ICSID Konvansiyonu Kapsamında Bulut Bilişimin Yatırım Olarak Değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Verinin değerinin ortaya çıkarılabilmesi, ancak yüksek miktarda işlem gücü kullanılması ile mümkün olabilir. Söz konusu yüksek işlem gücünün temini için en elverişli yol, bulut bilişim hizmetleridir. Bulut bilişim hizmetleri, tüm dünyada hükümetler tarafından çeşitli müdahalelerle karşılaşmaktadır. Bu müdahalelerin en önemlileri, verilerin ya da veri işleme sistemlerinin lokalizasyonuna (ülke sınırları içerisinde tutulmasının zorunlu kılınması) ilişkin olanlardır. Bulut bilişim hizmetlerinin neredeyse her zaman uluslararası ölçekte sunulduğu göz önüne alındığında; bulut bilişim hizmetlerinin söz konusu müdahalelerden korunmasına ilişkin olarak, 1960’lı yıllarda imzalanmış olan ve yabancı yatırımların korunmasını hedefleyen, ICSID Konvansiyonu’nun kullanılıp kullanılamayacağı konusunun incelenmesi ihtiyacı doğmuştur. ICSID Konvansiyonu, yatırımcılar ve devletler arasındaki yatırımlara ilişkin uyuşmazlıkların çözümlenmesi için tarafsız tahkim heyetleri oluşturulmasına imkân vermektedir. ICSID tahkim heyetlerinin bir uyuşmazlık üzerinde yetki sahibi olabilmesinin en önemli koşullarından birisi, ilgili uyuşmazlığın bir yatırıma ilişkin olmasıdır. Buna rağmen ICSID Konvansiyonu, yatırım terimine ilişkin herhangi bir tanım içermemektedir. Doktrinde ve içtihatlarda yatırım teriminin tanımlanması için temel olarak iki ana görüş bulunmaktadır. Bunlardan ilki, terimin tanımlanması görevinin taraflara ait olduğunu savunan görüştür. İkinci görüş ise; tarafların yatırım teriminin tanımını birlikte belirlemesi ile yatırım teşkil eden ekonomik aktivitenin belirli objektif kriterleri karşılayabilmesi koşullarının birlikte sağlanmasını aramaktadır. Bulut bilişim hizmetleri, her iki görüşe göre de gereken koşulları sağlayabilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bulut programlama,Veri,Bölgeselleştirme,Yatırım,ICSID

Cloud Computing as an Investment Under the ICSID Convention

Öz

Extracting data’s value can only be possible by using a high amount of processing power. The most eligible way of procuring such amount of processing power is using cloud computing services. Cloud computing services face several interventions by governments around the globe. The most notable interventions relate to the localization of data and data processing facility. Since cloud computing services nearly always provided internationally, there is a need to explore the possibility of protecting cloud computing services from those interventions by using a legal tool from the 1960s namely the ICSID Convention which allows forming arbitrational tribunals to solve investment disputes between investors and states. One of the conditions for ICSID tribunals to have jurisdiction over disputes is that the dispute at hand must be related to an investment. However, the ICSID Convention does not contain a definition of the investment term. Mainly, there are two different approaches among the case law and legal doctrine for defining the investment term. The first approach is leaving the duty of defining the term to the parties. The second approach requires simultaneous fulfilment of the parties’ consent and certain objective criteria. Cloud computing services can meet the required criteria under those approaches.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Cloud computing,Data,Localization,Investment,ICSID

Kaynakça

1. Bamman D, O’Connor B and Smith N, ‘Censorship and Deletion Practices in Chinese Social Media’ (2012) 17 First Monday accessed 11 September 2017
2. Bennett SC, ‘The Right to Be Forgotten: Reconciling EU and US Perspectives’ (2012) 30 Berkeley J. Int’l L. 161
3. Block FL, The Origins of International Economic Disorder: A Study of United States International Monetary Policy from World War II to the Present (University of California Press 1977)
4. Broches A, ‘Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes: Some Observations on Jurisdiction’ (1966) 5 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 263 accessed 2 December 2018
5. Chander A and Lê UP, ‘Data Nationalism’ (2015) 64 Emory Law Journal 679 accessed 7 July 2017
6. Cimpanu C, ‘Attempting to Ban YouTube, Turkey Restricts Several Google Services’ (softpedia) accessed 11 September 2017
