Justification of the Right to a Fair Trial Based on John Locke's Social Contract Theory

Year 2024, , 81 - 150, 31.01.2024

Sermet Erdem

https://doi.org/10.33432/ybuhukuk.1376217

Abstract

The principle of individual freedom, which is the most important value of liberalism and advocates for individuals to act according to their own will, immune from arbitrary and random coercion from others in their decisions and actions, is also the source from which many rights and freedoms protecting the individual against the state and third parties are derived. John Locke, the founder of liberalism and a social contract theorist, who is the philosophical source of modern systems, argued that the state itself is established to protect individual freedom. Locke associated the political power with individuals relinquishing their right to punish those who violate their rights without just cause in a stateless life, for the sake of protection and transferring this right to the state. Therefore, in the philosopher's theory, the fair resolution of disputes concerning individuals' rights is directly related to power and legitimacy.
The right to a fair trial emerges as an absolute right derived from individual freedom, established to protect the individual from potential infringements by the state itself and others. It exists within the legal confines intended to safeguard everyone's freedom. The right to a fair trial emerges as a mechanism to protect the domain preserved by these legal limitations. It advocates for the impartial, public, and just resolution of legal conflicts that arise among individuals or between an individual and the state, facilitated by the designated state organs. As a distinctive, innate, and absolute right, the right to a fair trial serves as the safeguard for all other rights and freedoms individuals possess in the modern world, acting as a criterion for the legitimacy of political systems.

Keywords

Right to Fair Trial, Individual Freedom, Punishment, State, Equality, Law, Legal Dispute, Legitimacy, Property, Social Contract, Compensation

Adil Yargılanma Hakkının John Locke’un Toplum Sözleşmesi Kuramından Hareketle Gerekçelendirilmesi

Abstract

Liberalizmin en önemli değeri olan kişinin karar ve eylemlerinde başkalarının keyfi ve rastlantısal zorlamasından bağışık olup kendi iradesine göre eyleyebilmesini salık veren bireysel özgürlük ilkesi, aynı zamanda bireyi devlete ve üçüncü kişilere karşı korumaya hizmet eden birçok hak ve özgürlüğün de türetildiği kaynaktır. Öyle ki çağdaş düzenlerin felsefi kaynağı olan liberalizmin kurucusu ve toplum sözleşmesi kuramcısı John Locke, devletin dahi bireysel özgürlüğü korumak için kurulduğunu savunmuştur. Locke siyasal iktidarın bireylerin devletsiz bir yaşamda sahip olduğu kendini koruma ve haklı bir sebep olmaksızın haklarını ihlal edenleri cezalandırma hakkını devlete devretmeleriyle ilişkilendirmiştir. Bu nedenle düşünürün kuramında bireylerin haklarını konu alan uyuşmazlıkların adil bir çözümü iktidar ve meşruiyetiyle doğrudan ilgilidir.
Bireyin, bireysel özgürlüğü korumak için kurulan devletin kendisinin ve diğer bireylerin olası ihlallerinden korunması için adil yargılanma hakkı bireysel özgürlükten türeyen mutlak bir hak olarak gündeme gelmektedir. Adil yargılanma hakkı herkesin özgürlüğünün teminat altına alınması için öngörülen hukuki kısıtlamaların içerisinde kalan alanı koruyan bir araçtır. Birey- birey ve birey- devlet arasında ortaya çıkan hukuki ihtilafların bağımsız tarafız aleni ve hakkaniyete uygun bir biçimde devletin bu işle görevlendirilmiş organları tarafından çözülmesini salık verir. Kendine özgü doğal ve mutlak bir hak olarak adil yargılanma hakkı çağdaş dünyada bireyin sahip olduğu diğer tüm hak ve özgürlüklerin güvencesi ve politik sistemlerin meşruiyet ölçütüdür.

