Alabama Tahkimi Kararı ve Uluslararası Hukukta Dolaylı Zararlar

Uluslararası hukuk alanında Alabama Tahkimi kararı büyük önemi haizdir. Kararın pek çok kayda değer hükmünden bir tanesi, tali zararlara ilişkin olandır. Kuşkusuz, tahkim mahkemesi tüm Amerikan tali taleplerini reddetmiştir; ancak bu karar siyasi kabul edilmekte ve bu nedenle Birleşik Krallık’ın söz konusu tali zararlardan sorumlu olup olmadığı sorusunun irdelenmesi gerekli olmaktadır. Üç bölümden oluşan bu makale, kararın incelenmesiyle başlamaktadır; ilk olarak iki ülke arasındaki anlaşmazlığın kaynağı olan Amerikan İç Savaşı ve Alabama tahkim mahkemesini kuran Washington Antlaşması aktarılacaktır. Akabinde, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nin Birleşik Krallık’tan olan doğrudan ve tali talepleri ile Birleşik Devletler lehine verilen hükümden bahsedilecektir. İkinci bölümde, uluslararası hukuktaki tali zarar kavramı irdelenecektir; kavramın ARSIWA Yorumları uyarınca anlamı üzerinde durulması tercih edilmiştir. Son bölümde, çeşitli görüşler ve nedensellik bağı ışığında tali zarar teşkil edip edemeyeceği noktasında Amerikan tali talepleri tahlil edilecektir.

THE ALABAMA ARBITRAL AWARD AND INDIRECT DAMAGES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW

The Alabama Arbitral Award is of crucial importance in the field of international law. One of its many significant rulings is that which regards indirect damages. Although the arbitral tribunal rejected all American indirect claims; this decision is nonetheless considered political and it is deemed necessary to analyze the question of whether these claims constitute indirect damages for which Great Britain was responsible. This article, composed of three chapters, begins by examining the Tribunal Award. Firstly, it examines the American Civil War, which was the source of the two countries’ disagreement and the Treaty of Washington which established the Alabama arbitral tribunal. In addition, the United States’ direct and indirect claims against Great Britain and the award granted to the States will be analyzed. In the second chapter, the notion of indirect damages in international law will be examined. It is preferred to focus on the notion’s interpretation according to ARSIWA Commentary. In the last chapter, an analysis of American indirect claims as indirect damages will be discussed in light of various legal opinions and link of causality.

PDF

___

AMADOR F.V. Garcia, Sixth Report on International Responsibility, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, Vol. II, 1966.
Alabama claims of the United States of America v. Great Britain, Arbitration Award rendered on 14 September 1872 by the tribunal of arbitration established by Article I of the Treaty of Washington of 8 May 1871, Reports of International Arbitral Awards, Volume XXIX, pp.125-134.
The Alabama Claims, American Law Review, Vol. 4, No. 1, October 1869, BALCH Thomas Willing, The Alabama Arbitration 1-2, 1900. https:// archive.org/stream/alabamaarbitrati00balcuoft?ref=ol#page/123/mode/1up BINGHAM Tom, “The Alabama Claims Arbitration”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 54/1, 2005, pp. 1-25.
BROWN Bartram S., “Humanitarian Intervention at a Crossroads”, William&Mary Law Review, Vol. 41 (1999-2000), Issue 5, 2000, pp. 1683- 1741.
BYRNE Karen, “’We Have a Claim on This Estate’, Remembering Slavery at Arlington House”, Cultural Resource Management, Vol. 25, No. 4, 2002, pp. 27-29, p. 27.
CHADWICK Elizabeth, The British View of Neutrality in 1872, 2018. Corfu Channel Case (United Kingdom v. Albania); Merits, International Court of Justice (ICJ), 9 April 1949.
CRAWFORD James, State Responsibility: The General Part (Cambridge Studies in International and Comparative Law), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013.
CRAWFORD James, “State Responsibility”, Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, September 2006.
CUSHING Caleb, Treaty of Washington: Its Negotiation, Execution, and the Discussion Relating Thereto, Harper&Bros, New York, 1873. Decisions of Arbitral Tribunal Great Britain-United States, Reports of International Arbitral Awards, Volume VI. EAGLETON Clyde, “Measure of Damages in International Law”, Yale Law Journal, Vol. 39, 1929, pp. 52-75.
FRIEDMANN Wolfgang, “Half a Century of International Law”, Virginia Law Review, Vol. 50, No. 8, December 1964, pp. 1333-1358.
GIROUARD Désiré, “The Alabama Indirect Claims”, Revue Critique de Legislation et de Jurisprudence du Canada, Vol. 2, No. 2, 1872, pp. 185- 205.
HACKETT Frank W., Geneva Award Acts: With Notes, and References to Decisions of the Court of Commissioners of Alabama Claims, Little, Brown and Co., Boston, 1882.
HILL Frederick Trevor, Decisive Battles of the Law-Narrative Studies of Eight Legal Contests Affecting the History of the United States between the Years 1800 and 1886, 1906.
HAURIOU André, Les Dommages Indirects Dans les Arbitrages Internationaux, Revue Générale de Droit International Public, Vol. 31, 1924.
International Law Commission, Commentaries to the Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, Supplement No. 10 (A/56/10), Chapter IV. E. 1, November 2001.
MILLER Marion Mills, Great Debates in American History, from the Debates in the British Parliament on the Colonial Stamp Act (1764-1765) to the Debates in Congress at the Close of the Taft Administration (1912- 1913), Current Literature Pub. Co., New York.
Mixed Claims Commission (United States and Germany), 1 November 1923-30 October 1939, Reports of International Arbitral Awards, Volume VII, pp.1-391.
MOORE John Bassett, History and Digest of the International Arbitrations to Which the United States Has Been a Party, Washington, 1898.
Orinoco Asphalt Case, Reports of International Arbitral Awards, Volume X, pp. 424-428.
PALMER Roundell, Memorials, Macmillan&Co., London, 1898.
PARK Willliam/de FUMICHON Bruno, “Retour sur L’Affaire de L’Alabama: De l’Utilité et de l’Histoire pour l’Arbitrage International”, Revue de l’Arbitrage, 2019, No. 3, pp. 743-834.
PITCAITHLEY, Dwight T., “The American Civil War and the Preservation of Memory”, Cultural Resource Management, Vol. 25, No. 4, 2002, pp. 5-9.
RALSTON Jackson H., Law and Procedure of International Tribunals: Being a Resume of the Views of Arbitrators upon Questions Arising under the Law of Nations and of the Procedure and Practice of International Courts, Stanford University Press, 1926.
ROBINSON John E., “The Alabama Claims and the Development of Modern Admirality Arbitration”, Malabu: Maritime Law Bulletin, Vol. 3, No. 1, Winter 2012, pp. 22-25.
SCHINAZI Mikael, “The Three Ages of International Commercial Arbitration and the Development of the ICC Arbitration System”, ICC Dispute Resolution Bulletin, Issue 2, 2020, pp. 63-75.
SHELTON Dinah, “Righting Wrongs: Reparations in the Articles on State Responsibility”, The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 96, No. 4, 2002, pp. 833–856.
WHITEMAN Marjorie M., Damages in International Law, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, 1943.
YNTEMA Hessel E., “The Treaties with Germany and Compensation for War Damage, IV. The Measure of Damages in International Law.” Columbia Law Review, Vol. 24, no. 2, 1924, pp. 134–153.