NATIONAL PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS: THE CASE OF THE 1998 BRITISH HUMAN RIGHTS ACT

Öz

The 1998 British Human Rights Act is an important national human rights protection mechanism in the United Kingdom. One of the main motivations for the Human Rights Act was to "clarify" human rights law. Another point is that the United Kingdom, which contributed significantly to the drafting of the European Convention on Human Rights, was in a "difficult position" because the Convention had not been a full part of the UK legal system for a long time. This is because disputes arising from breaches of the provisions of the Convention must be referred to the European Court of Human Rights for resolution. This was an important factor in the drafting of the Human Rights Act.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Human rights
• United Kingdom
• ECHR
• National protection.

ULUSAL KORUMA MEKANİZMALARININ BİR ÖRNEĞİ OLARAK 1998 İNSAN HAKLARI YASASI

Öz

1998 İngiliz İnsan Hakları Yasası, Birleşik Krallık’ta yürürlükte olan önemli bir ulusal insan hakkı koruma mekanizmasıdır. İnsan Hakları Yasasının ortaya çıkışındaki önemli sebeplerden biri İngiliz insan hakları hukukunda “berraklaşma”nın sağlanmasıdır. Bir diğer sebep ise Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi’nin hazırlanmasında önemli katkısı olan Birleşik Krallık’ta, insan haklarının korunması için ulusal bir koruma yolu öngörülmemesi dolayısıyla devletin “zor durumda” kalmasıdır. Zira Birleşik Krallık’ta Sözleşme hükümlerinin ihlâli söz konusu olur ise bu ihlalden kaynaklanan uyuşmazlıkların çözümü için Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi’ne başvurulması zorunluluk arz etmektedir. İnsan Hakları Yasası’nın hazırlanmasındaki önemli etkenlerden biri de husus olmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İnsan hakları
• Birleşik Krallık
• AİHM
• Ulusal koruma.

Kaynakça

1. Amos, Merris: “Problems with the Human Rights Act 1998 and How to Remedy Them: Is a Bill of Rights the Answer?”, The Modern Law Review, C.6, S.72, 2009, s. 883-908.
2. Amos, Merris: “Transplanting Human Rights Norms: The Case of the United Kingdom’s Human Rights Act”, Human Rights Quarterly, S.36, 2013, s. 386-407.
3. Carol, Harlow: “Damages and Human Rights”, New Zealand Law Review, S. 3, 2004, s. 429-450.
4. Clayton, Richard: Damage Limitation: The Courts and Human Rights Act Damages: (https://www.claytoncomments.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DAMAGE-LIMITATION-THE-COURTS-AND-HUMAN-RIGHTS-ACT-DAMAGES-CLAYTON-COMMENTS.pdf Erişim: 13.05.2024)
5. Conor, Gearty: Uk Election and the Human Right Act, 2010. (https://www.sciencespo.fr/ceri/sites/sciencespo.fr.ceri/files/art_cg.pdf Erişim:10.05.2024)
6. Cooper, Jonathan: “The Human Rights Act 1998”, Amicus Curiae, Journal of the Society for Advanced Legal Studies, S.15,1999, s. 8-12.
7. Craig, Paul P: “Judicial Review and Anxious Scrutiny: Foundations, Evolution and Application”, Public Law Oxford Legal Studies Research Paper, S. 20, 2015, s. 60-78. (https://ssrn.com/abstract=2595190 Erişim: 14.05.2024)
8. Dainow, Joseph: “The Civil Law and the Common Law: Some Points of Comparison”, The American Journal of Comparative Law, C.3, S.15, 1966-1967, s. 419-435.