Keywords

Adil Yargılanma Hakkı, Bireysel Özgürlük, Devlet, Eşitlik, Hukuk, Hukuki Uyuşmazlık, Meşruiyet, Mülkiyet, Sosyal Sözleşme, Tazminat

References

• Aaron, Richard I. (1955) John Locke, London, Oxford University Press.
• Acemoğlu, Daron/James A. Robinson (2019) The Narrow Corridor: States, Societies, and the Fate of Liberty, New York, Penguin Press.
• Altındağ, Halil (2016) “Yasama Kısıntısı”, Hukuk ve Adalet Eleştirel Hukuk Dergisi, C:8, S:20 s.s.247-266.
• Altıparmak, Kerem (1996) “Due Process of Law” Kavramının Amerikan Hukukundaki Yeri Üzerine Bir İnceleme” Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, C: 45, S:1, s.219-250.
• Andrew, Edward (2015) Locke on Consent, Taxation and Representation, A Journal of Social and Political Theory, C: 62, S:143 s.15-32.
• Barnett, Randy E. (1998) The Structure of Liberty: Justice and the Rule of Law, New York, Oxford Clarendon Press.
• Berlin, Isaiah (2002) “Liberty: Incorporating Four Essays on Liberty”, Henry Hardy, (Editör) New York, Oxford University Press.
• Berlin, Isaiah (2014) “Two Concepts of Freedom: Romantic and Liberal”: Berlin, Isaiah/ Hardy, Hery/ Cherniss, Joshua L./Galston, William (Editörler) Political Ideas in the Romantic Age: Their Rise and Influence on Modern Thought, Princeton ve Oxford, Princeton University Press.
• Brandal, Nik/ Øivind Bratberg,/Dag Einar Thorsen (2013) The Nordic Model of Social Democracy, New York, Palgrave Macmillan.
• Block, Walter (2004) “The Libertarian Minimal State?: A Critique of the Views of Nozick, Levin, and Rand”, The Journal of Ayn Rand Studies, C: 4, S:1, s.141-160.
• Chapman, Nathan S./Michael W. Mcconnell (2012) “Due Process as Separation of Powers.”, The Yale Law Journal C:121, S:7 s.1672-1807.
• Corbett, Ross J. (2006) “The Extraconstitutionality of Lockean Prerogative” he Review of Politics, Summer, C:68, S:3, s.428-448.
• Donnelly, Jack (2013) Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice, Ithaca & London, Cornell University Press.
• Dunn, John (2000) The Political Thought of John Locke: An historical Account Af Ahe argument of the ’Two Treatises of Government’, New York, Cambridge University Press.
• Dworkin, Ronald M. (1967) “The Model of Rules.” The University of Chicago Law Review, C:35, S:1, s.14-46.
• Home page of the European Court Of Human Rigts, <https://www.echr.coe.int/> s.e.t. 15.10.2023.
• Fatovic, Clement (2004) “Constitutionalism and Contingency: Locke's Theory of Prerogative”, History of Political Thought, C:24, S:4, s.276-297.
• Filmer, Robert/Peter Laslett (2017) Patriarcha and Other Political Works, New York, Routledge.
• Gough, John Wiedhofft (1956) John Locke's Political Philosophy, Eight Studies, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
• Grant, Ruth W. (1987) John Locke's Liberalism, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.
• H.L.A, Hart (1955) “Are There Any Natural Rights?”, The Philosophical Review C:65, S:2, s.175-191.
• Hart, H.L.A. (1993) Essays in Jurisprudence and Philosophy, Oxford, Clarendon Press, Hayek, Friedrich August von. (1978) The Constitution of Liberty. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
• Ho, Hock Lai (2010) “Liberalism and Criminal Legal Studies.”, Singapore Journal of Law, s.87-106.
• Hobbes, Thomas (1651) Leviathan the Matter Forme and Power of A Common Wealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil, London, Andrew Crooke.
• Holmes, Stephen (2008) “Conclusion” Daniel Farber (Editör) Security V. Liberty: Conflicts Between National Security and Civil Liberties in American History, New York, Russell Sage Foundation.
