INTERLAKEN PROCESS AND THE REFLECTIONS OF THE WIDER MARGIN OF APPRECIATION CLAIMS ON THE ECTHR JUDGMENTS

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 5 Sayı: 1, 177 - 219

Eray Acar

https://doi.org/10.59909/khm.05.01.007

Öz

The European Court of Human Rights, with the principle of subsidiarity and the doctrine of margin of appreciation, recognises that the primary role in the implementation of the Convention belongs to the state parties and that cultural relativism may lead to changes in the practice of protecting rights. In recent years, there has been growing discontent in Europe with the judgments of the ECtHR, particularly those concerning illegal migration and refugee issues. These discourses and the argument that the ECtHR should pay more attention to the doctrines of subsidiarity and margin of appreciation are coherent. The series of High-Level Conferences, organized in Interlaken in 2010, is a reform attempt to find solutions to the problems the ECtHR has faced in recent years, particularly the increasing workload. In these meetings, organized at the initiative of the Committee of Ministers and the States Parties, the main demands of the States Parties give weight to the principle of subsidiarity and the application of a wider margin of appreciation. This study focuses on the political atmosphere accompanying this process and whether the ECtHR has adopted a more deferential attitude towards state parties in this process by offering a wider margin of appreciation.

Anahtar Kelimeler

ECtHR, margin of appreciation, political backlash, Interlaken, reform

INTERLAKEN SÜRECİ ve DAHA GENİŞ TAKDİR MARJI TALEBİNİN AİHM KARARLARINA YANSIMALARI

Öz

Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi, benimsediği ikincillik ilkesi ve takdir marjı doktriniyle, hem sözleşmenin uygulanmasında birincil rolün taraf devletlere ait olduğunu hem de kültürel göreceliliğin hakları koruma pratiğinde değişikliklere yol açabileceğini kabul etmektedir. Son yıllarda Avrupa’da, özellikle yasa dışı göç ve mülteci sorunları ile ilgili kararlar başta olmak üzere AİHM kararları ile ilgili taraf devletlerden yükselen hoşnutsuz söylemler söz konusudur. Bu söylemler ile AİHM’nin ikincillik ilkesi ve takdir marjı doktrinlerine daha fazla önem vermesi gerektiği savı arasında paralellik söz konusudur. İlki 2010 yılında Interlaken’de düzenlenen, Üst Düzey Konferanslar dizisi, AİHM’nin artan iş yükü başta olmak üzere, son yıllarda karşı karşıya kaldığı sorunlar için çözüm üretmeye yönelik bir reform girişimi olarak nitelenebilir. Bakanlar Komitesi ve taraf devletlerin girişimiyle düzenlenen bu toplantılarda, ikincillik ilkesine önem verilmesi ve daha geniş takdir marjı uygulaması, taraf devletlerin odaklandıkları ana talep olarak göze çarpmaktadır. Bu çalışma, söz konusu sürece eşlik eden politik atmosfere ve bu süreçte AİHM’nin daha geniş takdir marjı tanıyarak, taraf devletlere daha saygılı bir tutum içerisinde olup olmadığı sorusuna odaklanmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

AİHM, takdir marjı, siyasi direniş, Interlaken, reform.

