Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Conscientious Objection under European Regime of Human Rights: An Analysis on Turkey

Year 2024, Volume: 4 Issue: 1, 67 - 85, 10.01.2024

Cerenmelis Kıcıroğlu

Abstract

This study examines the right to conscientious objection to military service in Turkey in light of the Council of Europe’s (CoE) human rights system. The European Court of Human Rights recognized the right to conscientious objection (CO) in 2011. Accordingly, the member states of the CoE need to incorporate the right and make the necessary arrangements in their domestic law. However, Turkey is an exception to this rule. The internal tensions of modernization and historical specificities have been effective in this orientation. In conclusion, the non-recognition of the right to conscientious objection has had some negative effects on Turkish democracy and state-citizen relations. The objective of this study is to outline the approach of Turkey’s domestic law to CO and suggest proposals for harmonizing domestic legislation with international human rights standards binding on Turkey.

Keywords

Council of Europe Conscientious Objection European Convention on Human Rights European Court of Human Rights Turkish Legal System

References

  • Altınay, A. G. (2004). The Myth of the Military-Nation: Militarism, Gender, and Education in Turkey, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Altınay, A. G. (2009). “Refusing to identify as obedient wives, sacrificing mothers, and proud warriors”, Özgür Heval Çınar and Coşkun Üsterci (Ed.), Conscientious Objection: Resisting Militarized Society, London: Zed Books, pp. 88-104.
  • Aydın, S. (2009). “The militarization of society: Conscription and national armies in the process of citizen creation”, Özgür Heval Çınar and Coşkun Üsterci (Ed.), Conscientious Objection: Resisting Militarized Society, London: Zed Books, pp. 17-36.
  • Balcı, A. (2012). “Askeri mahkeme vicdani reddi tanıdı”, Sabah Gazetesi, 10 March 2012.
  • Berkes, N. (1998). The Development of Secularism in Turkey, New York: Routledge.
  • Bozdağlıoğlu, Y. (2003). Turkish Foreign Policy and Turkish Identity: A Constructivist Approach, New York: Routledge.
  • Brock, P. (1994). “Why did St. Maximilian refuse to serve in the Roman army?”, The Journal of Ecclesiastical History, Vol:45, Issue: 2, pp. 195-209.
  • Canon, B. C. (1983). “Defining the dimensions of judicial activism”, Judicature, Vol: 66, pp. 236-247.
  • Committee of Ministers (2011). “Decision case no. 24: Case against Turkey, 8 June 2011 (115th Meeting)”, https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectId=09000016805b0a14, Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Constitution of the Republic of Turkey (2019). Grand National Assembly of Turkey Printing House. Council of Europe (1949). “Statute of the Council of Europe”, https://rm.coe.int/1680306052, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Council of Europe (1953). “The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights)”, https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Council of Europe (1987). “Recommendation no. R (87) 8 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States Regarding Conscientious Objection to Compulsory Military Service, 9 April 1987 (406th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)”, https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectId=09000016804e6689, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Council of Europe (1994). “Protocol No. 11 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Restructuring the Control Machinery Established Thereby”, https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Library_Collection_P11_ETS155E_ENG.pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Council of Europe (2007). “Committee of Ministers, Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)109, Execution of the Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights: Ülke against Turkey, 17 October 2007 (1007th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies”, https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectId=09000016805adea0#globalcontainer, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Çınar, Ö. H. (2014). The Right to Conscientious Objection to Military Service and Turkey’s Obligations under International Human Rights Law, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Çınar, Ö. H. and Üsterci, C. (2009). Conscientious Objection: Resisting Militarized Society, London: Zed Books.
  • Decker, C. D. and Fresa, L. (2001). “The status of conscientious objection under Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights”, New York University Journal of International Law & Politics, Vol: 33, pp. 379-418.
  • European Bureau for Conscientious Objection (2019). “Annual Report: Conscientious Objection to military service in Europe”, http://ebco-beoc.org/sites/ebco-beoc.org/files/attachments/EBCOreport2018fin.pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • European Commission (2005). “SEC (2005) 1426, Turkey: 2005 Progress Report”, http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/2/2005/EN/2-2005-1426-EN-1-0.Pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • European Commission for Democracy Through Law (Venice Commission) (2016). “Opinion No. 831/2015, Penal Code of Turkey”, https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-REF(2016)011-e, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Green, C. (2009). “An intellectual history of judicial activism”, Emory Law Journal, Vol: 58, Issue: 5, pp. 1195-1264.
  • Karaca, E. (2012a). “Mahkeme, Delice’yi değil ama vicdani reddi tanıdı”, Bianet, 9 March 2012.
  • Karaca, E. (2012b). “Yehova Şahidi’ne vicdani ret hakkı”, Bianet, 13 March 2012.