• Huyler, Jerome (1997) “Was Locke a Liberal?”, The Independent Review C:1, S:4, s.523-542.
• İnceoğlu, Sibel (2013) İnsan Hakları Avrupa Mahkemesi Kararlarında Adil Yargılanma Hakkı. İstanbul, Beta Basım Yayım Dağıtım A.Ş.
• Josephson, Peter (2002) “The Great Art of Government: Locke's Use of Consent”, Lawrence, University Press of Kansas.
• Jr., Lewis F. Powell (1965) “The Right to a Fair Trial.”, American Bar Association Journal, C:51, S:6, s.534-538.
• Kapani, Münci (1993) Kamu Hürriyetleri. 7. Ankara, Yetkin Basımevi.
• Karakehya, Hakan (2007) Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesinin 6. Maddesi (Adil Yargılanma Hakkı) Bağlamında Ceza Muhakemesinde Duruşma, Eskişehir, Savaş Yayınları.
• Kuckes, Niki (2006) “Civil Due Process, Criminal Due Process.”, Yale Law & Policy Review, C:25, S:1, s.1-61.
• Langston, Thomas S., Lind, Michael E. (1991) “John Locke & the Limits of Presidential Prerogative”, Polity, C: 24, S: 1, s.49-68.
• Leiter, Yechiel M. (2018) John Locke’s Political Philosophy and the Hebrew Bible, New York, Cambridge University Press.
• Locke, John (1980) Second Treatise of Government: Crawford Brough Macpherson (Editör), Indianapolis ve Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.
• Locke, John (2003) Two Treatises of Government. Düzenleyen: Peter Laslett. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Locke, John (1999) An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, Peter N. Hiddich (Editör), Pennsylvania, The Pennsylvania State University.
• Mabbott, John, D. (1973) John Locke. London & Basingstoke, Macmillan Education.
• Mack, Eric (2009) John Locke. New York ve London, Continuum International Publishing Group.
• Mattie, Sean (2005) “Prerogative and the Rule of Law in John Locke and the Lincoln Presidency”, The Review of Politics, C:67, S:1, s.77-111.
• Mises, Ludwig Von/Ralph Raico (1985) Liberalism In The Classical Tradition. San Francisco, California, Cobden Press.
• Monaghan, Henry P. (1970) “First Amendment Due Process” Harvard Law Review, C:83, S:3, s.518-551.
• Morris, Christopher W. (1999) The Social Contract Theorists: Critical Essays On Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau Critical Essays On the Classics, New York, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
• Nozick, Robert (1974) Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Oxford, Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
• Öktem, Niyazi (1993), Devlet ve Hukuk Felsefesi Akımları, İstanbul, Der Yayınevi.
• Parry, Geraint (1978) John Locke, Boston & Sydney, George Allen And Ulwin.
• Pasquino, Pasquale (1998) “Locke on King's Prerogative” Political Theory, C: 26, S: 2, s, 198- 208.
• Pekcanıtez, Hakan (1997) “Medeni Yargıda Adil Yargılanma.”, İzmir Barosu Dergisi, S:2, s.35-55.
• Rahe, Paul A. (2005) “The Political Needs Of A Toolmaking Animal: Madison, Hamilton, Locke, and the Question of Property.” Paul, Ellen Frankel/ Miller, Fred D./Paul, Jeffrey, (Editörler)Natural Rights Liberalism from Locke to Nozick, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
• Rawls, John (1971) A Theory ofJustice, New York, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
• Raz, Joseph (1983) The Authority of Law: Essays on Law and Morality, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
• Resnick, David (1977) “Due Process And Procedural Justice.”, Nomos, C:18, s.206-228.
• Richard H. Fallon, Jr. (1993) “Some Confusions about Due Process, Judicial Review, and Constitutional Remedies.”, Columbia Law Review, C:93, S:2, s.309-373.
• Rones, J. R. (1972) The Revolution of 1688 in England, London, Weidenfeld and Nicholson.