Kaynakça

• Algan, Bülent. “Bireysel Başvurularda “Açıkça Dayanaktan Yoksunluk” Kriterinin Anayasa Mahkemesi Tarafından Yorumu ve Uygulanması”. AÜHFD 63, no.2 (2014): 247-284.
• Alter, Karen J., Laurence R. Helfer, ve Mikael R. Madsen. “How Context Shapes the Authority of International Courts”. Law and Contemporary Problems 79, no. 1 (2016): s.1-36.
• Amos, Merris. “Reality Amidst Rhetoric: Implementation of ECtHR Judgments in the UK". European Convention on Human Rights Law Review 5 (2024): s.9-23.
• Arnardottir, Oddny Mjöll. “The Brighton Aftermath and the Changing Role of the European Court of Human Rights”. Journal of International Dispute Settlement 9 (2018): s.223-239.
• Aust, Helmut Philipp ve Esra Demir-Gürsel, Der. The European Court of Human Rights: Current Challenges in Historical Perspective. Cheltenham: Elgar Publishing, 2021.
• Bates, Ed. Evolution of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.
• Bowring, Bill. “The Crisis of the European Court of Human Rights in the Face of Authoritarian and Populist Regimes". The Future of International Courts: Regional, Institutional and Procedural Challenges, Der. Avidan Kent, Nikos Skoutaris ve Jamie Trinidad, s.76-92. Oxon, New York: Routledge, 2019.
• Brummer, Klaus. Der Europarat: Eine Einführung. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag, 2008.
• Carlier, Jean-Yves, Laura Cools, Eleonora Frasca, Francesco Gatta ve Sylvie Sarolea, “Humanitarian visa: Does the suspended step of the stork become a hunting permit? (European Court of Human Rights [GC], decision on Admissibility of 5 may 2020, M.N. and others v. Belgium, appl. no 3599/18) ”, Louvain Migration Case Law Commentary, Juin 2020, s.4-12.
• Council of Europe. The Interlaken Process: Measures taken from 2010 to 2019 to secure the effective implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 2020. https://rm.coe.int/processus-interlaken-eng/1680a059c7. (son erişim: 28.11.2024). (E-kitap)
• Çalı, Başak. “Coping with Crisis: Whither the Variable Geometry in the Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights". Wisconsin International Law Journal 35, no. 2 (2018): s.1-54.
• Çavuşoğlu, Naz. “İnsan Hakları Avrupa Mahkemesi: Gerçekler ve Perspektifler". 50. Yılında Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi: Başarı mı, Hayal Kırıklığı mı?, Der. Kerem Altıparmak, s.17-27. Ankara: Ankara Barosu Yayınları, 2009.
• Çoban, A. Rıza. “Strasbourg’da Herküllere İhtiyacımız Var mı? Ulusal Takdir Yetkisi ve Evrensel Standartlar Arasında Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi”. AÜHFD 57, no. 3 (2013): s.187-223.
• Değirmencioğlu, Burcu. Westphalian Modelden Bugüne Egemenliğin Dönüşümü Bağlamında Yeni Dünya Düzeninin İnşası. Ankara: Adalet Yayınevi, 2022.
• Demir-Gürsel, Esra. “The Former Secretary General of the Council of Europe Confronting Russia’s Annexation of the Crimea and Turkey’s State of Emergency". European Convention on Human Rights Law Review 2 (2021): s.303-335.
• Doğru, Derya. Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi Yargılamasında Takdir Marjı Doktrini. Ankara: Turhan Kitabevi, 2019.
• Dothan, Shai. “Margin of Appreciation and Democracy: Human Rights and Deference to Political Bodies”. Journal of International Dispute Settlement, (2018): s.1-9
• Duessel, Fabian. “Human Rights in the British Constitution: A Prisoner of History". University of Illinois Law Review, no. 2 (2017): s.791-815.
• Duranti, Marco. The Conservative Human Rights Revolution: European Identity, Transnational Politics, and the Origins of the European Convention. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.
• Esen, Egemen. İnsan Hakları Avrupa Mahkemesi Kararları Işığında Takdir Marjı Doktrini. İstanbul: On İki Levha Yayınları, 2020.
• Esmet, Ellen, ve Stijn Smet. “Right-Wing Populism, Crumbling Migrants’ Rights and Strategies of Resistance in Belgium”. Migrants’ Rights, Populism and Legal Resilience in Europe, Der. Vladislava Stoyanova and Stijn Smet, s.301-329. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022.
• Gözübüyük, A. Şeref, Feyyaz Gölcüklü ve Abdurrahman Saygılı. Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi ve Uygulaması: Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi İnceleme ve Yargılama Yöntemi. Ankara: Turhan Kitabevi, 2019.
• Fleming, Nathaniel. “S.A.S. v. France: A Margin of Appreciation Gone Too Far". Connecticut Law Review 52, no. 2 (2020): s.917-942.
