The Relationship Between “International Peace and Security Law” and “International Responsibility Law”

Hakkı Hakan Erkiner

Makale detayları

The Relationship Between “International Peace and Security Law” and “International Responsibility Law”

Yazarlar:

Hakkı Hakan Erkiner

Yayıncı:

Süleyman Demirel University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hukuk (Diğer) | Kamu Hukuku (Diğer) | Uluslararası ve Karşılaştırmalı Hukuk (Diğer)

Dergi:

Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.14 Issue 2, pp.1349-1384

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001334699

pISSN:

2146-7129

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 There is a significant relationship between the International Law of Peace and Security and the International Law of Responsibility in terms of the fulfillment of the requirements of international law or, in other words, in terms of ensuring the supremacy of international law. This relationship becomes particularly important when grave international wrongful acts such as armed attacks or genocide are committed, which are among the most serious and grave violations of international law and are erga omnes obligations arising from jus cogens rules. As a matter of fact, for example, international law of peace and security and international law of responsibility apply simultaneously to an act of armed aggression committed by a State. The possibility of simultaneous application to the same act gives rise to a legal factual relationship between the international law of peace and security and international law of responsibility. Due to the existential nature of international law, the effectiveness of these mechanisms, both separately and together, is problematic. The mechanisms of the international law of responsibility which can be invoked by states against a state that commits the gravest violations, such as armed aggression or genocide, where the requirements of the international law of collective peace and security are not applicable, can create international pressure against such a violating state. It may be possible to establish this pressure and ensure the supremacy of international law. However, to achieve this possible result, it is essential that the mechanisms of international law of responsibility should be activated and implemented in a sufficiently effective manner by a sufficiently numerous and powerful sovereign state. With the realization of this condition, it is possible and probable to ensure the supremacy of international law. This mechanism exists in international law and is potentially awaiting implementation, but it must be favored by states. Therefore, international law is not an absolute law but a possible law.

 There is a significant relationship between the International Law of Peace and Security and the International Law of Responsibility in terms of the fulfillment of the requirements of international law or, in other words, in terms of ensuring the supremacy of international law. This relationship becomes particularly important when grave international wrongful acts such as armed attacks or genocide are committed, which are among the most serious and grave violations of international law and are erga omnes obligations arising from jus cogens rules. As a matter of fact, for example, international law of peace and security and international law of responsibility apply simultaneously to an act of armed aggression committed by a State. The possibility of simultaneous application to the same act gives rise to a legal factual relationship between the international law of peace and security and international law of responsibility. Due to the existential nature of international law, the effectiveness of these mechanisms, both separately and together, is problematic. The mechanisms of the international law of responsibility which can be invoked by states against a state that commits the gravest violations, such as armed aggression or genocide, where the requirements of the international law of collective peace and security are not applicable, can create international pressure against such a violating state. It may be possible to establish this pressure and ensure the supremacy of international law. However, to achieve this possible result, it is essential that the mechanisms of international law of responsibility should be activated and implemented in a sufficiently effective manner by a sufficiently numerous and powerful sovereign state. With the realization of this condition, it is possible and probable to ensure the supremacy of international law. This mechanism exists in international law and is potentially awaiting implementation, but it must be favored by states. Therefore, international law is not an absolute law but a possible law.

 There is a significant relationship between the International Law of Peace and Security and the International Law of Responsibility in terms of the fulfillment of the requirements of international law or, in other words, in terms of ensuring the supremacy of international law. This relationship becomes particularly important when grave international wrongful acts such as armed attacks or genocide are committed, which are among the most serious and grave violations of international law and are erga omnes obligations arising from jus cogens rules. As a matter of fact, for example, international law of peace and security and international law of responsibility apply simultaneously to an act of armed aggression committed by a State. The possibility of simultaneous application to the same act gives rise to a legal factual relationship between the international law of peace and security and international law of responsibility. Due to the existential nature of international law, the effectiveness of these mechanisms, both separately and together, is problematic. The mechanisms of the international law of responsibility which can be invoked by states against a state that commits the gravest violations, such as armed aggression or genocide, where the requirements of the international law of collective peace and security are not applicable, can create international pressure against such a violating state. It may be possible to establish this pressure and ensure the supremacy of international law. However, to achieve this possible result, it is essential that the mechanisms of international law of responsibility should be activated and implemented in a sufficiently effective manner by a sufficiently numerous and powerful sovereign state. With the realization of this condition, it is possible and probable to ensure the supremacy of international law. This mechanism exists in international law and is potentially awaiting implementation, but it must be favored by states. Therefore, international law is not an absolute law but a possible law.