• Ross, James F. (1980) “A Natural Rights Basis for Substantive Due Process of Law in U. S. Jurisprudence.”, Universal Human Rights, C:2, S:2, s.61-79.
• Russell, Isaac Franklin (1905) “Due Process of Law”, The Yale Law Journal, C:14, S:6, 322-332.
• Sally, Razeen (1998) Classical Liberalism and International Economic Order: Studies in Theory and Intellectual History, Routledge, London and New York.
• Sampson, Geoffrey (1978) “Liberalism and Nozick's `Minimal State”, Mind, C: 87, S:345, s.93-97.
• Sarıca, Ragıp (1942) “Türk Devlet Şurası İçtihatlarına Göre Hükümet Tasarrufları.”, İstanbul Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Mecmuası, C:8, S:3-4, s.457-472.
• Scanlon, Thomas Michael (1977) “Due Process.”, Nomos, C:18, s.93-125.
• Schwoerer, Lois G. (1990), “Locke, Lockean Ideas, and the Glorious Revolution.”, Journal of the History of Ideas, C:51, S:4, s.531-548.
• Silkenat, James R. (2014) “What Is the Rule of Law and Why Is It So Important?” Mortimer N. S. Sellers, E James Hickey Jr., ve D. Peter Barenboim (Editörler) The Legal Doctrines of the Rule of Law and the Legal State (Rechtsstaat), Cham Heidelberg, Springer.
• Simmons, A. John (1991) “Locke and the Right to Punish”, Philosophy & Public Affairs C: 20, S: 4, s.311-349.
• Snyder, David C. (1986) “Locke on Natural Law and Property Rights.”, Canadian Journal of Philosophy, C:16, S: 4, s.723-750.
• Tanrıver, Süha (2004) “Hukuk Yargısı Bağlamında Adil Yargılanma Hakkı”, Türkiye Barolar Birliği Dergisi, C:17, S:53, s.191-215.
• Taylor, Charles (1979) “What’s Wrong with Negative Liberty”, Alan Ryan(Editör), The Idea of Freedom: Essays in Honour of Isaiah Berlin, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
• Taylor, Hannis (1915) “Due Process of Law.” The Yale Law Journal, C:24, S:5, s.353- 369.
• Thomas G. Weiss,/Ramesh Thakur (2010) Generations of Rights An Unfinished Journey. Bloomington & Indianapolis, Indiana University Press.
• Toroslu, Nevzat (2009), Ceza Hukuku Genel Kısım, 14. Baskı, Ankara, Savaş Yayınevi.
• Tuckness, Alex (2008) “Punishment, Property, and the Limits of Altruism: Locke’s International Asymmetry”, American Political Science Review, C: 102, S:4 s.467-479.
• Tuckness, Alex, “Locke’s Political Philosophy”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2023 Edition), Edward N. Zalta & Uri Nodelman (eds.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2023/entries/locke-political/> 6.12.2023.
• Turan, Hüseyin (2009) “Adil Yargılanma Hakkının İnsan Hakları Avrupa Sözleşmesi'ndeki Yeri ve Önemi”, Türkiye Barolar Birliği Dergisi, S:84, s.213-230.
• Vermeule, Adrian (2016) “Deference and Due Process”, Harvard Law Review, C:129, S: 7, s.1890-1931.
• Ward, Lee (2005) “Locke on Executive Power and Liberal Constitutionalism”, Canadian Journal of Political Science, C: 38, S: 3, s.719-744.
• Ward, Lee (2009) “Locke on Punishment, Property and Moral Knowledge”, Journal of Moral Philosophy, C: 6. S: 2, s.218-244.
• Ward, Lee (2010) John Locke and Modern Life, New York, Cambridge University Press. White, Robert, S. (2005) Natural Rights and the Birth of Romanticism in the 1790s, New York, Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.
• Williams, Juliet A. (2005) Liberalism and the Limits of Power, New York, Palgrave Macmillan.
• Wolff, Jonathan (1996) Robert Nozick Property, Justice and the Minimal State. Oxford, Polity Press.
• Zuckert, Michael (2005) “Natural Rights and Imperial Constitutionalism: The Ameri- can Revolution and the Development of the American Amalgam.”, Natural Rights Liberalism from Locke to Nozick, (Editörler) Paul, Ellen Frankel / Miller, Fred D./ Paul, Jr. Paul ve Jeffrey, New York, Cambridge University Press.