• Føllesdal, Andreas. "The Legitimacy of International Human Rights Review: The Case of the European Court of Human Rights". Journal of Social Philosophy 40, (2009): s.595-607.
• Gerards, Janneke. “Margin of Appreciation and Incrementalism in the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights". Human Rights Law Review 18 (2018): s.495-501.
• Glas, Lize R. “From Interlaken to Copenhagen: What Has Become of the Proposals Aiming to Reform the Functioning of the European Court of Human Rights?”. Human Rights Law Review 20 (2020): s.121-151.
• Hartmann, Jacques ve Samuel White. “The alleged backlash against human rights: evidence From Denmark and the UK". Human Rights in Times of Transition: Liberal Democracies and Challenges of National Security, Der. K. McCall-Smith, A. Birdsall, & E. Casanas Adam, Cheltantam: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2020, s.139-163.
• Helfer, Laurence R. ve Erik Voeten. “Walking Back Human Rights in Europe?” The European Journal of International Law 31, no. 3 (2020): s.797-827.
• Kokott, Juliane. The Burden of Proof in Comparative and International Human Rights Law. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 1998.
• Londras, Fiona de ve Kanstantsin Dzehtsiarou. “Mission Impossible? Addressing Non-Execution Through Infringement Proceedings in the European Court of Human Rights". International and Comparative Law Quarterly 66, no. 2 (2017): s.467-490.
• Madsen M. Rask, “Rebalancing European Human Rights: Has the Brighton Declaration Engendered a New Deal on Human Rights in Europe?” Journal of International Dispute Settlement 9, no. 2 (May 2018): s.199-222.
• Marchuck, Iryana ve Marina Aksenova. “The Tale of Yukos and of the Russian Constitutional Court’s Rebellion Against the European Court of Human Rights". Osservatorio Costituzionale Fasc. 1 (2017): s.1-12.
• Matta, Aaron ve Armen Mazmanyan. “Russia: In Quest for a European Identity". Criticism of the European Court of Human Rights: Shifting the Convention System: Counter-Dynamics at the National and EU Level, Der. Patricia Popelier, Sarah Lambrecht ve Koen Lemmens, 481-502. Cambridge: Intersentia, 2017.
• McGoldrick, Dominic. "Religious Rights and the Margin of Appreciation". Human Rights between Law and Politics The Margin of Appreciation in Post-National Contexts. Der. Petr Agha, s.145-168, Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2017.
• Molbæk-Steensig, Helga. “The Copenhagen Declaration, Wrapping Up the Interlaken Reform". Theory and Practice of the European Convention on Human Rights, Der. Stephanie Schiedermair, Alexander Schwarz ve Dominik Steiger, 55-78. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2022.
• Molbæk-Steensig, Helga. “Subsidiarity Does Not Win Cases: A Mixed Methods Study of the Relationship Between Margin of Appreciation Language and Deference at the European Court of Human Rights". Leiden Journal of International Law 36 (2023): s.83-107.
• Özbudun, Ergun, “Anayasa Yargısı ve Demokratik Meşruluk Sorunu”, Demokrasi ve Yargı, Der. Ozan Ergül, s.359-399, Ankara: Türkiye Barolar Birliği Yayınları, 2005.
• Pekel, Abdulkadir, İnsan Haklarının Evrenselliğine Kültürel Görecilik İtirazı ve Tartışmayı Uzlaştırma Çabaları. Ankara: Adalet Yayınevi, 2023.
• Pildes, Richard H. “Supranational Courts and The Law of Democracy: The European Court of Human Rights". Journal of Dispute Settlement 8, no. 1 (2017): s.1-26.
• Popelier, Patricia, Sarah Lambrecht ve Koen Lemmens, Der.. Criticism of the European Court of Human Rights: Shifting the Convention System: Counter-Dynamics at the National and EU Level. Cambridge: Intersentia, 2017.
• Ramos, Juan Ruiz. “The Right to Liberty of Asylum-Seekers and the European Court of Human Rights in the Aftermath of the 2015 Refugee Crisis". Revista Electronica de Estudios Internacionales 39 (2020): s.1-23.
• Salihpaşaoğlu, Yaşar. Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi ve Yargılamada Kullandığı Yöntem, İlke ve Usuller. Ankara: Adalet Yayınevi, 2020.
• Shany, Yuval. “Toward a General Margin of Appreciation Doctrine in International Law?”. The European Journal of International Law 16, no. 5 (2005): s.907-940.
• Shapiro, Martin, “The Success of Judicial Review”, Constitutional Dialogues in Comparative Perspective, Der. Sally J. Kenney, William M. Reisinger ve John C. Reitz, s.193-219. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 1999.