  • Kessler, J. K. (2015). “A war for liberty: On the law of conscientious objection”, The Cambridge History of World War II, Vol: 3, pp. 447-474.
  • Kmiec, K. D. (2004). “The origin and current meanings of judicial activism”, California Law Review Vol: 92, Issue: 5, pp. 1441-1477.
  • Letsas, G. (2013). “The ECHR as a living instrument: Its meaning and legitimacy”, Andreas Føllesdal, Birgit Peters and Geir Ulfstein (Ed.), Constituting Europe: The European Court of Human Rights in a National, European and Global Context, New York: Cambridge University Press, 106-141.
  • Lewis, B. (1993). Modern Türkiye’nin Doğuşu, Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi.
  • Lubell, N. (2002). “Selective conscientious objection in international law: Refusing to participate in a specific armed conflict”, Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights Vol: 20, Issue: 4, pp. 407-422.
  • Macovei, M. (2004). Freedom of Expression: A Guide to the Implementation of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. No. 2 of Human Rights Handbooks, Germany: Council of Europe, https://rm.coe.int/168007ff48, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Major, M. F. (1992). “Conscientious objection and international law: A human right. Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law”, Vol: 24, Issue: 2, pp. 349-378.
  • Moskos, C. C. and John, W. C. (1993). The New Conscientious Objection: From Sacred to Secular Resistance, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Munyar, V. (2018). “5.5 Milyonun askerlik sorunu çözüm bekliyor”, Hürriyet, 4 June 2018.
  • Muzny, P. (2012). “Bayatyan v Armenia: The Grand Chamber renders a grand judgment”, Human Rights Law Review Vol: 12, Issue: 1, pp. 135-147.
  • Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (1967). “Resolution 337, Right of Conscientious Objection (22nd Sitting)”, http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-en.asp?fileid=15752&lang=en, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (1977). “Recommendation 816, Right of Conscientious Objection to Military Service (10th Sitting)”, http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-EN.asp?fileid=14850&lang=en, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (2001). “Recommendation 1518, Exercise of the Right of Conscientious Objection to Military Service in Council of Europe Member States”, https://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-EN.asp?fileid=16909&lang=en, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (2004). “Resolution 1380, Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by Turkey (18th Sitting)”, http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-DocDetails-EN.asp?FileID=17225&lang=EN, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (2006). “Recommendation 1742, Human Rights of Members of the Armed Forces (11th Sitting)”, http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-en.asp?fileid=17424&lang=en, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Resmi Gazete, 1111 Sayılı Askerlik Kanunu, 12-17 July 1927, https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.3.1111.pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Resmi Gazete, 1632 Sayılı Askeri Ceza Kanunu, 15 June 1930, http://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.3.1632.pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Resmi Gazete, 3713 Sayılı Terörle Mücadele Kanunu, 12 April 1991, https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/mevzuatmetin/1.5.3713.pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Resmi Gazete, 5237 Sayılı Türk Ceza Kanunu, 12 October 2004, https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.5.5237.pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Resmi Gazete, 765 Sayılı Türk Ceza Kanunu (mülga), 13 March 1926, https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/mevzuatmetin/5.3.765.pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Resmi Gazete, 93/4613 Sayılı Bakanlar Kurulu Kararı Birden Fazla Tabiiyetli Vatandaşların Askerlik Yükümlülüklerini Yerine Getirmiş Sayılmalarına Dair Esaslar, 25 July 1993, http://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/arsiv/21648.pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Rumelili, B., Keyman, F. and Isyar, B. (2011). “Turkey’s conscientious objectors and the contestation of European citizenship”, J. Peter Burgess and Serge Gutwirth (Ed.), A Threat Against Europe? Security, Migration and Integration, Brussels: VUBPRESS Brussels University Press, pp. 47-62.
  • Schroeder, J. B. (2011). “The role of Jehovah’s Witnesses in the emergent right of conscientious objection to military service in international law”, Kirchliche Zeitgeschichte, Vol: 24, Issue: 1, pp. 169-206.
  • Tachau, F. and Heper, M. (1983). “The state, Politics, and the Military in Turkey”, Comparative Politics, Vol: 16, Issue: 1, pp. 17-33.
