AVRUPA İNSAN HAKLARI MAHKEMESİ İÇTİHATLARINA GÖRE MÜLKİYET HAKKININ KORUNMASI AÇISINDAN DEVLETLERİN POZİTİF YÜKÜMLÜLÜKLERİ

Yıl 2012, Sayı: 84, 1 - 144, 01.03.2012

Suat Şimşek

Öz

Klasik yaklaşımda devletin negatif statü hakları konusunda negatif yükümlülüklerinin, pozitif statü hakları konusunda ise pozitif yükümlülüklerinin bulunduğu kabul edilmektedir. Zaten devletin yükümlülüğünün pozitif ya da negatif olması, ilgili hakkın negatif statü hakkı ya da pozitif statü hakkı olarak nitelendirilmesinde kullanılmaktadır. Fakat AİHM son yıllarda verdiği kararlarında klasik tasnifte negatif statü hakkı olduğu kabul edilen mülkiyet hakkı açısından devletin pozitif yükümlülüklerinin de bulunabileceğine karar vermektedir. Mahkeme, mülkiyet hakkı karşısında devletin sadece müdahale etmemesini yeterli bulmamakta, bireylerin bu haktan etkin şekilde yararlanabilmeleri için devletin harekete geçmesini beklemektedir. Bu kapsamda devletler hem mülkiyet hakkının korunması için gerekli yasal ve idari çerçeveyi düzenlemek hem de uygulamanın bu çerçeveye uygun olarak cereyan etmesini sağlamakla yükümlüdürler. Bu çalışmada Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi çerçevesinde mülkiyet hakkının korunması açısından devletlerin pozitif yükümlülükleri, bu yükümlülüklerin kapsamı ve sınırı ile bu yükümlülüklerdeki takdir hakkı, AİHM kararları ışığında irdelenecektir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Mülkiyet Hakkı, Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi, Pozitif Yükümlülükler, Takdir Hakkı

POSITIVE OBLIGATIONS OF STATES IN TERMS OF PROTECTION OF THE RIGHT OF PROPERTY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE JUDGMENTS OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Öz

The classical approach assumes that negative obligations exist for negative status rights and positive obligations for positive status rights. In fact, the negative or positive status of the state’s obligations is used to describe the relevant right as negative status right or positive status right. However, in its recent decisions, the ECHR has ruled that the state may also have positive obligations regarding property right for which traditional classification provides only negative status rights. The Court finds that sole intervention of the state is insufficient regarding property right and expects the state to take action to ensure that the individuals can actively benefit from this right. In this regard, the states are obliged to regulate the legal and administrative framework necessary to protect property rights as well as to ensure that implementation occurs in line with this framework. This study shall evaluate the positive obligations of states for the protection of property rights within the framework of the European Convention on Human Rights, the context and boundaries of these obligations as well as the margin of appreciation over these obligations in light of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Right of Property, European Convention on Human Rights, Positive Obligations, Margin of Appreciation

