Uluslararası Kriminal Polis Teşkilatı’nın Uluslararası Örgüt Statüsü

Year 2020, Volume: 29 Issue: 1, 89 - 112, 30.03.2020

Buğra Sarı

https://doi.org/10.26650/siyasal.2020.29.1.0046

Abstract

Günümüzde başta Birleşmiş Milletler tarafından uluslararası örgüt olarak tanınmasına ve bu doğrultuda faaliyet göstermesine rağmen, INTERPOL’ün uluslararası örgüt statüsü ve uluslararası hukuk şahsiyeti literatürde tartışmalı bir konu olagelmiştir. Kimi yazarlar INTERPOL’ün formel bir uluslararası andlaşma marifetiyle kurulmamış olmasından yola çıkarak, örgütün uluslararası örgüt olamayacağını ve dolayısıyla uluslararası hukuk şahsı olarak kabul edilemeyeceğini öne sürmektedirler. Buradan hareketle, bu çalışma INTERPOL’ün uluslararası örgüt statüsünü sorgulamakta ve uluslararası örgüt olarak uluslararası hukuk şahsiyetine sahip olduğu yönünde tavır almaktadır. Bunu desteklemek amacıyla çalışma, INTERPOL’ün neden uluslararası örgüt statüsünde olduğunu uluslararası hukuki dayanaklarıyla ortaya koymaktadır. Nitekim INTERPOL’ün kurucu belgesi olan 1956 Anayasası yapılış süreci, muhtevası ve taraf devletlerin müteakip uygulamalarından yola çıkarak basit usulde düzenlenmiş bir andlaşma özelliği taşımaktadır. Örgüt aynı zamanda devletlerden ayrı iradesini gösteren organlara ya da kurumsal bir yapıya ve uluslararası hukuk şahsiyetine sahiptir.

Keywords

INTERPOL, Uluslararası örgüt, Uluslararası hukuk şahsiyeti, Andlaşmalar Hukuku, Uluslararası Örgütler Hukuku

Supporting Institution

Yazar bu çalışma için finansal destek almadığını beyan etmiştir.

International Organization Status of the International Criminal Police Organization

Abstract

The International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL) functions as an international organization, and is recognized in this regard by the United Nations. However, the status of INTERPOL as an international organization, and thereby its international legal personality has been a point of controversy in the literature. In this respect, some international lawyers argue that since INTERPOL was not established by a formal international treaty, it cannot be classified as an international organization with international legal personality. Problematizing this argument, this study questions whether INTERPOL is an international organization. At the end of the discussion, the study reaches the conclusion, by demonstrating its relevant international legal bases, that INTERPOL is an international organization with international legal personality. Accordingly, the 1956 INTERPOL Constitution constitutes an international treaty in simplified form. Moreover, the Organization has autonomous organs with distinct will and international legal personality.

Keywords

INTERPOL, International organization, International legal personality, Law of Treaties, Law of International Organizations