  • The European Commission of Human Rights (1996). “Thomas Spöttl v. Austria. No. 22956/93”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22\%2222956/93\%22%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-2889%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (1966). “Grandrath v. Germany. No: 2299/64”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22grandrath%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-73650%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (1973). “G.Z. v. Autriche. No: 5591/72”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22g.z.%20autriche%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-100491%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023). The European Court of Human Rights (1977). “X. v. Federal Republic of Germany. No: 7705/76”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22\%227705/76\%22%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-74554%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (1984). “N. v. Sweden. No: 10410/83”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22\%2210410/83\%22%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-74737%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023). The European Court of Human Rights (1994). “Peters v. The Netherlands. No: 22793/93”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22\%2222793/93\%22%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-2432%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2000). “Thlimmenos v. Greece. No: 34369/97”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%2234369%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-58561%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2006). “Ülke v. Turkey. No: 39437/98”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%2239437%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-72146%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2009). “Bayatyan v. Armenia. No: 23459/03, Chamber”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22\%22BAYATYAN%20v.%20ARMENIA\%22%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22CHAMBER%22,%22DECISIONS%22,%22COMMUNICATEDCASES%22,%22CLIN%22,%22ADVISORYOPINIONS%22,%22REPORTS%22,%22RESOLUTIONS%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-95386%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2011). “Bayatyan v. Armenia. No: 23459/03, Grand Chamber”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22appno%22:[%2223459/03%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-105611%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2011). “Erçep v. Turkey. No: 43965/04”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-121130%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2012). “Feti Demirtaş v. Turkey. No: 5260/07”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-120170%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2014). “Buldu and Others v. Turkey. No: 14017/08”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-156378%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2016). “Enver Aydemir v. Turkey. No: 26012/11”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-169942%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2016). “Mammadov and Huseynov v. Azerbaijan. No: 14604/08”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22mammadov%20huseynov%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-170069%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2016). “Papavasilakis v. Greece. No: 66899/14”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%2266899%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-166850%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2016). “Savda v. Turkey (No. 2). No: 2458/12”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-172977%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2017). “Adyan and Others v. Armenia. No: 75604/11”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22\%2275604/11\%22%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-177429%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2017). “Mirzayev v. Azerbaijan. No: 41792/15”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22\%2241792/15\%22%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-171871%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2018). “Baydar v. Turkey. No. 25632/13”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22\%22BAYDAR%20v.%20TURKEY\%22%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-184882%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Parliament (2006). “Resolution No. 2006/2118(INI), Turkey’s Progress towards Accession”, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-6-2006-0381_EN.html?redirect, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Turkey: Military Courts Recognise Right to Conscientious Objection (2012). War Resisters’ International, 1 May 2012, https://www.wri-irg.org/en/story/2012/turkey-military-courts-recognise-right-conscientious-objection, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi (The Grand National Assembly of Turkey), 5170 Sayılı Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Anayasasının Bazı Maddelerinin Değiştirilmesi Hakkında Kanun, 7 May 2004, http://www.anayasa.gen.tr/5170sk.htm, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi (The Grand National Assembly of Turkey), 5532 Sayılı Terörle Mücadele Kanununda Değişiklik Yapılmasına Dair Kanun, 29 June 2006, https://www.tbmm.gov.tr/kanunlar/k5532.html, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Türkiye’de Vicdani Ret İlk Defa Tanındı (2012). Birgün Gazetesi, 10 March 2012.
  • United Nations General Assembly (1948). “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • United Nations General Assembly (1966). “International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights”, https://treaties.un.org/doc/publication/unts/volume%20999/volume-999-i-14668-english.pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Vicdani Red Davasında Tarihi Karar (2012). Agos Gazetesi, 9 March 2012.
  • Vicdani Ret Derneği (T.Y.). “Vicdani retlerini açıklayanlar”, https://vicdaniret.org/tarih-sirasina-gore/, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Wiberg, M. (1985). “Grounds for recognition of conscientious objection to military service: The deontological–teleological distinction considered”, Journal of Peace Research Vol: 22, Issue: 4, pp. 359-364.
  • Young, E. A. (2002). “Judicial activism and conservative politics”, University of Colorado Law Review, Vol: 73, Issue:4, pp. 1139-1216.
  • Zürcher, E. (2000). Modernleşen Türkiye’nin Tarihi, İstanbul: İletişim.

