IS LEGAL PLURALISM REQUIRED IN HUMAN RIGHTS LAW?

Yıl 2025, Sayı: 30, 39 - 54, 28.07.2025

Mehmet Sercan Ercan

Öz

This paper critically examines the nature and extent of legal pluralism, its role in fostering inclusiveness, and perceptions of justice administration within international human rights law. Arguing that legal pluralism is not merely a descriptive concept but a normative requirement, the study explores its complex and nuanced relationship with international human rights standards. Through a detailed analysis of various forms of legal pluralism, the paper evaluates their alignment with international human rights legislation. Case law from the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) illustrates how pluralism is fundamental to democratic society, affecting the scope and definition of freedoms such as speech and association. The study ultimately questions how pluralism is interpreted within ECtHR jurisprudence, revealing it as both a marker of societal diversity and an essential element of political and legal frameworks.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Legal pluralism , human rights , case-law , European legal pluralism.

Etik Beyan

There is no requirement of Ethics Committee Approval for this study.

Hukuki Çoğulculuk İnsan Hakları Hukuku için Gerekli midir?

Öz

Bu makale, hukuki çoğulculuğun doğasını ve kapsamını, kapsayıcılığı teşvik etmedeki rolünü ve uluslararası insan hakları hukuku çerçevesinde adaletin sağlanmasına dair algıları eleştirel bir şekilde incelemektedir. Hukuki çoğulculuğun yalnızca tanımlayıcı bir kavram değil, aynı zamanda normatif bir gereklilik olduğunu ileri süren çalışma, bu kavramın uluslararası insan hakları standartlarıyla olan karmaşık ve çok yönlü ilişkisini araştırmaktadır. Çeşitli hukuki çoğulculuk biçimlerinin ayrıntılı bir analizini sunan makale, bunların uluslararası insan hakları mevzuatıyla uyumunu değerlendirmektedir. Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi’nin (AİHM) içtihatları, çoğulculuğun demokratik toplum için temel bir unsur olduğunu, ifade ve örgütlenme özgürlüğü gibi hakların kapsam ve tanımlarını etkilediğini göstermektedir. Çalışma, çoğulculuğun AİHM içtihatlarında nasıl yorumlandığını sorgulamakta ve bunu hem toplumsal çeşitliliğin bir göstergesi hem de siyasi ve hukuki çerçevelerin vazgeçilmez bir unsuru olarak ortaya koymaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Hukuki çoğulculuk , insan hakları , içtihat , Avrupa hukuki çoğulculuğu

Kaynakça

• Ahmed, B. I. What are the Underlying Factors for the Poor Implementation of the Free, Prior, and Informed Consent Principle in Australia, Canada, and the United States? A Qualitative Comparative Study.
• Alves AI. The margin of appreciation doctrine and the Right to life: the article 2 of the ECHR (Doctoral dissertation).
• Bosset P. Cultural human rights as new foundations for interculturalist policies: a rights-based approach from Québec. The International Journal of Human Rights. 2024 Dec 3:1-25.
• Delmas-Marty M, Towards a Truly Common Law: Europe as a Laboratory for Legal Pluralism (Paperback re-issue, digitally print version, Cambridge Univ Press 2007)
• Fyson D. Legal pluralism, hybridisation and the uses of everyday criminal Law in Quebec, 1760–1867. InThe Uses of Justice in Global Perspective, 1600–1900 2019 Jan 15 (pp. 210-230). Routledge.
• Gharios G. Legal pluralism and unofficial law in Lebanon: evolution and sustainable development of water. Water Policy. 2020 Jun 1;22(3):348-64.
• Kachar S. The Challenges of Pluralism in Lebanon and the Culture of Change in the Lebanese Political Thought. J Poli Sci Publi Opin. 2023;1(1):105.
• Kosta V, Skoutaris N and Tzevelekos VP (eds), The EU Accession to the ECHR (Hart Publishing 2014)<https://libproxy.berkeley.edu/login?qurl=http%3A%2F%2Fdx.doi.org%2F10.5040%2F9781474202046%3Flocatt%3Dlabel%3Asecondary_bloomsburyCollections> accessed 27 October 2024
• Krisch N, Beyond Constitutionalism: The Pluralist Structure of Postnational Law (Oxford University Press 2011)
• Linden-Retek, P. (2024). A Postnational Bearing: On the Legal Form of European Constitutionalism.
• Loewenstein K, ‘Militant Democracy and Fundamental Rights, I’ (1937) 31 American Political Science Review 417
• McDougal MS, Lasswell HD, Chen LC. Human rights and world public order: the basic policies of an international law of human dignity. Oxford University Press; 2018 Nov 16.
• Mégret F. International Criminal Justice, Legal Pluralism, and the Margin of Appreciation Lessons from the European Convention on Human Rights. Harv. Hum. Rts. J.. 2020;33:57.
• Pirola F. Between Deference and Activism: The ECtHR as a Court on States or a Court on Rights? Exploring the ECtHR interpretative tools (Doctoral dissertation, Université Côte d›Azur; Università degli studi di Milano-Bicocca).
• Rawls J, ‘THE DOMAIN OF THE POLITICAL AND OVERLAPPING CONSENSUS,’ Debates in Contemporary Political Philosophy (Routledge 2002)
• Salih AL. The Anglo-Saxon the Basis for a Universal Language. Journal of Al-Ma’moon College. 2023;2(40).
• Schmid, S. P. (2023). Individual or collective rights? Consequences for the satisfaction with democracy among Indigenous peoples in Latin America. Democratisation, 30(6), 1113-1134.
• Sciolino E, ‘Lawyers Protest Across France at Sweeping Anticrime Law’ The New York Times (12 February 2004) <https://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/12/world/lawyers-protest-across-france-at-sweeping-anticrime-law.html> accessed 27 October 2024
• Sieder R, Multiculturalism in Latin America: Indigenous Rights, Diversity and Democracy (Palgrave Macmillan 2002)
• Steiner HJ, Alston P and Goodman R, International Human Rights in Context: Law, Politics, Morals : Text and Materials (Oxford University Press 2008)
• Brannigan and Mcbride v the United Kingdom [1993] ECtHR 14553/89, 14554/89
• Gunduz v Turkey [2003] ECtHR 35071/97
• Handyside v the United Kingdom [1976] ECtHR 57499/17, 74536/17, 80215/17, 9323/18, 16128/18, 25920/18
• Kjeldsen, Busk Madsen and Pedersen v Denmark [1976] ECtHR 57509/11
• Refah Partisi (the Welfare Party) and Others v Turkey [2003] ECtHR [GC] 60936/12
• Thlimmenos v Greece [2000] ECtHR [GC] 58561/00