Tahkimin Hayatta Kalmasının Ardındaki Sır: Öz Düzenleyici Mekanizma

Öz

Bu makale, tahkimin tarih boyunca karşılaştığı başlıca güçlüklere karşı ayakta kalmasında, öz düzenleyici bir yapı gelişiminin rolünü incelemektedir. Devletlerin müdahaleci yaklaşımları ve COVI9-19 salgını olmak üzere, tahkimin karşılaştığı iki güçlük ele alınmaktadır. Tahkim, öz düzenleyici bir sistem olmaya doğru gelişmesiyle birlikte devlet denetiminden büyük oranda özgürleşmiştir, böylelikle de ilk zaferini kazanmıştır. Bunun yanında, tahkim, salgının etkilerine kapalı kalamamış ve söz konusu sistem, tahkimin salgın koşullarında ayakta kalmasında önemli rol oynamıştır. Salgınla mücadele kapsamında devletlerce uygulanan karantina tedbirleri sebebiyle yaşanan iletişim güçlükleri, gelişen öz düzenleyici mekanizmanın önemli bir ayağı olan tahkim kurumlarınca atılan ve tahkimi salgın koşullarında etkin ve canlı tutan elektronik başvurunun ve duruşmanın teşviki, kuralların güncellenmesi ve kılavuzların ve tedbirlerin üretilmesi gibi çeşitli adımlarla aşılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• tahkim
• öz düzenleyici sistem
• milli hukuk ve mahkemelerin kontrol ve denetimi
• COVID-19 salgını
• tahkim kurumları

The Secret Behind The Survival of Arbitration: Self-Regulating Mechanism

Öz

This Article explores the role of development of a self-regulating mechanism in arbitration on the survival of arbitration against difficulties in its history. It focuses on two major challenges in the history of arbitration, namely the interventionist attitude by States towards arbitration and the COVID-19 pandemic. It indicates that arbitration has liberalized itself from the control of States to great extent through its development towards becoming largely self-regulating system, thereby gaining its first victory. Besides, arbitration could not remain immune to the effect of the pandemic and such mechanism has played a crucial role in the survival of arbitration as a dispute resolution method under the pandemic circumstances. The difficulties on the way of communication among arbitration community because of the quarantine applied by the countries with various degrees of strictness to deal with COVID-19 have been quickly addressed by arbitral institutions, one pillar in the self-regulating mechanism in arbitration, in various forms, namely promoting electronic filings and hearings, amending rules, producing guidelines and measures, which have overall kept arbitration alive and efficient against the circumstances presented by the pandemic.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• arbitration
• self-regulating system
• control and supervision of national laws and courts
• COVID-19 pandemic
• arbitration institutions

Kaynakça

1. Convention on Execution of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1927 (signed on 26 September 1927, entered into force 25 July 1929) League of Nations Treaty Series No 2096
2. Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (signed on 10 June 1958, entered into force on 7 June 1959) 21 UST 2517, 330 UNTS 38 (The New York Convention)
3. Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (opened for signature 18 March 1965, entered into force 14 October 1966), 575 UNTS 515; reproduced in 4 ILM 532 (1965) (ICSID Convention)
4. Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, UNGA Res 40/72 (11 December 1985)
5. Protocol on Arbitration Clauses (signed on 24 September 1923, entered into force on 28 July 1924) League of Nations Treaty Series Vol 27 UN DOC E/AC.42/2 16 February 1955
6. Recommendations to Assist Arbitral Institutions and Other Interested Bodies with regard to Arbitrations under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules Adopted at the Fifteenth Session of the Commission, Yearbook of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, 1982, Vol. XIII 420-424
7. Revised articles of the Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, and the recommendation regarding the interpretation of article II, paragraph 2, and article VII, paragraph 1, of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, done at New York, 10 June 1958, UNGA Res 61/33 (4 December 2006)
8. UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules accessed 11 July 2022

9. UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (as revised in 2010) (15 August 2010)
10. UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, UN Doc A/40/17, annex I (adopted on 21 June 1985)
11. UNGA Res 65/22 (10 January 2011)
12. UNGA Res 68/109 (18 December 2013)
13. UNGA Res 76/108 (17 December 2021)
14. French New Code of Civil Procedure, Decree of 12 May 1981
15. International Arbitration Law, Law No. 4686 of 21 June 2001, published in the Official Gazette dated 5 July 2001, No. 24453
16. Law Approving the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, Law No. 3731 of 8 May 1991, published in the Official Gazette dated 21 May 1991
17. Law regarding Principles to be Adhered to Upon Resorting to Arbitration in Disputes Arising from Concession Stipulations and Agreements Regarding Public Services, Law No. 4501 of 21 January 2000, published in the Official Gazette dated 22 January 2000, No. 23941
18. Law No. 1086 promulgated in Official Gazette dated July 2, 3, 4, 1927, No. 622, 623, 624
19. Law No. 3460 of 27 May 1988, published in the Official Gazette dated 6 December 1988, No. 19830
20. Law No. 4446 of 13 August 1999, published in the Official Gazette dated 13 August 1999, No. 23786
21. Official Gazette dated 25 September 1991, No. 21002
22. Swiss PILA
23. Turkish Private International Law, Law No. 5718 of 27 November 2007, published in the Official Gazette dated 12 December 2007
24. The Swedish Arbitration Act
25. Tobey v County of Bristol, 23 Fed Cas 1313 No 14,065 (Circuit Court, D. Massachusetts May Term 1845)
26. Akıncı Z, Milletlerarası Tahkim (4th edn Vedat Kitapçılık 2016)
27. Ansay T and Schneider E C, ‘The New Private International Law in Turkey’ (1990) 37(1) Netherlands International Law Review 139-161
28. Briner R and Hamilton V, ‘History and General Purpose of the Convention-The Creation of an International Standard to Ensure the Effectiveness of Arbitration Agreements and Foreign Arbitral Awards’ in Emmanuel Gaillard and Domenico Di Pietro (eds), Enforcement of Arbitration Agreements and International Arbitral Awards-The New York Convention in Practice (CMP Publishing Ltd. 2008) 3-37
29. Candaner Elver N, ‘Turkish International Arbitration Law and Restrictions on its Application’ (2004) 21(5) Journal of International Arbitration 453-458
30. Domke M, Wilner G M and Edmonson L E, Part I. The Nature of Commercial Arbitration, Chapter 2. A Brief History of Arbitration in Domke on Commercial Arbitration (Westlaw, Database updated November 2017)
31. Doğan V, Milletlerarası Ticaret Hukuku (1st edn Savaş 2020)
32. Erdoğan E and Vural Çelenk B, ‘The Culture of Dispute Resolution in Turkey and the Istanbul Arbitration Centre’ (2016) 7(12) Law & Justice Review, 157-171
33. Garnett R, ‘International Arbitration Law: Progress towards Harmonisation’ (2002) 3(2) Melbourne Journal of International Law 400-413
34. Herrmann G, ‘The 1958 New York Convention: Its Objectives and Its Future’ in Albert Jan Van den Berg (ed), Improving the Efficiency of Arbitration Agreements and Awards: 40 Years of Application of the New York Convention (Kluwer Law International 1999) 15-23
35. Hunter J M H, ‘Arbitration Procedure in England: past, present and future’ (1985) 1(1) Arbitration International 82-102
36. Hussein E, ‘The COVID-19 Pandemic and Arbitration in the UAE: A Tale of Challenges and Opportunities’ (2020) 7(2) SOAS Law Journal 102-191
37. Kaytaz Eker B, Harmonising Role of the New York Convention (1st edn Seckin 2020)
38. Lew J D M, ‘Achieving the Dream: Autonomous Arbitration’ (2006) 22(2) Arbitration International 179-203
39. Manav Özdemir A E and Vural Çelenk B, ‘Tahkimde Çevrimiçi Duruşmalar ve Çevrimiçi Duruşmaların Hukuki Dinlenilme Hakkı ve Tarafların Eşitliği İlkeleri Bağlamında Değerlendirilmesi’ (2022) 42(1) Public and Private International Law Bulletin 205-248 accessed 22 July 2022
40. Mustill M, ‘Arbitration: History and Background’ (1989) 6(2) Journal of International Arbitration 43-56
41. Nussbaum A, ‘Treaties on Commercial Arbitration-A Test of International Private-Law Legislation’ (1942) 56(2) Harvard Law Review 219-244
42. Otto D, ‘Article IV’ in Herbert Kronke and others (eds), Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards: A Global Commentary on the New York Convention (Kluwer Law International 2010) 143-203
43. Quigley L V, ‘Accession by the United States to the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards’ (1961) 70(7) The Yale Law Journal 1049-1082
44. Raouf M A, ‘Emergence of New Arbitral Centres in Asia and Africa: Competition, Cooperation and Contribution to the Rule of Law’ in Stavros Brekoulakis, Julian D M Lew and Loukas Mistelis (eds), The Evolution and Future of International Arbitration (Kluwer Law International 2016) 321-330
45. Scherer M, ‘Remote Hearings in International Arbitration: An Analytical Framework’ (2020) 37(4) Journal of International Arbitration 407-448
46. Shope M, ‘The International Arbitral Institution Response to COVID-19 and Opportunities for Online Dispute Resolution’ (2020) 13(1) Contemp. Asia Arb. J. 67-83
47. Slate W K II, ‘International Arbitration: Do Institutions Make a Difference’ (1996) 31(1) Wake Forest Law Review 41-64
48. Şanlı C, Uluslararası Ticari Akitlerin Hazırlanması ve Uyuşmazlıkların Çözüm Yolları (7th edn Beta 2019)