Avrupa İnsan Hakları Rejimi Kapsamında Vicdani Ret: Türk İstisnacılığı

Year 2024, Volume: 4 Issue: 1, 67 - 85, 10.01.2024

Cerenmelis Kıcıroğlu

Abstract

Bu çalışma, Avrupa Konseyi (AK) insan hakları sistemi ışığında Türkiye’de askerlik hizmetine karşı vicdani ret hakkını incelemektedir. Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi vicdani ret hakkını 2011 yılında tanımıştır. Buna göre, AK üyesi devletlerin bu hakkı kendi iç hukuklarına dâhil etmeleri ve gerekli düzenlemeleri yapmaları gerekmektedir. Ancak Türkiye bu kuralın bir istisnasıdır. Modernleşmenin içsel gerilimleri ve tarihsel özgünlükler bu yönelimde etkili olmuştur. Sonuç olarak, vicdani ret hakkının tanınmaması, Türk demokrasisi ve devlet-vatandaş ilişkileri üzerinde birtakım olumsuz etkiler yaratmıştır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, Türkiye iç hukukunun vicdani ret konusundaki yaklaşımını ana hatlarıyla ortaya koymak ve yerel mevzuatın Türkiye için bağlayıcı olan uluslararası insan hakları standartlarıyla uyumlu hale getirilmesi için önerilerde bulunmaktır.

Keywords

Vicdani Ret Avrupa Konseyi Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi Türk Hukuk Sistemi