9. Doğan, İlyas: Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi Hukuku, 1. Baskı, Astana Yayınları, Ankara, 2020.
10. Elliott, Mark: “Scrutiny of Executive Decisions Under the Human Rights Act 1998 Exactly How Anxious” Judicial Review, C.3, S.6, s. 166-176.
11. Feldman, David: “The Human Rights Act 1998 and Constitutional Principles”, Legal Studies, C.2, S.19, 1999, s. 197. Fordham, Michael: “What is Anxious Scrutiny?”, Judicial Review, C.1, S.2, 1996, s. 81-87.
12. Fordham, Michael/Mare, Thomas: “Anxious Scrutiny, the Principle of Legality and the Human Rights Act”, Judicial Review, C.1, S.5, 2000, s. 40-51.
13. Fordham, Micheal: “Common Law Rights” Judicial Review, C.1, S.16, 2011, s. 14-21.
14. Friedman, Danny: “A Common Law of Human Rights: History, Humanity and Dignity”, Europan Human Rights Law Review, S.4, 2016, s. 378-398.
15. Garnham, Neil: “Sufficient Victim? Standing and the Human Rights Act 1998”, Judicial Review, C.1, S.4, 1999, s. 39-42. Harold H. Punke, “Common Mind and Common Law, as Basic Commonwealth”, The International Lawyer, C.3, S.6, 1972, s. 635-641. (https://www.jstor.org/stable/i40031049 Erişim: 05.05.2024)
16. Harvey, Colin: “Taking the Next Step? Achieving Another Bill of Rights”, European Human High Court, s. 24-42.
17. Hunt, Paul: Social Rights are Human Rights But the Uk System is Rigged, Centre for Welfare Forum, 2017.
18. Ipsos Mori: A Quantitative Survey of Public Awareness and Atitudes towards Human Rights, the HRA and Its Underlying Principles, Institute for Public Policy Research, Londra, 2005.
19. King, Jeff: Parliament’s Role Following Declarations of Incompatibility under the Human Rights Act, Parliaments and Human Rights içinde, ed. Hooper/Hunt/Yowell, Hart Publishing, Londra, 2015, s. 165-192.
20. Klug, Francesca: “A Bill of Rights: Do We Need One or Do We Already Have One?”, Public Law, 2007, s. 701-717. Klug, Francesca: A Bill of Rights: What For?, Ed: Bryant, Chris, Towards a New Constitutional Settlement içinde, The Smith Institute , Londra, 2007 s. 129-144.
21. Labour Party: A New Agenda for Democracy, 1993.
22. Mcgoldrick, Dominic: “The United Kingdom’s Human Rights Act 1998 in Theory and Practice” The International and Comparative Law Quarterly. C.4, S. 50, 2011, s. 901-953. Mcquigg, Ronagh J.A.: “The Human Rights Act 1998 Future Prospects”, Statute Law Review, C.2, S. 35, C, 2014 s. 120-132.
23. Miller, Jonathan: “A Typology of Legal Transplants: Using Sociology, Legal History and Argentine Examples to Explain the Transplant Process”, The American Journal of Comparative Law, S.51, 2003, s. 839-885.
24. Neenan, Caroline: “Is Declaration of Incompatibility an Effective Remedy”, Judicial Review, C.4. S.5, 2000, s. 247-250.
25. Philpott, Juliet: “Damages Under the United Kingdom’s Human Rights Act 1998 and the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990”, New Zealand Journal of Public and International Law, C.2, S.5., 2007, s. 211-243.
26. Pound, Roscoe: The Spirit of the Common Law, College of Law, Marshall Jones Company Publishers Francestown, New Hampshire, 1921.
27. Ramsden, Micheal: “Anxious Scrutiny in Hong Kong Administrative Law: Origins, Adaptations, and Techniques”, Asian Journal of Comparative Law, 2024, s. 1-21.
28. Rosenkrantz, Carlos F: “Against Borrowings and other Nonauth Foreign Law”, International Journal of Constitutional Law, S.1, 2003, s. 269-295.
29. Salihpaşaoğlu, Yaşar: Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi ve Yargılamada Kullandığı Yöntem, İlke ve Usuller, Adalet Yayınları, Ankara, 2020.
30. Sedley, Stephen: “The Rocks or the Open Sea: Where is the Human Rights Act Heading?”, Journal of Law and Society, S.32, 2005, s. 1-17.
31. Singh, Rabinder: “The Declaration of Incompatibility”, Judicial Review, C.4, S.7, s. 237-243.
32. Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi: (https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/convention_tur Erişim: 16.02.2024)
33. Bill of Rights Bill: (https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-03/0117/220117.pdf Erişim: 11.05.2024)
34. Bill of Rights Forum, Recommendations to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission on a Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland: (https://wrda.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Bill-of-Rights-Forum-final-report.pdf Erişim: 15.05.2024)
35. Commission on a Bill of Rights: A Uk Bill of Rights? The Choice Before Us: (https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20130206021312/http://www.justice.gov.uk/about/cbr/ Erişim: 10.05.2024)
36. Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination: (https://www.refworld.org/policy/polrec/cerd/2003/en/20689 Erişim:07.04.2024)
37. Conservative General Election Manifesto, 1979: (https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/110858 Erişim: 15.05.2024)
38. Council of Europe, Values: (https://www.coe.int/en/web/about-us/values Erişim: 07.02.2024)
39. Country Court: (https://www.judiciary.uk/courts-and-tribunals/county-court/ Erişim: 27.01.2024)
40. Declaration of Incompatibility: (https://www.lse.ac.uk/sociology/assets/documents/human-rights/HRF5-incompatibilityHRA.pdf Erişim: 10.05.2024)
41. Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in Great Britain: (https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/economic-social-and-cultural-rights-great-britain Erişim: 15.05.2024)
42. Elliot, Mark: The Common Law and the European Convention on Human Rights: Do We need Both? (https://publiclawforeveryone.com/2022/02/11/the-common-law-and-the-european-convention-on-human-rights-do-we-need-both/ Erişim: 06.05.2024)
43. Employment Appeal Tribunal: (https://www.gov.uk/employment-appeal-tribunal-decisions/mrs-kristie-higgs-v-1-farmors-school-2-archbishops-council-of-the-church-of-england-2023-eat-89-eat-89 Erişim: 13.05.2024)
44. Equality and Human Rights Commission, Report of the Equalty and Human Rights Commission: (https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/hri_report.pdf Erişim: 10.05.2024)
45. European Convention on Human Rights: (https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/convention_tur Erişim: 06.03.2024) From the Human Rights Act to a Bill of Rights?: https://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/commons/lib/research/key_issues/Key-Issues-From-the-Human-Rights-Act-to-a-Bill-of-Rights.pdf Erişim: 29.04.2024)
46. Guide to the Human Rights Act 1998: (https://lx.iriss.org.uk/sites/default/files/resources/Guide%20to%20Human%20Rights%20Act.pdf Erişim: 07.02.2024)
47. Human Rights Commite Concludes Review of Report of United Kingdom: (https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2009/10/human-rights-committee-concludes-review-report-united-kingdom Erişim: 07.05.2024)
48. Immigration Act 1968: (https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/commonwealth-migration-since-1945/immigration-act-1968/#:~:text=In%201968%2C%20the%20Labour%20government,entitled%20to%20enter%20the%20country Erişim: 06.05.2024)
49. Judicial Remedies: (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/section/8 Erişim: 16.02.2024) King’s Bench Division of the High Court: (https://www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/kings-bench-division-of-the-high-court Erişim: 23.02.2024)
50. Liberty: “Liberty’s Written Evidence to the Joint Committee on Human Rights İnquiry into 20 years of the Human Rights Act”, 2018. (https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Libertys-Written-Evidence-to-the-Joint-Committee-on-Human-Rights-Inquiry-into-20-years-of-the-Human-Rights-Act.pdf, Erişim: 11.05.2024)
51. Lord Sumption gives the Administrative Law Bar Association Annual Lecture Anxious Scrutiny.(https://www.supremecourt.uk/docs/speech-141104.pdf Erişim: 10.12.2023)
52. Privy Council: (https://privycouncil.independent.gov.uk/#:~:text=The%20Privy%20Council%20is%20the,rather%20than%20as%20Departmental%20Ministers. Erişim: 9.12.2023)
53. R (Reprieve) v. Prime Minister: (https://www.landmarkchambers.co.uk/news-and-cases/implications-for-the-uk-of-the-new-standing-test-for-human-rights-and-climate-change-verein-klimaseniorinnen-schweiz-and-others-v-switzerland-app-no-53600-20-and-related-applications Erişim: 13.05.2024)
54. Remedial Order: (https://www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/remedial-orders/#:~:text=A%20remedial%20order%20is%20an,European%20Convention%20on%20Human%20Rights. Erişim: 23.02.2024)
55. Scottish Courts and Tribunals: (https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/the-courts/supreme-courts/about-the-court-of-session Erişim: 09.12.2023)
56. Sheriff Court: (https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/the-courts/sheriff-court Erişim: 16.05.2024)
57. The Declaration by United Nation: (https://www.un.org/en/about-us/history-of-the-un/preparatory-years Erişim: 07.02.2024)
58. The Law Comission and the Scottish Law Comission, Damages under the Human Rights Act: (https://www.scotlawcom.gov.uk/files/3012/7989/6877/rep180.pdf Erişim: 13.05.2024)
59. Tribunals: (https://www.judiciary.uk/courts-and tribunals/tribunals/#:~:text=The%20tribunals%20are%20specialist%20courts,appeals%20challenging%20some%20tribunal%20decisions Erişim: 16.05.2024)