 Uluslararası Barış ve Güvenlik Hukuku ile Uluslararası Sorumluluk Hukuku arasında, uluslararası hukukun gereğinin yerine getirilebilmesi yönünden veya başka bir ifade ile uluslararası hukukun üstünlüğünün sağlanabilmesi bakımından çok önemli bir ilişki vardır. Özellikle uluslararası hukukun en ağır ve ciddi ihlallerinin başında gelen ve jus cogens kurallardan kaynaklanan erga omnes yükümlülükler olan silahlı saldırı veya soykırım gibi vahim uluslararası haksız fiiller işlendiğinde bu ilişki önemini özellikle belli etmektedir. Nitekim, örneğin bir devlet tarafından gerçekleştirilen bir silahlı saldırı fiili hakkında uluslararası barış ve güvenlik hukuku ile uluslararası sorumluluk hukuku eşzamanlı olarak uygulanırlar. Aynı fiil hakkında eşzamanlı olarak uygulanma olanağı, uluslararası barış ve güvenlik hukuku ile uluslararası sorumluluk hukuku arasında hukuken olgusal bir ilişki doğurur. Uluslararası hukukun varoluşsal niteliklerinden ötürü ise bu mekanizmaların gerek ayrı ayrı gerekse birlikte etkinlikleri sorunludur. Uluslararası kollektif barış ve güvenlik hukukunun gereklerinin uygulanamadığı silahlı saldırı veya soykırım gibi en ağır ve ciddi bir ihlalde bulunan bir devlete karşı uluslararası sorumluluk hukukunun mekanizmalarının devletler tarafından çalıştırılması böylesi bir ihlalde bulunan bir devlete karşı uluslararası baskı oluşturabilir. Bu baskının kurulabilmesi ve uluslararası hukukun üstünlüğünün sağlanması mümkün olabilir. Ancak bu olanak dahilindeki sonucun elde edilebilmesi için sayıca yeterince güçlü egemen devlet tarafından, yeterince etkin bir biçimde, uluslararası sorumluluk hukuku mekanizmalarının çalıştırılması ve uygulanması şarttır. Bu şartın hayata geçmesi ile uluslararası hukukun üstünlüğünün sağlanması mümkün ve muhtemel bir olgudur. Uluslararası hukukta bu mekanizma potansiyel olarak uygulanmayı bekler bir biçimde mevcuttur ancak bunun devletler tarafından tercih edilmesi gereklidir. Bundan ötürü uluslararası hukuk muhakkak bir hukuk değil fakat muhtemel bir hukuktur.

Makale detayları

The Relationship Between “International Peace and Security Law” and “International Responsibility Law”

Yazarlar:

Hakkı Hakan Erkiner

Yayıncı:

Süleyman Demirel University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hukuk (Diğer) | Kamu Hukuku (Diğer) | Uluslararası ve Karşılaştırmalı Hukuk (Diğer)

Dergi:

Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.14 Issue 2, pp.1349-1384

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001334699

pISSN:

2146-7129

International Law of Collective Peace and Security

International Law of Collective Responsibility

Bilateralism and Multilateralism in International Law

Erga Omnes Obligations of the International Community Arising from the Imperative Jus Cogens Rules of International Law

Collective Countermeasures in International LawUluslararası Kollektif Barış ve Güvenlik Hukuku

Uluslararası Kollektif Sorumluluk Hukuku

Uluslararası Hukukta İki Taraflılık ve Çok Taraflılık

Uluslararası Hukukun Emredici Jus Cogens Kurallarından Kaynaklanan Uluslararası Topluluğun Geneline Yönelik Erga Omnes Yükümlülükler

Uluslararası Hukukta Kollektif Karşı Önlemler

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Hakkı Hakan Erkiner

Yayıncı: Süleyman Demirel University

Ana Başlıklar: Hukuk (Diğer) | Kamu Hukuku (Diğer) | Uluslararası ve Karşılaştırmalı Hukuk (Diğer)

Dergi: Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.14 Issue 2, pp.1349-1384

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 12/2024

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2001334699

pISSN: 2146-7129

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Hakkı Hakan Erkiner

Yayıncı:

Süleyman Demirel University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hukuk (Diğer) | Kamu Hukuku (Diğer) | Uluslararası ve Karşılaştırmalı Hukuk (Diğer)

Dergi:

Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.14 Issue 2, pp.1349-1384

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001334699

pISSN:

2146-7129