References

  • Altınay, A. G. (2004). The Myth of the Military-Nation: Militarism, Gender, and Education in Turkey, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Altınay, A. G. (2009). “Refusing to identify as obedient wives, sacrificing mothers, and proud warriors”, Özgür Heval Çınar and Coşkun Üsterci (Ed.), Conscientious Objection: Resisting Militarized Society, London: Zed Books, pp. 88-104.
  • Aydın, S. (2009). “The militarization of society: Conscription and national armies in the process of citizen creation”, Özgür Heval Çınar and Coşkun Üsterci (Ed.), Conscientious Objection: Resisting Militarized Society, London: Zed Books, pp. 17-36.
  • Balcı, A. (2012). “Askeri mahkeme vicdani reddi tanıdı”, Sabah Gazetesi, 10 March 2012.
  • Berkes, N. (1998). The Development of Secularism in Turkey, New York: Routledge.
  • Bozdağlıoğlu, Y. (2003). Turkish Foreign Policy and Turkish Identity: A Constructivist Approach, New York: Routledge.
  • Brock, P. (1994). “Why did St. Maximilian refuse to serve in the Roman army?”, The Journal of Ecclesiastical History, Vol:45, Issue: 2, pp. 195-209.
  • Canon, B. C. (1983). “Defining the dimensions of judicial activism”, Judicature, Vol: 66, pp. 236-247.
  • Committee of Ministers (2011). “Decision case no. 24: Case against Turkey, 8 June 2011 (115th Meeting)”, https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectId=09000016805b0a14, Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Constitution of the Republic of Turkey (2019). Grand National Assembly of Turkey Printing House. Council of Europe (1949). “Statute of the Council of Europe”, https://rm.coe.int/1680306052, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Council of Europe (1953). “The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights)”, https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Council of Europe (1987). “Recommendation no. R (87) 8 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States Regarding Conscientious Objection to Compulsory Military Service, 9 April 1987 (406th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)”, https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectId=09000016804e6689, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Council of Europe (1994). “Protocol No. 11 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Restructuring the Control Machinery Established Thereby”, https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Library_Collection_P11_ETS155E_ENG.pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Council of Europe (2007). “Committee of Ministers, Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)109, Execution of the Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights: Ülke against Turkey, 17 October 2007 (1007th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies”, https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectId=09000016805adea0#globalcontainer, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Çınar, Ö. H. (2014). The Right to Conscientious Objection to Military Service and Turkey’s Obligations under International Human Rights Law, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Çınar, Ö. H. and Üsterci, C. (2009). Conscientious Objection: Resisting Militarized Society, London: Zed Books.
  • Decker, C. D. and Fresa, L. (2001). “The status of conscientious objection under Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights”, New York University Journal of International Law & Politics, Vol: 33, pp. 379-418.
  • European Bureau for Conscientious Objection (2019). “Annual Report: Conscientious Objection to military service in Europe”, http://ebco-beoc.org/sites/ebco-beoc.org/files/attachments/EBCOreport2018fin.pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • European Commission (2005). “SEC (2005) 1426, Turkey: 2005 Progress Report”, http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/2/2005/EN/2-2005-1426-EN-1-0.Pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • European Commission for Democracy Through Law (Venice Commission) (2016). “Opinion No. 831/2015, Penal Code of Turkey”, https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-REF(2016)011-e, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Green, C. (2009). “An intellectual history of judicial activism”, Emory Law Journal, Vol: 58, Issue: 5, pp. 1195-1264.
  • Karaca, E. (2012a). “Mahkeme, Delice’yi değil ama vicdani reddi tanıdı”, Bianet, 9 March 2012.
  • Karaca, E. (2012b). “Yehova Şahidi’ne vicdani ret hakkı”, Bianet, 13 March 2012.
  • Kessler, J. K. (2015). “A war for liberty: On the law of conscientious objection”, The Cambridge History of World War II, Vol: 3, pp. 447-474.
  • Kmiec, K. D. (2004). “The origin and current meanings of judicial activism”, California Law Review Vol: 92, Issue: 5, pp. 1441-1477.
  • Letsas, G. (2013). “The ECHR as a living instrument: Its meaning and legitimacy”, Andreas Føllesdal, Birgit Peters and Geir Ulfstein (Ed.), Constituting Europe: The European Court of Human Rights in a National, European and Global Context, New York: Cambridge University Press, 106-141.
  • Lewis, B. (1993). Modern Türkiye’nin Doğuşu, Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi.
  • Lubell, N. (2002). “Selective conscientious objection in international law: Refusing to participate in a specific armed conflict”, Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights Vol: 20, Issue: 4, pp. 407-422.