• Soyaltın-Collela, Diğdem. “(Un)Democratic Change and Use of Social Sanctions for Domestic Politics: Council of Europe Monitoring in Turkey". International Political Science Review 41, no. 1 (2020): s.1-17.
• Spano, Robert. “Universality or Diversity of Human Rights? Strasbourg in the Age of Subsidiarity". Human Rights Law Review 14, no. 3 (2014): s.487-502.
• Stone Sweet, Alec, Wayne Sandholtz ve Mads Andenas. “Dissenting Opinions and Rights Protection in the European Court: A Reply to Laurence Helfer and Erik Voeten". The European Journal of International Law 32, no. 3 (2021): s.897-905.
• Stone Sweet, Alec, Wayne Sandholtz ve Mads Andenas. “The Failure to Destroy the Authority of the European Court of Human Rights: 2010–2018". The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 21, (2022): s.244-277.
• Şirin, Tolga. “Takdir Marjı Doktrini ve Türkiye Anayasa Mahkemesi Açısından Anlamı”. Anayasa Hukuku Dergisi 2, no. 4 (2013): s.359-399.
• Tsarapatsanis, Dimitrios. "The Margin of Appreciation as an Underforcement Doctrine", Human Rights between Law and Politics The Margin of Appreciation in Post-National Contexts, Der. Petr Agha, s.71-88, Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2017.
• von Staden, Andreas. “The Democratic Legitimacy of Judicial Review Beyond the State: Normative Subsidiarity and Judicial Standards of Review”. International Journal of Constitutional Law 10, no. 4 (2012): s.1023-1049.
• Ahmed, Yasmine ve Emilie McDonnell. “UK’s Harmful Rwanda Bill to Become Law". Human Rights Watch, 23.04.2024. https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/04/23/uks-harmful-rwanda-bill-become-law. (son erişim: 28.11.2024). Alan, Gülsüm. “Türkiye, Avrupa Konseyi’ne yaptığı katkı payının yarıdan fazlasını kesti". Euronews, 05.11.2019. https://tr.euronews.com/my-europe/2019/11/05/turkiye-avrupa-konseyi-ne-katk-payini-ciddi-oranda-azaltti. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• Barrett, David ve Harriet Line. “Rishi Sunak could face a revolt from at least 12 Cabinet members including Jeremy Hunt and James Cleverly if he sets out plans to leave the ECHR". Daily Mail, 10.04.2024. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13294667/Rishi-Sunak-face-revolt-Cabinet-members-sets-plans-leave-ECHR.html. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• Batchelor, Tom. “Russia cancels payment to Council of Europe after claiming its delegates are being persecuted over Crimea". Independent, 30.06.2017. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-cancels-council-of-europe-payment-members-persecuted-a7816951.html. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• Cameron, David. “Speech on the European Court of Human Rights". Gov.UK, 25.01.2012. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/speech-on-the-european-court-of-human-rights. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• "Denmark: Lowest number of asylum seekers ever", European Commission, European Website on Integration, 20.01.2021, https://migrant-integration.ec.europa.eu/news/denmark-lowest-number-asylum-seekers-ever_en (son erişim: 10.01.2025).
• Donald, Alice ve Philip Leach. “A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing: Why the Draft Copenhagen Declaration Must be Rewritten". EJIL: Talk!, 21.02.2018. https://www.ejiltalk.org/a-wolf-in-sheeps-clothing-why-the-draft-copenhagen-declaration-must-be-rewritten/. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• Donald, Alice ve Philip Leech. “The UK vs the ECtHR: Anatomy of A Politically Engineered Collision Course". Verfassungsblog, 05.05.2023. https://verfassungsblog.de/the-uk-vs-the-european-court-of-human-rights-on-a-politically-engineered-collision-course/. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• Elgot, Jessica. “Tory MPs to push for UK exit from European convention on human rights". The Guardian, 05.02.2023. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/feb/05/tory-mps-to-push-for-uk-exit-from-european-convention-of-human-rights. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• “Erdoğan’dan Osman Kavala açıklaması: Bizim mahkeme kararlarımızı tanımayanı biz de tanımayız". Euronews, 03.02.2022. https://tr.euronews.com/2022/02/03/erdogan-dan-osman-kavala-ac-klamas-bizim-mahkeme-kararlar-m-z-tan-mayan-biz-de-tan-may-z. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• Hartman, Jacques. “A Danish Crusade for the Reform of the European Court of Human Rights". EJIL: Talk!, 14.10.2017. https://www.ejiltalk.org/a-danish-crusade-for-the-reform-of-the-european-court-of-human-rights/. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• “İngiltere hükümetinin sığınmacıları Ruanda'ya gönderme planı onaylandı: Tasarı neden tartışılıyordu?". BBC Türkçe, 22.04.2024. https://www.bbc.com/turkce/articles/cx9wedk0020o. (son erişim: 06.01.2025).
