection in the event of a mass influx of displaced persons and on measures promoting a balance of efforts between Member States in receiving such persons and bearing the consequences thereof (COM/2000/0303 final – CNS 2000/0127). Official Journal of the European Communities, C 311E, 251–258. Erişim adresi: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A52000PC0303
10. Crisp, J., & Long, K. (2016). Safe and voluntary refugee repatriation: From principle to practice. Journal on Migration and Human Security, 4(3), 141–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/233150241600400305
11. Edwards, A. (2012). Temporary protection, derogation and the 1951 Refugee Convention. Melbourne Journal of International Law, 13(2), 595–635 Erişim adresi: https://law.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/1687379/Edwards.pdf
12. Erdoğan, M. N. (2024). Bakan Yerlikaya: Ülkesine dönüş yapan Suriyeli sayısı 1,5–2 katına çıktı. Anadolu Ajansı. Erişim adresi: https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/gundem/bakan-yerlikaya-ulkesine-donus-yapan-suriyeli-sayisi-1-5-2-katina-cikti/3419939
13. European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE). (2023). 2022 update AIDA country report: Türkiye. ECRE. Erişim adresi: https://ecre.org/2022-update-aida-country-report-turkiye/
14. European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE). (2024). Transitioning out of the Temporary Protection Directive: ECRE’s analysis of the main options available to ensure a smooth transition out of the TPD regime for people displaced from Ukraine (Policy Paper No. 13). ECRE. Erişim adresi: https://ecre.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/ECRE-Policy-Paper-13_Transitioning-Out-of-the-Temporary-Protection-Directive.pdf
15. Gibney, M. J. (2000). Between control and humanitarianism: Temporary protection in contemporary Europe. Georgetown Immigration Law Journal, 14, 689–707. Erişim adresi: https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/geoimlj14&div=38&id=&page=
16. Göç İdaresi Başkanlığı. (2025). Gönüllü, Güvenli, Onurlu ve Düzenli Geri Dönüş. T.C. İçişleri Bakanlığı. Erişim adresi: https://www.goc.gov.tr/gonullu-geri-donus
17. Göç İdaresi Başkanlığı. (2025a). Geçici koruma. T.C. İçişleri Bakanlığı. Erişim adresi: https://www.goc.gov.tr/gecici-koruma5638
18. Harrell-Bond, B. E. (1986). Imposing aid: Emergency assistance to refugees. Oxford University Press.
19. Hathaway, J. C., & Neve, R. A. (1997). Making international refugee law relevant again: A proposal for collectivized and solution-oriented protection. Harvard Human Rights Journal, 10, 115–211. Erişim adresi: https://repository.law.umich.edu/articles/1622/
20. Fitzpatrick, J. (2000). Temporary protection of refugees: Elements of a formalized regime. American Journal of International Law, 92(2), 279–306. https://doi.org/10.2307/2555293
21. Humanitarian Issues Working Group (HIWG). (1995). Survey on the implementation of temporary protection. UNHCR. Erişim adresi: https://www.refworld.org/reference/research/hiwg/1995/en/1996
22. Fitzpatrick, J., & Bonoan, R. (2003). Cessation of refugee protection. In E. Feller, V. Türk, & F. Nicholson (Eds.), Refugee protection in international law: UNHCR’s global consultations on international protection (pp. 492–542). Cambridge University Press.
23. Hathaway, J. C. (2021). The rights of refugees under international law (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. İltica ve Göç Araştırmaları Merkezi (İGAM). (2025). Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung gazetesi, Türkiye’de Suriyeli mültecilerin gönüllü geri dönüş sürecini mercek altına aldı (Özel Röportaj – Metin Çorabatır). Erişim adresi: https://igamder.org/TR/frankfurter-allgemeine-zeitung-gazetesi-turkiye’de-suriyeli-multecilerin-gonullu-geri-donus-surecini-mercek-altina-aldiozel-roportaj-metin-corabatir
24. İneli-Ciger, M. (2014). Implications of the new Turkish Law on Foreigners and International Protection and Regulation No. 29153 on temporary protection for Syrians seeking protection in Turkey. Oxford Monitor of Forced Migration, 4(2), 28–36
25. İneli-Ciğer, M. (2023). When temporary protection ends: Longer-term solutions for refugees from Ukraine(European Policy Analysis No. 2023:11 epa). Swedish Institute for European Policy Studies. Erişim adresi: https://sieps.se/media/ojndl3td/2023_11epa.pdf
26. Kjaerum, M. (1993). Temporary protection of refugees in Europe in the ’90s. Helsinki Monitor, 1993, 31–38. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/6.3.444
27. Kneebone, S., & O’Sullivan, M. (2014). Article 1 C 1951 Convention. In A. Zimmermann (Ed.), The 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol: A commentary (pp. 571–610). Oxford University Press.
28. Koser, K., Walsh, M., & Black, R. (1998). Temporary protection and the assisted return of refugees from the European Union. International Journal of Refugee Law, 10(3), 444–461. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/10.3.444
29. Liebaut, F. (2000). Legal and social conditions for asylum seekers in Western European countries. Danish Refugee Council.