  • Macovei, M. (2004). Freedom of Expression: A Guide to the Implementation of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. No. 2 of Human Rights Handbooks, Germany: Council of Europe, https://rm.coe.int/168007ff48, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Major, M. F. (1992). “Conscientious objection and international law: A human right. Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law”, Vol: 24, Issue: 2, pp. 349-378.
  • Moskos, C. C. and John, W. C. (1993). The New Conscientious Objection: From Sacred to Secular Resistance, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Munyar, V. (2018). “5.5 Milyonun askerlik sorunu çözüm bekliyor”, Hürriyet, 4 June 2018.
  • Muzny, P. (2012). “Bayatyan v Armenia: The Grand Chamber renders a grand judgment”, Human Rights Law Review Vol: 12, Issue: 1, pp. 135-147.
  • Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (1967). “Resolution 337, Right of Conscientious Objection (22nd Sitting)”, http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-en.asp?fileid=15752&lang=en, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (1977). “Recommendation 816, Right of Conscientious Objection to Military Service (10th Sitting)”, http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-EN.asp?fileid=14850&lang=en, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (2001). “Recommendation 1518, Exercise of the Right of Conscientious Objection to Military Service in Council of Europe Member States”, https://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-EN.asp?fileid=16909&lang=en, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (2004). “Resolution 1380, Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by Turkey (18th Sitting)”, http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-DocDetails-EN.asp?FileID=17225&lang=EN, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (2006). “Recommendation 1742, Human Rights of Members of the Armed Forces (11th Sitting)”, http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-en.asp?fileid=17424&lang=en, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Resmi Gazete, 1111 Sayılı Askerlik Kanunu, 12-17 July 1927, https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.3.1111.pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Resmi Gazete, 1632 Sayılı Askeri Ceza Kanunu, 15 June 1930, http://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.3.1632.pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Resmi Gazete, 3713 Sayılı Terörle Mücadele Kanunu, 12 April 1991, https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/mevzuatmetin/1.5.3713.pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Resmi Gazete, 5237 Sayılı Türk Ceza Kanunu, 12 October 2004, https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.5.5237.pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Resmi Gazete, 765 Sayılı Türk Ceza Kanunu (mülga), 13 March 1926, https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/mevzuatmetin/5.3.765.pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Resmi Gazete, 93/4613 Sayılı Bakanlar Kurulu Kararı Birden Fazla Tabiiyetli Vatandaşların Askerlik Yükümlülüklerini Yerine Getirmiş Sayılmalarına Dair Esaslar, 25 July 1993, http://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/arsiv/21648.pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Rumelili, B., Keyman, F. and Isyar, B. (2011). “Turkey’s conscientious objectors and the contestation of European citizenship”, J. Peter Burgess and Serge Gutwirth (Ed.), A Threat Against Europe? Security, Migration and Integration, Brussels: VUBPRESS Brussels University Press, pp. 47-62.
  • Schroeder, J. B. (2011). “The role of Jehovah’s Witnesses in the emergent right of conscientious objection to military service in international law”, Kirchliche Zeitgeschichte, Vol: 24, Issue: 1, pp. 169-206.
  • Tachau, F. and Heper, M. (1983). “The state, Politics, and the Military in Turkey”, Comparative Politics, Vol: 16, Issue: 1, pp. 17-33.
  • The European Commission of Human Rights (1996). “Thomas Spöttl v. Austria. No. 22956/93”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22\%2222956/93\%22%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-2889%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (1966). “Grandrath v. Germany. No: 2299/64”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22grandrath%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-73650%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (1973). “G.Z. v. Autriche. No: 5591/72”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22g.z.%20autriche%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-100491%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023). The European Court of Human Rights (1977). “X. v. Federal Republic of Germany. No: 7705/76”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22\%227705/76\%22%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-74554%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (1984). “N. v. Sweden. No: 10410/83”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22\%2210410/83\%22%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-74737%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023). The European Court of Human Rights (1994). “Peters v. The Netherlands. No: 22793/93”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22\%2222793/93\%22%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-2432%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2000). “Thlimmenos v. Greece. No: 34369/97”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%2234369%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-58561%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2006). “Ülke v. Turkey. No: 39437/98”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%2239437%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-72146%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2009). “Bayatyan v. Armenia. No: 23459/03, Chamber”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22\%22BAYATYAN%20v.