Kaynakça

• Adams, W.M. (1990), Green Development: Environ ment and Sustainability in the Third World, London: Routledge.
• ASOSAI (2002), “The Importance of Environmental Audit in China” by SAI CNAO, Asian Journal of Government Audit
• http://www.asosai.org/journal2002/articles_2.htm#h1 (Access date: 05.03.2012)
• ASOSAI (2009), “8th ASOSAI Research Project: Guidance on Conducting Environmental Audit”, http://www.asosai.org/activities/research_project_detail. jsp?idx=52 (Access date: 25.08.2011)
• Awasthi, A. K. (1999), “Environment Issues in Audit”, Asian Journal of Government Audit, http://www.asosai.org/asosai_old/journal1999/enviroment_ issues_in_audit.htm (Access date: 05.03.2012)
• Campelo, V. (2004), “Getting Started: A Brazilian Perspective on Environmental Auditing”, International Journal of Auditing, April 2004. http://www.intosaijournal. org/technicalarticles/technicalapr04e.html (Access date: 01.07.2011)
• Carisse, N., Cotnoir, L., Mathieu, C. and Reed, J. (2004), “Making the world a better place to live one audit at a time: improving governance and accountability in environmental protection”, International Journal of Government Auditing, 31 (2), p. 10-16.
• Chai, N. (2009), Sustainability Performance Evaluation System in Government, Springer Science+Business Media B.V. ,2009.
• Chiang, C. (2010), “Insights into current practices in auditing environmental matters”, Managerial Auditing Journal, 25 (9), p. 912-933.
• Desgagn´e, B. S. and Gabel, H. L. (1997), “Environmental Auditing in Management Systems and Public Policy”, Journal of Environmental Economics And Management, 33, p.331-346.
• Efendi, M. (2005), Thesis titled “Çevre ve Sayıştay”, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Kamu Yönetimi Ve Siyaset Bilimi Anabilim Dalı, Kent ve Çevre Bilimleri, Ankara Üniversitesi.
• Emerson, J., Esty, D. C., Levy, M.A., Kim, C.H., Mara, V., De Sherbinin, A. and Srebotnjak, T. (2010), 2010 Environmental Performance Index, New Haven: Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy.
• INTOSAI (2010), “INTOSAI Strategic Plan 2011-2016”, http://www.intosai.org/ uploads/intosaispenglishv9web.pdf (Access date: 06.09.2011)
• INTOSAI WGEA (1997), “Results of the second questionnaire on environmental auditing”, http://www.environmental-auditing.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=aEDEP kTapug%3d&tabid=129&mid=569 (Access date: 05.09.2011)
• INTOSAI WGEA (2001), “Guidance on Conducting Audits of Activities with an Environmental Perspective”, http://www.environmental-auditing.org/LinkClick.asp x?fileticket=tuoNw1oAs%2fQ%3d&tabid=128&mid=568 (Access date: 05.08.2011)
• INTOSAI WGEA (2007a), “Evolution and Trends in Environmental Auditing”, http://www.environmental-auditing.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=91RsG1vxtGs%3 d&tabid=128&mid=568 (Access date: 01.07.2011)
• INTOSAI WGEA (2007b), “The World Summit on Sustainable Development: An Audit Guide for Supreme Audit Institutions”, http://www.environmental-auditing. org/Home/WGEAPublications/StudiesGuidelines/tabid/128/Default.aspx (Access date: 20.08.2011)
• INTOSAI WGEA (2007c), “The Fifth Survey on Environmental Auditing: Detailed Results”, http://www.environmental-auditing.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=6fEVZA 6HV%2fg%3d&tabid=129&mid=569 (Access date: 05.09.2011)
• INTOSAI WGEA (2009), “The Sixth Survey on Environmental Auditing”, http:// www.environmental-auditing.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=X19ppkMSplE%3d&tabi d=129&mid=569 (Access date: 05.09.2011)
• INTOSAI WGEA (2011), “2011-2013 Work Plan”, http://www.environmental- auditing.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=XYy23eyNDqw%3d&tabid=112 (Access date: 05.09.2011)
• Köse, H. Ö. (2007), “Dünyada ve Türkiye’de Yüksek Denetim”, T.C. Sayıştay Başkanlığı 145. Kuruluş Yıldönümü Yayınları, Mayıs 2007.
• Leeuwen, S. V. (2004), “Developments in Environmental Auditing by Supreme Audit Institutions”, Environmental Management, 33 (2), p. 163–172, Springer-Verlag New York, LLC.
• Lima, L. H. and Magrini, A. (2010), “The Brazilian Audit Tribunal’s role in improving the federal environmental licensing process”, Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 30, p.108–115.
• OECD (2008a), Summary of Environmental Outlook to 2030.
• Pollitt, C. and Summa, H. (1997), “Reflexive Watchdogs? How Supreme Audit Institutions Account for Themselves”, Public Administration, 75 (2), p. 313-336.
• Rika, N. (2009), “What motivates environmental auditing? A public sector perspective”, Pacific Accounting Review, 21 (3), p. 304-318.
• Roberts, P. (2006), “Evaluating Regional Sustainable Development: Approaches, Methods and the Politics of Analysis”, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 49(4), p.515 – 532.
• Rongbing, H. (2011), “Environmental Auditing: An Informationized Regulatory Tool of Carbon Emission Reduction”, Energy Procedia, 5, p.6–14, Published by Elsevier Ltd.
• Stafford, S. L. (2006), “State Adoption of Environmental Audit Initiatives”, Contemporary Economic Policy, 24 (I), January 2006, p. 172-187.
• TCA (2007), International Symposium on Environmental Auditing and Supreme Audit Institutions, Turkish Court of Accounts.
• Toepfer, K. (2004), “Environmental Auditing and Sustainable Development: SAIs Matter”, INTOSAI Journal of Government Auditing, 32 (2), April. http://www. intosaijournal.org/pdf/april2004.pdf (Access date: 13.09.2011)
• UNCED (1992), “United Nations Conference on Environ ment and Development”, http://www.un.org/geninfo/bp/enviro.html (Access date: 20.08.2011)
• UN DESA (2002a), “Guidance in preparing a national sustainable development strategy: Managing sustainable development in the new millenium”, United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/ publications/nsds_guidance.pdf (Access date: 20.08.2011)
• Wanga, J., Zhangb, B. and Chenc, T. (2011), “The case study of China’s environmental audit: taking the Taihu Lake as an example”, Energy Procedia, 5, p. 2108–2113, Published by Elsevier Ltd.
• WCED (1987), Our Common Future. World Commission on Environment and Devel opment, http://www.un-documents.net/ocf-02.htm#I (Access date: 20.08.2011)