Uluslararası İnsancıl Hukuk Kurallarına Göre Teslim Olma Kuralının İncelenmesi

Öz

Uluslararası insancıl hukuk kurallarına göre silahlı bir çatışmada teslim olan bir kişiye yönelik saldırı gerçekleştirmek hukuka aykırıdır. Teslim olan kişiler, silahlı çatışmalar açısından artık savaş dışı kalmış sayılmaktadır. Bu nedenle teslim olan kişi düşmanca davranışlara son vererek düşman kuvvetleri için askeri bir tehdit unsuru olmaktan çıkmıştır. Dolayısıyla herhangi bir düşmanca davranış sergilemeyen ve savaş dışı kalan bir kişi, saldırı hedefi yapılamayacaktır. Söz konusu husus insancıl hukukun temel ilkelerinden askeri gereklilik ilkesine de dayandırılmaktadır. Zira savaş dışı kalmış bir kişiye saldırı yöneltmenin askeri olarak gerekli olduğunu iddia etmek mümkün değildir. Bu bağlamda teslim olmanın insancıl hukukun temel kurallarından biri olduğu ifade edilmektedir. Ancak gerek doktrinde gerekse insancıl hukuka ilişkin anlaşmalarda yeterli ölçüde ele alınmamıştır. Buna paralel olarak devletlerin askeri el kitaplarında da az sayıda içeriğe sahip olduğu görülmektedir. Söz konusu çalışma, insancıl hukukta önemli bir işleve sahip olduğu kabul edilen teslim olma kuralının içerik ve uygulamasının yeterince anlaşılmasına katkıda bulunmak üzere hazırlanmıştır. Buna göre teslim olma eyleminin üç unsura sahip olduğu söylenebilir. Bunlar; teslim olma niyetinin gösterilmesi, teslim olma sürecinin işletilmesi ve teslim olmanın tamamlanmasıdır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Teslim olma
• Uluslararası insancıl hukuk
• Savaş dışı
• Askeri gereklilik
• Silahlı çatışma

An Analysis of the Rule of Surrender According to International Humanitarian Law

Öz

According to international humanitarian law, attacking a person who has surrendered in an armed conflict is unlawful. Persons who have surrendered are no longer considered combatants in armed conflicts. Therefore, a person who has surrendered has ceased to be a military threat to enemy forces by ceasing hostile acts. Consequently, a person who has ceased to be a combatant and is not engaging in any hostile acts cannot be targeted for attack. This matter is also based on the principle of military necessity, one of the fundamental principles of humanitarian law. It is not possible to claim that attacking a person who is no longer a combatant is militarily necessary. In this context, it is stated that surrender is one of the fundamental rules of humanitarian law. However, it has not been sufficiently addressed either in doctrine or in agreements relating to humanitarian law. Similarly, it is seen that there is little content on this subject in the military manuals of states. This study has been prepared to contribute to a sufficient understanding of the content and application of the rule of surrender, which is recognized as having an important function in humanitarian law. Accordingly, it can be said that the act of surrender has three elements. These are: demonstrating the intention to surrender, implementing the surrender process, and completing the surrender.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Surrender
• International humanitarian law
• Hors de combat
• Military necessity
• Armed conflict

Kaynakça

1. Afflerbach H, ‘Going Down with Flying Colours: Naval Surrender from Elizabeth to Our Own Times’ in Holger Afflerbach and Hew Strachan (eds), How Fighting Ends: A History of Surrender (Oxford University Press 2012) 187-210.
2. Blix H, ‘Legal Restraints on the Use of Armed Force’ in Ola Engdahl and Pal Wrange (eds), Law at War: The Law as it was and the Law as it Should Be (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 2008) 21-39.
3. Buchan R, ‘The Rule of Surrender in Internatıonal Humanitarian Law’ (2018) 51(1) Israel Law Review 3-27.
4. Carnahan B M, ‘Lincoln, Lieber and the Laws of War: the Origins and Limits of the Principle of Military Necessity’ (1998) 92(2) American Journal of International Law 213-231.
5. Cartledge P, ‘Surrender in Ancient Greece’ in Holger Afflerbach and Hew Strachan (eds), How Fighting Ends: A History of Surrender (Oxford University Press 2012) 15-29.
6. Detter I, The Law of War (Cambridge University Press 2000).
7. Dillon D R, ‘Perfidy in Iraq: Their Tactics, Our Response’ (The Heritage Foundation, 26 March 2003) accessed 05 September 2025.
8. Dinstein Y, The Conduct of Hostilities Under the Law of Iternational Armed Conflict (Cambridge University Press 2004).