49. Tarman Z D, ‘Yabancı Mahkeme ve Hakem Kararlarının Türkiye’de Tenfizinde Karşılaşılan Sorunlara İlişkin Bazı Tespitler’ (2017) 37(2) Public and Private International Law Bulletin, 798-820
50. Van den Berg A J, The New York Convention of 1958 (Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers 1981)
51. Van Houtte H, ‘Parallel Proceedings Before State Courts and Arbitration Tribunals: Is there a Transnational lis alibi pendens-exception in Arbitration or Jurisdiction Conventions?’ in Pierre A. Karrer (ed), Arbitral Tribunals or State Courts Who Must Defer to Whom? (ASA Special Series No.15 2001) 35-54
52. Wolaver E S, ‘The Historical Background of Commercial Arbitration’ (1934) 83(2) University of Pennsylvania Law Review 132-146
53. Wolff R (ed), New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 10 June 1958 Commentary (C.H., Beck, Hart, Nomos 2012)
54. Yeşilırmak A, ‘Chapter 1: Legal Framework’ in Ali Yeşilırmak and Ismail G Esin (eds), Arbitration in Turkey (Kluwer Law International 2015) 1-14
55. ‘Arbitral Institutions COVID-19 Joint Statement’ accessed 16 June 2022
56. Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce, ‘Ad Hoc Platform-Powered by the SCC’ accessed 22 June 2022
57. Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce, ‘SCC Platform-Simplifying Secure Communication from Request to Award’ accessed 22 June 2022
58. Australian Centre for International Commercial Arbitration (ACICA), ‘Welcome to ACICA E-Filing System’ accessed 23 June 2022
59. China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC), ‘CIETAC launches Guidelines on Proceeding with Arbitration Actively and Properly during the COVID-19 Pandemic (Trial)’, (28 April 2020) accessed 17 June 2022
60. Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC), ‘Flexible, Effective and Seamless: HKIAC Virtual Hearings’ accessed 17 June 2022
61. Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC), ‘HKIAC Guidelines for Virtual Hearings’ accessed 17 June 2022
62. International Arbitration Centres Alliances, ‘What are Hybrid Hearings?’ accessed 17 June 2022
63. International Bar Association Arbitration 40 Subcommittee, ‘The Current State and Future of International Arbitration: Regional Perspectives’ (2015) accessed 6 June 2022
64. International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), ‘Database of ICSID Member States’ accessed 4 December 2022
65. International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR), ‘International Dispute Resolution Procedures (including Mediation and Arbitration Rules)’ (amended and effective 1 March 2021) accessed 22 June 2022
66. International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), ‘Hearing Facilities’ accessed 17 June 2022
67. International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), ‘ICC Arbitration Rules 2017 & 2021-Compared Version’ accessed 23 June 2022
68. ICC International Court of Arbitration, ‘ICC Guidance Note on Possible Measures Aimed at Mitigating the Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic’ (9 April 2020) accessed 17 June 2022
69. International Federation of Commercial Arbitration Institutions (IFCAI), ‘IFCAI Members 2022’ accessed 5 July 2022
70. Istanbul Arbitration Centre (ISTAC), ‘ISTAC Online Hearing Rules and Procedures’
71. London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA), ‘LCIA Arbitration Rules (2014)’ (effective 1 October 2014 accessed 16 June 2022
72. London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA), ‘LCIA Arbitration Rules’ (effective 1 October 2020) accessed 24 June 2022
73. London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA), ‘LCIA Online Filing’ accessed 22 June 2022
74. London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA), ‘Updates to the LCIA Arbitration Rules and the LCIA Mediation Rules (2020)’ accessed 24 June 2022
75. Pendell G, ‘The Rise and Rise of the Arbitration Institutions’ (Kluwer Arbitration Blog, 30 November 2011) accessed 5 July 2022
76. Queen Mary University of London and White & Case partnership, ‘2015 International Arbitration Survey: Improvements and Innovations in International Arbitration’ accessed 27 December 2021
77. Queen Mary University of London and White & Case partnership, ‘2018 International Arbitration Survey: The Evolution of International Arbitration’ accessed 13 December 2021
78. Queen Mary University of London and White & Case partnership, ‘2021 International Arbitration Survey: Adapting Arbitration to a Changing World’ accessed 21 June 2022
79. Rees H, ‘Where has International Commercial Arbitration Come From?’ (2010) accessed 22 March 2020
80. UNCITRAL, ‘Status: Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York, 1958)’ accessed 4 December 2022
81. UNCITRAL, ‘Status: UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (1985), with amendments as adopted in 2006’ accessed 12 June 2022
82. Vienna International Arbitration Centre, ‘The Vienna Protocol – A Practical Checklist for Remote Hearings, (June 2020)’ accessed 17 June 2022
83. World Health Organization (WHO), ‘Impact of COVID-19 on people's livelihoods, their health and our food systems- Joint statement by ILO, FAO, IFAD and WHO’ (13 October 2020) accessed 9 June 2022