References

• Amerasinghe, C. F. (2005). Principles of the institutional law of international organizations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Archer, C. (2005). International organizations. London ve New York: Routledge.
• “Aegean Sea Continental Shelf Case (Greece v. Turkey)” (1978). International Court of Justice.
• “Antigua and Barbuda Minister signs debt-rescheduling agreement with INTERPOL” (2007, 7 Eylül). The SOP. Erişim adresi: http://thesop.org/story/law/2007/09/07/antigua-and-barbuda-minister-signs-debtrescheduling-agreement-with-interpol.php.
• “Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (New Application: 2002) (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Rwanda)” (2006). International Court of Justice.
• “Article 102”. Repertory of Practice of United Nations Organs, Supplement No. 5 (1970-1978), Vol.V.
• Bowett, D. W. (1982). The Law of International Institutions. Londra: Stevens and Sons. “Case Concerning Maritime Delimitation and Territorial Questions between Qatar and Bahrain” (1994). International Court of Justice.
• Claude, I. L., Jr. (1961). Swords into Plowshares: The Problems and Progress of International Organization. New York: Random House.
• “Cooperation Agreements”. INTERPOL. Erişim adresi: https://www.interpol.int/Who-we-are/Legal-framework/ Cooperation-agreements.
• Çağıran, M. E. (2016). Uluslararası örgütler. Ankara: Turhan Kitabevi. Deflem, M. (2000). Bureacratization and social control: Historical foundations of international police cooperation. Law&Society Review, 34(3),739–778. Deflem, M. (2002). Policing world society: Historical foundations of international police cooperation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Deflem, M. (2005). International Police Cooperation, History of.. In R. A. Wright, J. M. Miller (Eds.) Encyclopedia of Criminology, C. 1 (ss.795-798). Londra: Routledge. “Draft Articles on the Law of Treaties with Commentaries” (1966). Yearbook of the International Law Commission, Vol. II, United Nations.
• Fitzmaurice, M. (1998). “Expression of Consent to be Bound by a Treaty as Developed in Certain Environmental Treaties”. In J. Klabbers, R. Lefeber (Eds.), Essays on the Law of Treaties: A Collection of Essays in Honour of Bert Vierdag (ss. 59-80). The Hauge: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
• Fooner, M. (1989). INTERPOL: Issues in world crime and ınternational criminal justice. NewYork: Springer.
• Gallas, A. (1983). “INTERPOL”. In R. Bernhardt (Ed.) Encyclopedia of Public International Law, C. 5 (ss. 187-188) Amsterdam: North Holland.
• Gless, S. (2007). “Interpol”. In Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, Erişim adresi: http://opil. ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e516.
• Hudson, M. O. (1934). International Legislation: A Collection of the Texts of Multipartite International Instruments of General Interest. C. 6, Washington: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
• INTERPOL Genel Kurulu Uygulama Usulleri. INTERPOL Genel Yönetmeliği. INTERPOL’ün Fransa’daki Karargâhına Dair Andlaşma (1982, 3 Kasım). Erişim adresi: https://www.interpol. int/content/download/6815/file/Agreement%20between%20ICPO-INTERPOL%20and%20France.pdf.
• “Interpretation of the Agreement of 25 March 1951 between the WHO and Egypt” (1980). Advisory Opinion, International Court of Justice, Separate Opinion of Judge Ruda.
• Jennings, R., & A. Watts (1992). Oppenheim’s international law. C. 1, Essex: Longman.
• Jensen, R. B. (1981). The ınternational anti-anarchist conference of 1898 and the origins of Interpol. Journal of Contemporary History, 16(2), 323–347
• Kelsen, H. (1966). Principles of international law. New York: Holt, Rinehard and Winston, Inc.,
• Klabbers, J. (1998). The concept of treaty in ınternational law. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.
• Klabbers, J. (2002). An introduction to international institutional law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Kolb, R. (2016). The law of treaties: An introduction. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Kolb, R. (2016). Theory of international law. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
• König, D. (2013). “Tacit Consent/Opting Out Procedure”. In Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, Erişim adresi:http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law9780199231690-e1478.
• “Law of Treaties” (1956). Document A/CN.4/101, Report by G. G. Fitzmaurice, Special Rapporteur, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, Vol. II. United Nations.
• “Legal Status of Eastern Greenland” (1933). Permanent Court of International Justice, Series A/B No. 53. Dissenting Opinion of M. Anzilotti.
• “Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict” (1996, 8 Temmuz). Advisory Opinion, International Court of Justice.
• Liang, H. H. (1992). The rise of modern police and the European state system from metternich to the Second World War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Marabuto, P. (1951, 1 Ocak). “The International Criminal Police”. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Erişim adresi: http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1951-01-01_3_page003. html.
• Martha, R. S. J. (2010). The Legal Foundations of INTERPOL. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
• “Membership”. International Labour Organization Administrative Tribunal, Erişim adresi: https://www.ilo.org/ tribunal/membership/lang--en/index.htm.
• McNair, A. D. (1961). The law of treaties. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Pazarcı, H. (2017). Uluslararası hukuk. Ankara: Turhan Kitabevi.
• “Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations” (1949, 11 Nisan). Advisory Opinion, International Court of Justice.
• “Responsibility of International Organizations” (2003). Yearbook of the International Law Commission, Vol. II, United Nations.
• Reuter, P. (1989). Introduction to the Law of Treaties. (çev. J. Mico ve P. Haggenmacher), Londra: Pinter Publishers.
• Sands, P. ve P. Klein (2009). Bowett’s Law of International Institutions. Londra: Sweet & Maxwell.
• Schermers, H. G. (1983). “International Organizations, Membership”. In R. Bernhardt (Ed.) Encyclopedia of Public International Law, C. 5 (ss. 147-151). Amsterdam: North Holland.
• Schermers, H. G. (1991). “The International Organizations”. In M. Bedjaoui (Ed.) International Law: Achievements and Prospects (ss. 67-100). Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
• Schermers, H. G., & N. M. Blokker (2011). International institutional law. Leiden ve Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Seidl-Hohenveldern, I. (1987). Corporations in and under International Law. Cambridge: Grotius Publications Ltd.
• Seyersted, F. (1964). Objective International Personality of Intergovernmental Organizations: Do Their Capacities Really Depend Upon the Conventions Establishing Them?. Nordisk Tidsskrift for International Ret Og Jus Gentium 34. Kopenhag: Nyt Nordish Forl.
• Seyersted, F. (2008). Common Law of International Organizations. Leiden ve Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
• Shaw, M. N. (2003). International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Sheptycki, J. (2004). The Accountability of transnational policing ınstitutions: The strange case of Interpol. Canadian Journal of Law and Society, 19(1), 107–134.
• “The responsibility of international organizations (A/CN.4/529, sect. E, A/CN.4/532, A/CN.4/L.632)” (2003). Report of the Working Group, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, Vol. I, United Nations.
• Tunkin, G. I. (1966). The legal nature of the United Nations. In Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, C. 119 (ss. 1-68). The Hague Academy of International Law.
• Türk Hukuk Lûgatı (1991). Ankara: Başbakanlık Basımevi. UAD Statüsü. UHK Statüsü. UN ECOSOC Resolution E/RES/1968/1296 (1968, 23 Mayıs). Arrangements for Consultation with NonGovernmental Organizations.
• UN ECOSOC Resolution 1971/1579(L) (1971, 20 Mayıs). Special Arrangement for Co-operation Between the United Nations and the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL).
• UN ECOSOC Resolution 1996/31 (1996, 25 Temmuz). Consultative Relationship between the United Nations and Non-Governmental Organizations, UN General Assembly Resolution A/RES/51/1 (1996, 22 Ekim).
• United Nations Juridical Yearbook (1982).
• United Nations. “United States v. Gonzalez” (1986). American Journal of International Law, 80(3), 653-656.
• Yemin, Edward (1969). Legislative Powers in the United Nations and Specialized Agencies. Leiden: A. W. Sijthoff. “12 wishes: then and now”. INTERPOL, Erişim adresi: https://www.interpol.int/Who-we-are/Our-history/12wishes-then-and-now.
• 1956 INTERPOL Anayasası. 1969 Viyana Andlaşmalar Hukuku Sözleşmesi.
• 1986 Viyana Devletler ve Uluslararası Örgütler veya Uluslararası Örgütler Arasında Andlaşmalar Hukuku Sözleşmesi. “24. Session” (1955). ICPC General Assembly. “26. Session” (1957). INTERPOL General Assembly