9. Gillingham J, ‘Surrender in Medieval Europe-An Indirect Approach’ in Holger Afflerbach and Hew Strachan (eds), How Fighting Ends: A History of Surrender (Oxford University Press 2012) 55-73.
10. Green L C, ‘The Law of War in Historical Perspective’ (1998) 72(1) International Law Studies 39-78.
11. Green L C, The Contemporary Law of Armed Conflict (2nd Ed., Manchester University Press 2000).
12. Greenwood C, ‘Historical Development and Legal Basis’ in Dieter Fleck (ed), The Handbook of International Humanitarian Law (2nd Ed., Oxford University Press 2008) 1-45.
13. Greenwood C, ‘Scope of Application of Humanitarian Law’ in Dieter Fleck (ed), The Handbook of International Humanitarian Law (2nd Ed., Oxford University Press 2008) 45-79.
14. Güneysu G, ‘Askeri Gereklilik İlkesi ve Uluslararası İnsancıl Hukuk’ (2012) 4 Ankara Barosu Dergisi 93-108.
15. Henckaerts J M and Doswald Beck L, Customary International Humanitarian Law Volume I: Rules (Cambridge University Press 2005).
16. Henderson I, The Contemporary Law of Targeting (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 2009).
17. Jasutis G, Mikova R and Cernejute K, ‘The Legal and Practical Elements of Surrender in International Humanitarian Law’ (2023) Geneva Centre for Security Sector Governance-DCAF 1-28.
18. Kecskemeti P, Strategic Surrender: The Politics of Victory and Defeat (Stanford University Press 1957).
19. Keely L H, ‘Surrender and Prisoners in Prehistoric and Tribal Societies’ in Holger Afflerbach and Hew Strachan (eds), How Fighting Ends: A History of Surrender (Oxford University Press 2012) 7-15.
20. Kolinovski S, ‘Mosul ISIS Fighters Feigning Surrender in order to Attempt Suicide Attacks’ (ABC News, 11 July 2017) accessed 12 September 2025.
21. Lanni A, ‘The Laws of War in Ancient Greece’ (2008) 26(3) Law and History Review 469-489.
22. Law of Armed Conflict Deskbook (U.S. International and Operational Department 2012).
23. Lehmann T and Zhukov Y, ‘Until the Bitter End? The Diffusion of Surrender Across Battles’ (2019) 73(1) International Organization 133-169.
24. Leigh D, ‘Iraq War Logs: Apache Crew Killed Insurgents Who Tried to Surrender’ (The Guardian, 22 October 2010) accessed 12 September 2025.
25. Libero L, ‘Surrender in Ancient Rome’ in Holger Afflerbach and Hew Strachan (eds), How Fighting Ends: A History of Surrender (Oxford University Press 2012) 29-41.
26. Luban D, ‘Military Necessity and the Cultures of MilitaryLlaw’ (2013) 26(2) Leiden Journal of International Law 315-349.
27. Neale A J, ‘Status and Treatment of Prisoners of War and Other Persons Deprived of Their Liberty’ in Elizabeth Wilmshurst and Susan Breau (eds), Perspectives on the ICRCStudy on Customary International Humanitarian Law (Cambridge University Press 2007) 302-337.
28. New Zealand Defence Force, ‘Manual of Armed Forces Law’ (2017) 4 Law of Armed Conflict accessed 15 September 2025.
29. Pandey D, ‘Vijay Diwas: Why did 93,000 Pakistani Troops Surrender before Indian Army in 1971? Explained’ (India TV News, 16 December 2024) accessed 10 September 2025.
30. Pictet J, Development and Principles of International Humanitarian Law (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 1985).
31. Queter S, ‘Methods and Means of Combat’ in Dieter Fleck (ed), The Handbook of International Humanitarian Law (2nd Ed., Oxford University Press 2008) 119-236.
32. Robertson H B, ‘The Obligation to Accept Surrender’ (1993) 46(2) Naval War College Review 103-115.
33. Sandoz Y, Swinarski C and Zimmermann B, Commentary on the Additional Protocols: of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 1987).
34. Solis G D, The Law of Armed Conflict: International Humanitarian Law in War (Cambridge University Press 2010).
35. Strachan H, ‘Essay and Reflection: On Total War and Modern War’ (2000) 22(2) The International History Review 341-370.
36. U.S. Department of Defense, ‘Report to Congress on the Conduct of the Persian Gulf War – Appendix on the Role of the Law of War’ (1992).
37. U.S. Department of Defense, Law of War Manual (Office of General Counsel Department of Defense, June 2015-Updated December 2016).
38. U.S. Department of The Army, The Law of Land Warfare (Field Manual No. 27-10 1956).
39. Wright Q, A Study of War-Volume I (The University of Chicago Press 1942).
40. ‘Convention (II) with Respect to the Laws and Customs of War on Land and its Annex: Regulations Concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land, The Hague, 29 July 1899’ (ICRC) accessed 21 August 2025.
41. ‘Convention (III) Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949’ (ICRC) accessed 15 September 2025.
42. ‘Convention (IV) respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land and its Annex: Regulations Concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land, The Hague, 18 October 1907’ (ICRC) accessed 21 August 2025.
43. ‘Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field (Lieber Code) 24 April 1863’ (ICRC) accessed 19 August 2025.
44. ‘Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I) 8 June 1977’ (ICRC) accessed 18 August 2025.
45. ‘Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts (Protocol II) 8 June 1977’ (ICRC) accessed 30 August 2025.
46. ‘Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I) Commentary of 1987’ (International Humanitarian Law Database-ICRC) accessed 08 September 2025.
47. ‘Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court’ (ICC) accessed 01 September 2025.