ULUS-AŞIRI DEMOKRASİNİN YÜKSELİŞİ VE ULUSLARARASI HUKUK SİSTEMİNE ETKİLERİ

Uluslararası hukuk sistemin, internet, sivil toplum kuruluşlarının (STK) etkisinin artışı, bununla beraber tartışmalı da olsa Vestfalya devlet merkezli sistemin zayıflaması ve uluslar ötesi demokrasinin gelişmesi ile çok önemli değişimlere maruz kaldığı kabul edilen bir gerçektir. Bu çalışma, öncelikle sivil toplum kuruluşlarının uluslararası alanda artan etkisine vurgu yaparak uluslararası hukuk sisteminin tecrübe ettiği bu değişimi inceliyor. Bu gelişme ile zayıflayan devlet merkezli sistem ve uluslararası hukukta gelişen bir olgu olan demokrasi konusu arasındaki ilişkileri değerlendiriyor. Uluslararası hukuk sisteminin şahit olduğu gelişmelerin aslında birbirlerine bağlı oldukları sonucuna varılıyor öyle ki sivil toplum kuruluşlarının artan etkisi demokrasinin ulusal sınırları aşması ve devlet merkezli sistem üzerinde baskı oluşması gibi sonuçlara yol açmıştır. 

The Rise of Transnational Democracy and Its Effect on the International Legal Order

It has been acknowledged that the international legal order faces the prospect of significant change through developments such as the Internet, the increase in the influence of NGOs, and also – controversially – the waning of Westphalian dominance by states together with the development of transnational democracy. This paper first examines the transformation that the international legal order has experienced, particularly since the end of the Cold War, underlining the rise of NGOs in the international realm. It then discusses the relationship between this development and both the degeneration of the state-centric system and the issue of democracy that is of growing concern in international law. It concludes that the developments the international legal order has been witnessing are interdependent, having led to the rise of NGOs, resulting in the extension of democracy beyond national borders and increasing pressure on state-centric systems. 