7. Coskuntuncel A, ‘Privatization of Governance, Delegated Censorship, and Hegemony in the Digital Era’ (2016) 0 Journalism Studies 1 accessed 11 September 2017
8. ‘Data Centre Risk Index’ (Cushman & Wakefield 2016) accessed 12 June 2017

9. dejiaccessnow, ‘Status of Net Neutrality Around the World’ (CARTO) accessed 23 September 2017
10. Dekastros M, ‘Portfolio Investment: Reconceptualising the Notion of Investment under the ICSID Convention’ (2013) 14 Journal of World Investment & Trade 286 accessed 1 October 2018
11. Dolzer R and Schreuer C, Principles of International Investment Law (2nd edn, Oxford University Press 2012)
12. Dugan C and others, Investor-State Arbitration (Oxford University Press 2011)
13. Economides N, ‘“Net Neutrality,” Non-Discrimination and Digital Distribution of Content Through the Internet’ (2008) 4 I/S: A Journal of Law and Policy for the Information Society 209 accessed 20 September 2017
14. Engfeldt HJ, ‘Should ICSID Go Gangnam Style in Light of Non-Traditional Foreign Investments Including Those Spurred on by Social Media - Applying an Industry-Specific Lens to the Salini Test to Determine Article 25 Jurisdiction’ (2014) 32 Berkeley Journal of International Law 44 accessed 27 December 2017
15. Gaillard E, ‘Identify or Define? Reflections on the Evolution of the Concept of Investment in ICSID Practice’ accessed 23 September 2017
16. García M, ‘The Path Towards Defining “Investment” in ICSID Investor-State Arbitrations: The Open-Ended Approach’ (2018) 18 Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal 27 accessed 2 July 2018
17. Given JP, ‘Malaysia Historical Salvors Sdn., Bhd. v. Malaysia: An End to the Liberal Definition of Investment in ICSID Arbitrations’ (2009) 31 Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review 467 accessed 2 September 2018
18. Grabowski A, ‘The Definition of Investment under the ICSID Convention: A Defense of Salini Comment’ (2014) 15 Chicago Journal of International Law 287 accessed 17 January 2018
19. Granados N, ‘The Net Neutrality Debate: Why There Is No Simple Solution’ (Forbes) accessed 23 September 2017
20. Greenberg A and others, ‘The Cost of a Cloud: Research Problems in Data Center Networks’ (2009) 39 ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 68 accessed 21 September 2017
21. Harb J-P, ‘Definition Of Investments Protected By International Treaties: An On-Going Hot Debate’ (2011) 26 Mealey’s International Arbitration Report 1 accessed 21 January 2018
22. Hayali A, Sarili S and Dinc Y, ‘Turkish Experience in Bank Shareholders and Top Managers Fraud: Imar Bank and Ihlas Finans Case’ (2012) 1 The Macrotheme Review 114 accessed 8 September 2017
23. Höfer CN and Karagiannis G, ‘Cloud Computing Services: Taxonomy and Comparison’ (2011) 2 Journal of Internet Services and Applications 81 accessed 6 February 2017
24. Hussein D, ‘Contribution to the Host State Development: A Marginalised Criterion?’ (2015) 2 BCDR International Arbitration Review 289 accessed 24 February 2018
25. Jaeger PT and others, ‘Where Is the Cloud? Geography, Economics, Environment, and Jurisdiction in Cloud Computing’ (2009) 14 First Monday accessed 23 September 2017
26. Kastrenakes J, ‘The FCC Just Killed Net Neutrality’ (The Verge, 14 December 2017) accessed 18 February 2018
27. Lunden I, ‘PayPal to Halt Operations in Turkey after Losing License, Impacts “Hundreds of Thousands”’ (www.techcrunch.com, 31 June 2016) accessed 9 July 2017
28. Manciaux S, ‘The Notion of Investment: New Controversies’ (2008) 9 Journal of World Investment & Trade 443 accessed 2 November 2018
29. Martin A, ‘Definition of Investment: Could a Persistent Objector to the Salini Tests Be Found in ICSID Arbitral Practice Topics’ (2011) 11 Global Jurist [i] accessed 12 August 2017
30. McGarty C and others, ‘New Technologies, New Identities, and the Growth of Mass Opposition in the Arab Spring’ (2014) 35 Political Psychology 725 accessed 13 September 2017
31. Mell P and Grance T, ‘The NIST Definition of Cloud Computing’ (The National Institute of Standards and Technology 2011) Recommendations of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication 800-145 accessed 12 February 2017
32. Mishra N, ‘Data Localization Laws in a Digital World: Data Protection or Data Protectionism?’ [2016] The Public Sphere 136 accessed 23 September 2017