%20ARMENIA\%22%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22CHAMBER%22,%22DECISIONS%22,%22COMMUNICATEDCASES%22,%22CLIN%22,%22ADVISORYOPINIONS%22,%22REPORTS%22,%22RESOLUTIONS%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-95386%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2011). “Bayatyan v. Armenia. No: 23459/03, Grand Chamber”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22appno%22:[%2223459/03%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-105611%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2011). “Erçep v. Turkey. No: 43965/04”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-121130%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2012). “Feti Demirtaş v. Turkey. No: 5260/07”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-120170%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2014). “Buldu and Others v. Turkey. No: 14017/08”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-156378%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2016). “Enver Aydemir v. Turkey. No: 26012/11”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-169942%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2016). “Mammadov and Huseynov v. Azerbaijan. No: 14604/08”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22mammadov%20huseynov%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-170069%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2016). “Papavasilakis v. Greece. No: 66899/14”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%2266899%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-166850%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2016). “Savda v. Turkey (No. 2). No: 2458/12”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-172977%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2017). “Adyan and Others v. Armenia. No: 75604/11”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22\%2275604/11\%22%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-177429%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2017). “Mirzayev v. Azerbaijan. No: 41792/15”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22\%2241792/15\%22%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-171871%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Court of Human Rights (2018). “Baydar v. Turkey. No. 25632/13”, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22\%22BAYDAR%20v.%20TURKEY\%22%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-184882%22]}, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • The European Parliament (2006). “Resolution No. 2006/2118(INI), Turkey’s Progress towards Accession”, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-6-2006-0381_EN.html?redirect, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Turkey: Military Courts Recognise Right to Conscientious Objection (2012). War Resisters’ International, 1 May 2012, https://www.wri-irg.org/en/story/2012/turkey-military-courts-recognise-right-conscientious-objection, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi (The Grand National Assembly of Turkey), 5170 Sayılı Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Anayasasının Bazı Maddelerinin Değiştirilmesi Hakkında Kanun, 7 May 2004, http://www.anayasa.gen.tr/5170sk.htm, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi (The Grand National Assembly of Turkey), 5532 Sayılı Terörle Mücadele Kanununda Değişiklik Yapılmasına Dair Kanun, 29 June 2006, https://www.tbmm.gov.tr/kanunlar/k5532.html, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Türkiye’de Vicdani Ret İlk Defa Tanındı (2012). Birgün Gazetesi, 10 March 2012.
  • United Nations General Assembly (1948). “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • United Nations General Assembly (1966). “International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights”, https://treaties.un.org/doc/publication/unts/volume%20999/volume-999-i-14668-english.pdf, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Vicdani Red Davasında Tarihi Karar (2012). Agos Gazetesi, 9 March 2012.
  • Vicdani Ret Derneği (T.Y.). “Vicdani retlerini açıklayanlar”, https://vicdaniret.org/tarih-sirasina-gore/, (Accessed: 13.12.2023).
  • Wiberg, M. (1985). “Grounds for recognition of conscientious objection to military service: The deontological–teleological distinction considered”, Journal of Peace Research Vol: 22, Issue: 4, pp. 359-364.
  • Young, E. A. (2002). “Judicial activism and conservative politics”, University of Colorado Law Review, Vol: 73, Issue:4, pp. 1139-1216.
  • Zürcher, E. (2000). Modernleşen Türkiye’nin Tarihi, İstanbul: İletişim.
There are 77 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects International Foundation, International Law, International Institutions
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Cerenmelis Kıcıroğlu 0000-0001-7111-4986

Early Pub Date December 20, 2023
Publication Date January 10, 2024
Submission Date October 22, 2023
Acceptance Date December 13, 2023
Published in Issue Year 2024 Volume: 4 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Kıcıroğlu, C. (2024). Conscientious Objection under European Regime of Human Rights: An Analysis on Turkey. Uluslararası İlişkiler Ve Politika Dergisi, 4(1), 67-85.
 Download Cover Image

27230                     Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

27232 

27418Studies submitted to our journal are scanned by Turnitin.