• Jones, Mared Gwyn, “How could a Labour-led government change the UK's migration policies?". Euronews, 03.07.2024. https://www.euronews.com/2024/07/03/how-could-a-labour-led-government-change-the-uks-migration-policies. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• Küçükgöçmen, Ali. “Turks risk losing Europe’s human rights protections after court spurned". Reuters, 10.11.2022. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/turks-risk-losing-europes-human-rights-protections-after-court-spurned-2022-11-10/. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• "Mette Frederiksen, the face of the anti-immigration left in Denmark", France 24, 02.11.2022, https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20221102-mette-frederiksen-the-face-of-the-anti-immigration-left-in-denmark. (son erişim: 10.01.2025).
• Martin, Daniel. “Sunak: Rwanda plan ‘more important’ than ECHR membership". The Telegraph, 03.04.2024. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/04/03/rishi-sunak-rwanda-plan-important-echr-membership/. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• Monier, Jean-Luc. “Russia’s undiplomatic return to the Council of Europe". France24, 28.06.2019. https://www.france24.com/en/20190628-russia-undiplomatic-return-council-europe-ukraine. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• “PACE should remove sanctions against Russia by 2019, Jagland says". Research Concorde Capital, 23.01.2018. https://concorde.ua/rs/daily/item_72621/. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• Pichl, Maximilian ve Dana Schmalz. “Unlawful” may not mean rightless. The shocking ECtHR Grand Chamber judgment in case N.D. and N.T". Verfassungsblog, 14.02.2020. https://verfassungsblog.de/unlawful-may-not-mean-rightless/. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• “Prisoners ’damn well shouldn’t’ be given right to vote, says David Cameron". The Guardian, 13.12.2013. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/dec/13/prisoners-right-to-vote-david-cameron. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• Rankin, Jennifer. “Human rights body faces cash crisis after clash with Russia". The Guardian, 16.03.2018. https://www.theguardian.com/law/2018/mar/16/human-rights-body-faces-cash-crisis-after-clash-with-russia. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• “Rusya, AİHM ile işbirliğini sonlandırabilir". Sputniknews, 01.03.2018. https://tr.sputniknews.com/rusya/201803011032463627-rusya-aihm-isbirligi-sonlandirabilir/. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• Stoyanova, Vladislova. “The Grand Chamber Judgment in Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary: Immigration Detention and How the Ground Beneath Our Feet Continues to Erode". Strasbourg Observer, 23.12.2019. https://strasbourgobservers.com/2019/12/23/the-grand-chamber-judgment-in-ilias-and-ahmed-v-hungary-immigration-detention-and-how-the-ground-beneath-our-feet-continues-to-erode/. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• “Theresa May: Human rights laws could change for terror fight". BBC, 07.06.2017. http://www.bbc.com/news/election-2017-40181444. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• The UN Refugee Agency. “Statement on UK Asylum Bill". 07.03.2023. https://www.unhcr.org/uk/news/statement-uk-asylum-bill. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• Trevelyan, Lucy. “Human rights: UK ministers continue to discuss drastic step of leaving ECHR". International Bar Association, 11.10.2023. https://www.ibanet.org/UK-ministers-continue-to-discuss-drastic-step-of-leaving-ECHR. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).
• Worley, Will. “Theresa May will campaign to leave the European Convention on Human Rights in 2020 election". Independent, 29.12.2016. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-campaign-leave-european-convention-on-human-rights-2020-general-election-brexit-a7499951.html. (son erişim: 28.11.2024).