33. Mortenson JD, ‘The Meaning of “Investment”: ICSID’s Travaux and the Domain of International Investment Law’ (2010) 51 Harvard International Law Journal 257 accessed 11 September 2017
34. Mowbray M, ‘The Fog over the Grimpen Mire: Cloud Computing and the Law’ (2009) 6 SCRIPTed: A Journal of Law, Technology and Society 132 accessed 8 August 2017
35. ‘Net Neutrality’ (EDRi 2013) Issue 8 accessed 21 April 2017
36. ‘Net Neutrality: The Perspective of Telcos and Cable Companies’ accessed 23 September 2017
37. Omurgonulsen M and Omurgonulsen U, ‘Critical Thinking about Creative Accounting in the Face of a Recent Scandal in the Turkish Banking Sector’ (2009) 20 Critical Perspectives on Accounting 651 accessed 11 September 2017
38. Rotella P, ‘Is Data The New Oil?’ (Forbes, 4 February 2012) accessed 11 September 2017
39. Schefer KN, International Investment Law: Text, Cases and Materials, Second Edition (Second Edition, Edward Elgar Publishing 2016)
40. Schreuer CH, The ICSID Convention: A Commentary (First Edition, Cambridge University Press 2001)
41. Schreuer CH, The ICSID Convention: A Commentary (Second Edition, Cambridge University Press 2009)
42. ‘The High Costs of GDPR Compliance’ (Dark Reading) accessed 23 September 2017
43. ‘The ICSID Caseload – Statistics’ (International Centre for Settelement of Investment Disputes) Issue 2017-2 accessed 9 September 2017
44. Tian GY, ‘Current Issues of Cross-Border Personal Data Protection in the Context of Cloud Computing and Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement: Join or Withdraw’ (2016) 34 Wisconsin International Law Journal 367 accessed 2 November 2018
45. ‘Transparency Report: Search Removals Under European Privacy Law’ (Google) accessed 27 August 2016
46. ‘UNCTAD Investment Policy Hub’ accessed 28 August 2017
47. Waibel M, ‘Opening Pandora’s Box: Sovereign Bonds in International Arbitration’ (2007) 101 American Journal of International Law 711 accessed 2 November 2018
48. Webber M, ‘The GDPR’s Impact on the Cloud Service Provider as a Processor’ (2016) 16 Privacy & Data Protection Journal accessed 13 August 2017
49. Youm KH and Park A, ‘The “Right to Be Forgotten” in European Union Law: Data Protection Balanced with Free Speech?’ (2016) 93 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 273 accessed 17 June 2017
50. Abaclat and Others v Argentine Republic, (formerly Giovanna a Beccara and Others v The Argentine Republic), Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility [2011] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/07/5
51. Abaclat and Others v Argentine Republic, (formerly Giovanna a Beccara and Others v The Argentine Republic), Dissenting Opinion, Georges Abi-Saab [2011] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/07/05
52. Bayindir Insaat Turizm Ticaret Ve Sanayi A.S. v Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Award [2009] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/03/29
53. Biwater Gauff Ltd v United Republic of Tanzania, Award [2008] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/05/22
54. Ceskoslovenska Obchodni Banka, AS v The Slovak Republic, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction [1999] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/97/04
55. CMS Gas Transmission Company v The Republic of Argentina, Decision of the ad hoc Committee on the Application for Annulment of the Argentine Republic [2007] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/01/08
56. Consortium RFCC v Kingdom of Morocco, Decision on Jurisdiction [2001] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/00/06
57. Consorzio Groupement LESI-DIPENTA v People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria, Award [2005] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/03/08
58. Enron Corporation and Ponderosa Assets, LP v Argentine Republic, Decision on Jurisdiction [2004] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/01/03
59. Fedax N V v The Republic of Venezuela, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction [1999] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/96/03
60. Generation Ukraine, Inc v Ukraine, Award [2003] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/00/09