___

  • Alston, P. (2005). The ‘Not-a-Cat’ Syndrome: Can the International Human Rights Regime Accommodate Non-State Actors? In P. Alston, Non-State Actors and Human Rights(pp. 3-36). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Archibugi, D. (2008). The Global Commonwealth of Citizens: Towards Cosmopolitan Democracy. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
  • Archibugi D. (2004). Cosmopolitan Democracy and its Critics: A Review. European Journal of International Relations, 10(3), 437-473.
  • Archibugi, Daniele & Held, David. (Eds.). (1995). Cosmopolitan Democracy: An Agenda for a New World Order. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • Archibugi, Daniele & Held, David. (2011). Cosmopolitan Democracy: Paths and Agents. Ethics & International Affairs, 25(4), 433-461.
  • Chandler, D. (2003). New Rights for Old? Cosmopolitan Citizenship and the Critique of State Sovereignty. Political Studies, 51(2), 332-349.
  • Charnovitz, S. (1997). Two Centuries of Participation: NGOs and International Governance. Michigan Journal of International Law, 18(2), 183-286.
  • Clark, I. (1999). Globalization and International Relations Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Cox, R. (1996). Approaches to World Order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Crawford, J. (1993). Democracy and International Law. The British Yearbook of International Law, 64(1), 113-133.
  • Crawford, J. (1994). Democracy in International Law: Inaugural Lecture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Crawford, J. (2000). Democracy and the Body of International Law. In G. & Fox, Democratic Governance and International Law (pp. 91-122). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Cullen, H., & Morrow, K. (2001). International Civil Society in International Law: The Growth of NGO Participation. Kluwer Law International, 1(1), 7-39.
  • Dahl, RA. (1989). Democracy and Its Critics. Yale University Press. Decent, T. (2015, January 30). The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved from Saudi Arabia’s King Salman Gives Citizens an Extra Two Months’ Salary: http://www.smh.com.au/world/saudi-arabias-king-salmangives-citizens-an-extra-two-months-salary-20150130- 1328x7.html
  • Delbruck, J. (2002). Prospects for a "World (Internal) Law"?: Legal Development in a Changing International System. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 9(2), 401-431.
  • Delbruck, J. (2004). Transnational Federalism: Problems and Prospects of Allocating Public Authority Beyond the State. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 11(1), 31-55.
  • Drake, C. (1999). The United Nations and NGOs: future roles. In G. J. Wood, Reordering the world: geopolitical perspectives on the twenty-first century (pp. 239-256). New York: Westview Press.
  • Falk, R. (1969). The Interplay of Westphalia and Charter Conceptions of International Legal Order. In R. F. Black, The Future of the International Legal Order: The Structure of the International Environment (pp. 32-72). New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
  • Ferguson, YH., & Mansbach, RW. (2004). Remapping Global Politics History's Revenge and Future Shock. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Fox, GH., & Roth, BR. (2000). Democratic Governance and International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Franck, T. (1987). Why a Quest for Legitimacy?. Davis Law Review, 21(1), 535-548.
  • Franck, T. (1992). The Emerging Right to Democratic Governance. American Journal of International Law, 86(1), 46-91.
  • Franck, T. (1998). Fairness in International Law and Institutions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Fukuyama, F. (1992). The End of History and the Last Man. New York: The Free Press.
  • Fung, A., & Wright, EO. (2001). Deepening Democracy: Innovations in Empowered Participatory Governance. Politics & Society, 29(1), 5-41.
  • Galtung, J. (2000). Alternative Models for Global Democracy. In B. Holden, Global Democracy: Key Debates (pp. 143-161). London: Routledge.
  • Gould, C. (2012). Regional Versus Global Democracy: Advantages and Limitations. In D. Archibugi, M. Koenig-Archibugi, & R. Marchetti, Global Democracy: Normative and Empirical Perspectives (pp. 115-131). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Hawthorn, G. (2000). Running the World through Windows. New Left Review, 5(1), 101-110.
  • Held, D. (1995). Democracy and the Global Order: From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance. California: Stanford University Press.
  • Helfer, L. (2003). Constitutional Analogies in the International Legal System. Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, 37(2), 193- 237.
  • Holden, B. (2000). Global Democracy: Key Debates. London: Routledge.
  • Khan, L. (2003). A Theory of Universal Democracy: Beyond the End of History. The Hague: Kluwer Law International. Kumm, M. (2004). The Legitimacy of International Law: A Constitutionalist Framework of Analysis. European Journal of International Law, 15(5), 907-932.
  • Kurtz, J. (2002). NGOs, the Internet and International Economic Policy Making: The Failure of the OECD Multilateral Agreement on Investment. Melbourne Journal of International Law, 3(1), 213-246.
  • Lindblom, A.-K. (2005). Non-Governmental Organizations in International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Lissitzyn, O. (1968). Territorial Entities Other Than Independent States in the Law of Treaties. The Hague: Hague Academy of International Law.
  • Marks, S. (2000). The Riddle of All Constitutions: International Law, Democracy, and the Critique of Ideology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Martell, L. (2011) Cosmopolitanism and Global Politics. The Political Quarterly, 82(4), 618-627.
  • McGrew, A. (2002). Transnational Democracy: Theories and Prospects. In A. C. Stokes, Democratic Theory Today: Challenges for the 21st Century (pp. 269-293). Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • McGrew, A. (2011). Globalization and Global Politics. In S. S. J Baylis, The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations (pp. 14-33). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Moravcsik, A. (2004). Is there a ‘Democratic Deficit’ in World Politics?: A Framework for Analysis. Government and Opposition, 39(2), 336-363.
  • Politis, N. (1926). The New Aspects of International Law: A Series of Lectures Delivered at Columbia University. Washington: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
  • Rich, R. (2001). Bringing Democracy into International Law. Journal of Democracy, 12(3), 20-34.
  • Schachter, O. (1997). The Decline of the Nation-State and Its Implications for International Law. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 36(1), 7-24.
  • Schneebaum, S. (2004). Ethnic Groups and International Law: A Status Report on International Legal Personality at the Beginning of the New Century. Human Rights & Human Welfare, 4(1), 11-22.
  • Schreuer, C. (1993). The Waning of the Sovereign State: Towards a New Paradigm for International Law?. European Journal of International Law, 4(1), 447-471.
  • Spiro, P. (1997). New Players on the International Stage. Hofstra Law & Policy Symposium, 2(1), 25-32.
  • Sussman, D. (2007, May 25). The New York Times. Retrieved from Poll Shows View of Iraqi War is Most Negative Since Start: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/25/washington/25vie w.html?_r=2&oref=slogin& Therien, JP., & Belanger-Dumontier, M. (2009). The United Nations and Global Democracy: From Discourse to Deeds. Cooperation and Conflict: Journal of the Nordic International Studies Association, 44(1), 355–377.
  • Valaskakis, K. (2000, March). Retrieved from Westphalia II: The Real Millennium Challenge: http://www.paricenter.com/library/papers/valaskakis01.p hp Varayudej, S. (2010). A Right to Democracy in International Law: Its Implications for Asia. Annual Survey of International & Comparative Law, 12(1), 1-18.
  • Weiler, J. (2004). The Geology of International Law – Governance, Democracy and Legitimacy. Retrieved from http://www.zaoerv.de/64_2004/64_2004_3_a_547_562.pdf Wendt, Alexander. (1992). Anarchy is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics. International Organization, 46(2), 391-425.
  • Willetts, P. (2010). Non-Governmental Organizations in World Politics: The Construction of Global Governance. London: Routledge.
  • Wilson, W. (1917, April 2). War Message to Congress. Joint Session of the Two Houses of Congress 65th Congress 1st Session Senate Document 5. U.S.
  • Wolf, K D. (1999). The New Raison d'Etat as a Problem for Democracy in World Society. European Journal of International Relations, 5(3), 333-363.
  • Woods, N. (1999). Good Governance in International Organizations. Global Governance, 5(1), 39-61.
  • Wouters, J., Meester, BD., & Ryngaert, C. (2003). Democracy and International Law. Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, 34(1), 139-197.
  • Zolo, D. (1997). Cosmopolis: Prospects for World Government. Cambridge: Polity Press.