Milletlerarası andlaşmalar ve anayasa yargısı
Küçük Resim Yok
Tarih
2001
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
Niğde Üniversitesi
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
Milletlerarası andlaşmaların yapılması, geçerliliği ve sona ermesi milli hukuk ve milletlerarası hukuk açısından önemlidir. Eski dönemlerde ahde vefa duygularıyla devletler birbirlerine vermiş oldukları sözlere sadık kalmaya çalışmışlardır. Osmanlı İmparatorluğu' nda andlaşmalar padişahın onaylamasıyla yürürlüğe girmekteydi. İkinci Meşrutiyetle beraber padişahın onayı yayında meclisinde onayıyla andlaşmaların yürürlüğe gireceği kabul edilmiştir. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti 'nin 1921, 1924, 1961 ve 1982 Anayasalarında andlaşmaların yapılması konusunda sürekli gelişmeler gözlendiği görülmektedir. 1 92 1 Anayasasında Yürütmenin elinde olan andlaşma yapma yetkisi 1 924 Anayasasında yürütme ve yasama arasında paylaştırılmıştır. 1961 Anayasasındaki andlaşmalara ilişkin düzenlemeler, 1982 Anayasasında da aynen benimsenmiştir. Milletlerarası andlaşmaların uygulanmasını gösteren 244 Sayılı kanun Anayasa Mahkemesince Anayasa aykırı görülmemiştir. 244 Sayılı kanun 1982 Anayasasındaki andlaşmalara ilişkin hükümler doktrin ve kazaî içtihatlar çerçevesinde değerlendirildiğinde andlaşmaların günün şartlarına göre yeniden düzenlenmesi gerektiği görülmektedir. Milletlerarası andlaşmaların Türk Hukukundaki yeri düalist ve monist görüşler çerçevesinde incelendiğinde, düalist bir yapı içerisinde olduğu görülmektedir. Milletlerarası andlaşmalar aleyhine Anayasa Mahkemesine karşı dava açılamasa da, devletin yüce menfaatleri gerektirdiği ölçüde açılması gerekmektedir.
Making international agrements. their validity and their ending are of importance in terms of national and international law. Nations have been trying to keep their promises due to their faitfulness. The agreement had been implemented by the emperors' confirmation in the Ottoman Empire With II. Meşrutiyet, it had been accepted that the agreements should have also had the confirmation from the assembly as well as the emperors. It has been observed that there are ongoing improvements about how agreements are considered in 1921, 1924, 1961 and 1982 constitutions. While the rights of making agreements according to 1921 constitution, execution and making law happened to share this right with 1 924 constitutions. The amendments related to agreements in 1961 constitution had been accepted in 1982 constitution. The law titled 244 which was about the application of international agreements had been accepted by the constitutional court. If considered in terms of doctrine and judiciary ideas frame, the law titled 244 should have changed contemporarily. If taken into consideration within the frame of dualist and monolist ideas it is understood that International agreements in Turkish Law have been in dualist form. Althought it has been impossible to open a trial against international agreements in the constitutional court, in is necessary for national benefit.
Making international agrements. their validity and their ending are of importance in terms of national and international law. Nations have been trying to keep their promises due to their faitfulness. The agreement had been implemented by the emperors' confirmation in the Ottoman Empire With II. Meşrutiyet, it had been accepted that the agreements should have also had the confirmation from the assembly as well as the emperors. It has been observed that there are ongoing improvements about how agreements are considered in 1921, 1924, 1961 and 1982 constitutions. While the rights of making agreements according to 1921 constitution, execution and making law happened to share this right with 1 924 constitutions. The amendments related to agreements in 1961 constitution had been accepted in 1982 constitution. The law titled 244 which was about the application of international agreements had been accepted by the constitutional court. If considered in terms of doctrine and judiciary ideas frame, the law titled 244 should have changed contemporarily. If taken into consideration within the frame of dualist and monolist ideas it is understood that International agreements in Turkish Law have been in dualist form. Althought it has been impossible to open a trial against international agreements in the constitutional court, in is necessary for national benefit.
Açıklama
Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Kamu Yönetimi Ana Bilim Dalı
Anahtar Kelimeler
Hukuk, Law, Kamu Yönetimi