61. Google Spain SL, Google Inc v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (AEPD), Mario Costeja González [2014] European Court of Justice C-131/12
62. Helnan International Hotels A/S v The Arab Republic of Egypt, Decision of the Tribunal on Objection to Jurisdiction [2006] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB 05/19
63. Ioannis Kardassopoulos v The Republic of Georgia, Decision on Jurisdiction [2007] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/05/18
64. Jan de Nul NV Dredging International NV v Arab Republic of Egypt, Decision on Jurisdiction [2006] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/04/13
65. Joy Mining Machinery Limited v The Arab Republic of Egypt, Award on Jurisdiction [2004] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/03/11
66. KT Asia Investment Group BV v Republic of Kazakhstan, Award [2013] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/09/8
67. Lanco International Inc v The Argentine Republic, Preliminary Decision: Jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal [1998] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/97/6
68. LesiSpA and ASTALDI S.pA v People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria, Decision on jurisdiction [2006] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/05/3
69. Malaysian Historical Salvors, SDN, BHD v The Government of Malaysia, Award on Jurisdiction [2007] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/05/10
70. Malaysian Historical Salvors, SDN, BHD v The Government of Malaysia, Dissenting Opinion of Judge Mohamed Shahabuddeen [2009] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/05/10
71. MCI Power Group LC and New Turbine, Inc v Republic of Ecuador, Award [2007] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/03/6
72. Mr Patrick Mitchell, The Democratic Republic of Congo, Decision on the Application for Annulment of the Award [2006] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/99/7
73. Pantechniki SA Contractors & Engineers (Greece) v The Republic of Albania, Award [2009] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/07/21
74. Philippe Gruslin v Malaysia, Award [2000] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/99/3 Phoenix Action, Ltd v The Czech Republic, Award [2009] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/06/5
75. Quiborax SA, Non-Metallic Minerals SA and Allan Fosk Kaplun v Plurinational State of Bolivia, Decision on Jurisdiction [2012] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/06/2
76. Saba Fakes v Republic of Turkey, Award [2010] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/07/20
77. Saipem S.pA v The People’s Republic of Bangladesh, Decision on Jurisdiction and Recommendation on Provisional Measures [2007] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/05/07
78. Salini Costruttori S.pA and Italstrade S.pA v Kingdom of Morocco, Decision on Jurisdiction [2001] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/00/4
79. SGS Société Générale de Surveillance SA v Republic of the Philippines, Decision of Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction [2004] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/02/6
80. Tokios Tokelés v Ukraine, Decision on Jurisdiction [2004] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/02/18
81. Toto Costruzioni Generali S.pA v The Republic of Lebanon, Decision on Jurisdiction [2009] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/07/12
82. Victor Pey Casado and President Allende Foundation v Republic of Chile, Award [2008] International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ARB/98/2
83. Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Network Penetration Reporting and Contracting for Cloud Services (DFARS Case 2013– D018)
84. General Communique on Electronic Ledger
85. General Communique on Tax Procedure Law (Circular Number: 433)
86. Law on Payment and Securities Settlement Systems, Payment Services and Electronic Money Institutions
87. Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a framework for the free flow of non-personal data in the European Union
88. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation)
89. The Communique on Principles of Information Systems Management and Business Processes and Audition of Information Systems in the Institutions of Information Exchange, Clearing and Netting