30. Long, K. (2013). Back to where you once belonged: A historical review of UNHCR policy and practice on refugee repatriation (PDES/2013/14). UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Erişim adresi: https://www.refworld.org/reference/research/unhcr/2013/en/97653
31. Luyten, K. (2025, June 25). Transitioning out of temporary protection for displaced people from Ukraine. European Parliament Think Tank. Erişim adresi: https://epthinktank.eu/2025/06/25/transitioning-out-of-temporary-protection-for-displaced-people-from-ukraine/
32. Kaya, B. (2025). O zaman Türkiye’deki Suriyeliler ne olacak? Sözcü. Erişim adresi: https://www.sozcu.com.tr/o-zaman-turkiye-deki-suriyeliler-ne-olacak-p150236
33. Öztürk, F. N. (2025). Suriye'ye gönüllü geri dönüş: 'Henüz yoğun dönüş yok'. BBC Türkçe. Erişim adresi: https://www.bbc.com/turkce/articles/ce8e49p091ro
34. Perluss, D., & Hartman, J. F. (1986). Temporary refuge: Emergence of a customary norm. Virginia Journal of International Law, 26(3), 551–626.
35. Sahin Mencutek, Z. (2019). Encouraging Syrian return: Turkey’s fragmented approach. Forced Migration Review, 62, 28-31. Erişim adresi: https://www.fmreview.org/return/sahinmencutek/
36. Sengul, I. (2022). Syrian Refugees’ Homemaking in Gaziantep: Uncertainty, Legality and Temporality. Refugee Survey Quarterly, 41(2), 267–297. https://doi.org/10.1093/rsq/hdac006
37. Thorburn, J. (1995). Transcending boundaries: Temporary protection and burden-sharing in Europe. International Journal of Refugee Law, 7(3), 459–485. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/7.3.459
38. Thouez, C. V. (1998). New direction in refugee protection. Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, 22(2), 89-105.
39. UNHCR. (1992). A comprehensive response to the humanitarian crisis in the former Yugoslavia (HCR/IMFY/1992/2). Erişim adresi: https://www.refworld.org/policy/strategy/unhcr/1992/en/15355
40. UNHCR. (1996). Handbook on Voluntary Repatriation: International Protection. Erişim adresi: https://www.unhcr.org/media/handbook-voluntary-repatriation-international-protection
41. UNHCR. (1997). The state of the world's refugees 1997: A humanitarian agenda. Oxford University Press.
42. UNHCR (2001). Summary conclusions: Cessation of refugee status. Expert roundtable hosted by the Luso-American Foundation for Development, Lisbon, Portugal. Erişim adresi: https://www.refworld.org/policy/legalguidance/cup/2003/en/18418
43. UNHCR. (2003). Guidelines on international protection No. 3: Cessation of refugee status under Article 1C(5) and (6) of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (the "ceased circumstances" clauses) (HCR/GIP/03/03). Erişim adresi: https://www.refworld.org/policy/legalguidance/unhcr/2003/en/14489
44. UNHCR. (2018). Comprehensive Protection and Solutions Strategy: Protection Thresholds and Parameters for Refugee Return to Syria. The UN Refugee Agency. Erişim adresi: https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/63223
45. UNHCR. (2024). Syria situation: Crisis Regional Flash Update #7. UNHCR. Erişim adresi: https://www.unhcr.org/media/syria-situation-crisis-regional-flash-update-7
46. UNHCR. (2025). Syria regional refugee response. The UN Refugee Agency. Erişim adresi: https://data.unhcr.org/en/situations/syria
47. UNHCR. (2025a). UNHCR’s Grandi reaffirms support for Türkiye’s refugee response and voluntary returns. UNHCR. Erişim adresi: https://www.unhcr.org/tr/en/news/speeches-and-statements/unhcr-s-grandi-reaffirms-support-tuerkiye-s-refugee-response-and
48. UNHCR. (2025b). Syria situation: Crisis Regional Flash Update #42. UNHCR. Erişim adresi: https://www.unhcr.org/media/syria-situation-crisis-regional-flash-update-42
49. UNHCR. (2025c). Syria situation: Crisis Regional Flash Update #30. UNHCR. Erişim adresi: https://www.unhcr.org/media/syria-situation-crisis-regional-flash-update-30
50. UNHCR. (2025d). Syria situation: Crisis Regional Flash Update #25. UNHCR. Erişim adresi: https://www.unhcr.org/media/syria-situation-crisis-regional-flash-update-25
51. UNHCR. (2025e). Syria situation: Crisis Regional Flash Update #37. UNHCR. Erişim adresi: https://www.unhcr.org/media/syria-situation-crisis-regional-flash-update-37
52. UNHCR EXCOM. (1980). Conclusion No. 19 (XXXI): Temporary refuge. Erişim adresi: https://www.refworld.org/policy/exconc/excom/1980/en/27367
53. UNHCR EXCOM. (1991). Conclusion No. 65 (XLII): General. Adopted by the Executive Committee of the High Commissioner’s Programme. Erişim adresi: https://www.refworld.org/policy/exconc/excom/1991/en/42053
54. UNHCR EXCOM. (1992). Conclusion No. 69 (XLIII): Cessation of status – Adopted by the Executive Committee. Erişim adresi: https://www.refworld.org/policy/exconc/excom/1992/en/41998
55. UNHCR EXCOM. (2004). Conclusion No. 101 (LV): Legal safety issues in the context of voluntary repatriation of refugees. Erişim adresi: https://www.refworld.org/policy/exconc/excom/2004/en/114427
56. UNHRC. (2025). Oral update by Mr. Paulo Sérgio Pinheiro, Chair of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic. United Nations Human Rights Council. Erişim adresi: https://www.ohchr.org/en/statements-and-speeches/2025/06/oral-update-mr-paulo-sergio-pinheiro-chair-independent
57. Wagner, M., & Grama, M. (2025). Phasing out temporary protection? Shaping EU policies through national experiences. ICMPD. Erişim adresi: https://www.icmpd.org/blog/2025/phasing-out-temporary-protection-shaping-eu-policies-through-national-experiences