“LANETLENECEK BİR RUH, TEKMELENECEK BİR BEDEN”: ŞİRKETLERİN, “İNSAN” HAKLARI OLABİLİR Mİ?

Yıl 2017, YBHD 2017/2, 63 - 93, 31.07.2017

Engin Yıldırım

Öz

Kar amaçlı tüzel kişi olan şirketler gerek uluslararası gerekse de ulusal düzeyde insan haklarının sağladığı güvencelerden gittikçe artan bir şekilde yararlanmaya çalışmaktadırlar. Şirketlerin, sözleşme özgürlüğü, adil yargılanma ve mülkiyet gibi haklardan yararlanırken, son yıllarda özel hayatın korunması ve din özgürlüğü gibi geleneksel olarak onlarla özdeşleşmeyen alanlarda da hak öznesi olma iddialarında bulunduklarını görmekteyiz. Bu çalışma, şirketlerin “insan” haklarının öznesi olup olmayacakları tartışmasından hareketle Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi, Amerikan Yüksek Mahkemesi ve Türk Anayasa Mahkemesinin şirketlerin hak ihlali iddiaları karşısındaki tutumlarını incelemektedir. Çalışmada, şirketlerin korunması gereken hakları olmakla beraber bunların insan hakları bağlamında genişletilmesinin insan haklarının korunması ve geliştirilmesine çok fazla katkı yapmayacağı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Şirketler, İnsan Hakları, Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi, Birleşik Devletler Yüksek Mahkemesi, Türk Anayasa Mahkemesi

A SPIRIT TO BE DAMNED, A BODY TO BE KICKED: CAN COMPANIES HAVE HUMAN RIGHTS?

Öz

For-profit corporations have been increasingly making attempts to benefit from human rights protections both at the international and national levels. While they have been a beneficiary of freedom of contract, the right to fair trial and the right to property, they have claimed to be right holders of such human rights as the right to privacy and freedom of religion traditionally not associated with the corporation. This study first examines whether corporations may become human rights subject. Then, it moves on to analyse some important rulings of the European Court of Human Rights, the Supreme Court of the United States and the Constitutional Court of Turkey on claims of corporate “human” rights. We conclude that while corporations have some essential fundamental rights, extending human rights protection for corporations is unlikely to contribute to the protection and strengthening of human rights.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Corporations, Human Rights, European Court of Human Rights, Supreme Court of the United States, Constitutional Court of Turkey

Kaynakça

• Akipek, Jale G./Akıntürk, Turgut/Ateş Kahraman, Derya (2014) Türk Medeni Hukuku Başlangıç Hükümleri Kişiler Hukuku, 1. Cilt, İstanbul, Beta.
• Altıparmak, Kerem, (1996), ‘Due Process of Law’ Kavramının Amerikan Hukukundaki Yeri Üzerine Bir İnceleme’, AÜHFD 45(1-4): 219-250.
• Berni, Andrew B. (2014), ‘Furniture, car parts and model airplanes: The religios rights of for-profit corporations under the Affordable Care Act’, Holy Cross Journal of Law and Public Policy 13: 9-47.
• Blair, Margaret M./Pollman Elizabeth, (2015), ‘The Derivative Nature of Corporate Constitutional Rights’ William/Mary Law Review, 56(5): 1673-1743.
• Brown, Teneille R. (2013); ‘In-Corp-o-Real: A Psychological Critique of Corporate Personhood and Citizens United’, FSU Business Review, 12: 1-109.
• Ciepley, David (2013), ‘Neither Persons nor Associations: Against Constitutional Rights for Corporations’, Journal of Law / Courts, 1(2): 221-245.
• Cismast, Loana/Cammaranot, Stacy (2016), ‘Whose Right and Who is Right? The US Supreme Court v. The European Court of Human Rights of Corporate Exercise of Religion’ Boston University International Law Journal, 34: 1-44. Cohen, Jean L. (2015), ‘Freedom of Religion, Inc.: Whose Sovereignty’, Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, 44(3): 169-210.
• Corbin, Caroline Mala (2015), ‘Corporate Religious Liberty’, Constitutional Commentary 30: 277-308. Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly, ‘Resolution 1757 (2010) Human Rights and Business’, <http://www.assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedText/ta10/ ERES1757.htm>, s.e.t. 22.09.2016.
• Dale, Rubin (2010), ‘Corporate personhood: How the courts have employed bogus jurisprudence to grant corporations constitutional rights intended for individuals’, Quinnipiac Law Review 28: 523-584.
• Dhooge, Lucien J. (2007), ‘Human rights for transnational corporations” Journal of Transnational Law and Policy’, 16(2): 197-249.
• Emberland, Marius (2006), The Human Rights of Companies: Exploring the Structure of ECHR Protection, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
• Gemalmaz H.B. (2013), ‘Uluslararası Yatırım Tahkimi Hukuku ve İnsan Hakları Hukuku İlişkisi Üzerine Başlangıç Notları’: Uluslararası Tahkim Kongresi Tebliğ Kitabı, Ankara, Adalet Yayınevi: 56-97.
• Gözler, Kemal (2011), Anayasa Hukukunun Genel Teorisi, (Cilt II), Bursa, Ekin.
• Grear, Anna (2010), Redirecting Human Rights: Facing the Challenge of Corporate Legal Humanity, Houndsmill: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Grear, Anna (2006), ‘Human Rights-Human Bodies? Some Reflections on Corporate Human Rights Distortion, The Legal Subject, Embodiment and Human Rights Theory’, Law and Critique, 17: 171-199.
• Harding, Christopher/Uta Kohl/Naomi Salmon (2008), Human Rights in the Market Place: The Exploitation of Rights Protection by Economic Actors, Aldershot, Ashgate.
• Hein, Van Kempen Piet (2011), ‘The recognition of legal persons in international human rights instruments: protection against and through criminal justice?’, Pieth Mark ve Radha Ivory (Editörler), Corporate Criminal Liability: Emergence, Convergence and Risk, Dordrecht, Springer: 355-389.
• Işıksel, Türküler (2016), ‘The Rights of Man and the Rights of the Man-Made: Corporations and Human Rights’, Human Rights Quarterly, 38(2): 294-349.
• Lafont, Cristina, (2016), ‘Should We Take the Human out of Human Rights? Human Dignity in a Corporate World’, <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract _id=2768881>, s.e.t. 19.09.2016.
• Lupu, Ira C. (2014), ‘Hobby Lobby and the Dubious Enterprise of Religious Exemptions’, Harvard Journal of Law and Gender 38: 35-101.
• McDonnell, Brett H. (2015), ‘The Liberal Case For Hobby Lobby’, Arizona Law Review 57: 777-822.
• Oliver, Peter, (2015), ‘Companies and Their Fundamental Rights: A Comparative Perspective International and Comparative Law’, Quarterly, 64: 661-696.
• Orts Eric W./Amy Sepinwall (2015), ‘Privacy and Organizational Persons’, Minnesota Law Reviw 99: 2275-2322. Pietranton, Erica (2012), ‘One Case Expands and Another Narrows: Constitutional Rights as They Apply to Corporations’, Journal of Law / Commerce, 30: 132-151.
• Pollman, Elizabeth, (2014) ‘A Corporate Right to Privacy’, Minnesota Law Review, 99 (1): 27-88.
• Scolnicov, Anat, (2013), Lifelike and Lifeless in Law: Do Corporations Have Human Rights?, University of Cambridge Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 13/2013 <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2268537>, s.e.t. 08.09.2016.
• Sepinwall Amy J. (2015), ‘Coprorate Piety and Impropriety: Hobby Lobby's Extension of RFRA Rights to the for-profit Corporation’, Harvard Business Law Review 5: 173-204.
• Tushnet, Mark (2014), ‘Do for-profit corporations have rights of religious conscience?’, Cornell Law Review, 99: 70-86. Winfried H.A.M. Van den Muijsenbergh/Sam Rezai (2012), ‘Corporations and the European Convention on Human Rights’, Global Business / Development Law Journal 25(1):43-68.
• Van der Sloot/Bart (2015), ‘Privacy as Personality Right: Why the ECtHR’s Focus on Ulterior Interests Might Prove Indispensable in the Age of ‘Big Data’’, Utrecht Journal of International and European Law, 31(80): 25-50.
• Westin, Alan (1967), Privacy and Freedom, New York, Atheneum.