POLITICS IN LAW PRACTICE: ECHR'S APPROACH TO THE DISSOLUTION OF POLITICAL PARTIES

Hukuk ve siyaset iki komşu kavram ve sosyal çalışmadır. Onların birbirileriyle olan ilişkilerini inceleyen iki etkili teori vardır. Halen hukuk uygulamasına egemen olan ana akım teori, hukukun bağımsız ve hukuki muhakeme şeklinde kendisine ait etkin bir metoda sahip olduğuna inanır. Bu teoride hukukçuların rolleri açık bir şekilde belirlenmiştir; objektiflik ve tarafsızlık bu mesleğin icrasında onlar için ana gerekliliklerdir. Buna karşın, hukuki realizm ve Eleştirel Hukuk Çalışmaları, hukuki formalizmin kendisine, onun hukuksal tarafsızlığına ve hukuk ile siyaset ayrımına meydan okumuşlardır. Onlar, uygulamada hukukun siyasetin bir formu olduğunu göstermeye çalışmışlardır. Onlara göre, hukuku siyasetten arındırmaya çalışmak çok açık bir boş uğraşıdır; çünkü yargı kararları bünyesinde az veya çok siyaset barındırır. Bu kapsamda, Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesinin Türkiyedeki siyasi partilerin kapatılması konusundaki kararları örnek alan olarak seçilerek hukuktaki siyasete ayna tutması anlamında analize tabi tutulmuştur.

Hukuk Uygulamasında Siyaset: AİHMin Siyasi Partilerin Kapatılmasına Yaklaşımı

Law and politics are neighbouring concepts and social studies. There are two influential theories that examine relationship between them. The main stream theory, the legal paradigm in practice, strongly believes in independence of law and its efficient method, legal reasoning. In this theory jurists role is strictly defined; objectivity and impartiality are main requirements for them during their profession. On the contrary, legal realism and Critical Legal Studies challenges to legal formalism itself, its neutrality of law and its distinction between law and politics. They try to show that law is a form of politics in practice. To them, the effort to cleanse law from politics by formalist is an absolute failure, because judicial decisions more or less contain politics. In this perspective, case law of the European Court of Human Rights on the dissolution of political parties in Turkey as a sample area is chosen and analysed to monitor politics in law.

___

Balkin JM, Bush v. Gore and the Boundary Between Law and Politics (2000- 2001) 110 Yale L. J.

Boyle K, Human Rights, Religion and Democracy: The Refah Party Case (2004) 1 Essex Human Rights Review.

Cerar M, The Relationship between Law and Politics (2009) 15 Ann. Surv. Intl.&Comp. L.

Cross FB, Political Science and New Legal Realism: A Case of Unfortunate Interdisciplinary Ignorance (1997-1998) 92 Nw. U. L. Rev.

Duxbury N, The Theory and History of American Law and Politics (1993) 13 Oxford J. Legal Stud.

Freedom and Democracy Party (ÖZDEP) v Turkey, (App. 23885/94), 8 December 1999, (2001) 31 EHRR 674, ECHR 1999-VIII.

Harvey P, Militant Democracy and the European Convention on Human Rights (2004) 29 E. L. Rev.

Hutchinson AC and Monahan PJ, Law, Politics, and the Critical Legal Scholars: The Unfolding Drama of American Legal Thought (1984) 36 Stan. L. Rev.

Kairys D, Law and Politics (1983-1984) 52 Geo. Wash. L. Rev.

Kanev K, Muslim Religious Freedom in the OSCE Area After September 11 (2004) 15 Helsinki Monitor.

Kelsen H, Pure Theory of Law (Max Knight tr, first published 1934, University of California Press 1978).

Kennedy D, Freedom and Constraint in Adjudication: A Critical Phenomenology (1986) 36 J. Legal Educ.

Kennedy D, Legal Education as Training for Hierarcy in David Kairys (ed), The Politics of Law: A Progressive Critique, (3th edn, Basic Books 1998).

Kronman AT, The Lost Lawyers: Failing Ideals of the Legal Profession, (4th edn, HUP 1995).

Lammon BD, What We Talk About When We Talk About Ideology: Judicial Politics Scholarship and Naive Legal Realism (2009) 83 St. Johns L. Rev.

Macklem P, Militant Democracy, Legal Pluralism and the Paradox of Self-Determination (2006) 4 Intl J. Const. L.

Mensch E, The History of Mainstream Legal Thought in David Kairys (ed), The Politics of Law: A Progressive Critique, (3th edn, Basic Books 1998).

Moore TL, Critical Legal Studies and Anglo-American Jurisprudence (1990)

1 U.S. A. F. Acad. J. Legal Stud.

Pierce RJ, Is Standing Law or Politics? (1998-1999) 77 N.C.L. Rev.

Refah Partisi (The Welfare Party) and others v Turkey, (App. 41340/98, 41342/98, 41343/98 and 41344/98) 13 February 2003 [GC], (2003) 37 EHRR 1, ECHR 2003-II.

Refah Partisi (The Welfare Party) and others v Turkey, (App. 41340/98, 41342/98, 41343/98 and 41344/98) 31 July 2001, (2002) 35 EHRR 3.

Schauer F, Thinking Like a Lawyer: A New Introduction to Legal Reasoning (HUP 2009).

Shapiro M and Sweet AS, On Law, Politics, and Judicialization, (1th edn, OUP 2002).

Shklar JN, Legalism: Law, Morals, and Political Trials (HUP 1986).

Simon WH, Fear and Loathing of Politics in the Legal Academy (2001) 51 J. Legal Educ.

Singer JW, The Players and the Cards: Nihilism and Legal Theory, (1984- 1985) 94 Yale L. J.

Socialist Party and others v Turkey, (App.21237/93), 25 May 1998, (1999) 27 EHRR 51, 1998-III.

Stone J, Legal Systems and Lawyers Reasoning (Stevens&Sons 1964).

Tiller EH and Cross FB, What is Legal Doctrine (2006) 100 Nw. U. L. Rev.

Unger RMU, The Critical Legal Studies Movement (1982-1983) 96 Harv. L. Rev.

United Communist Party of Turkey and others v Turkey, (App. 19392/92), 30 January 1998, (1998) 26 EHRR 121, ECHR 1998-1.

White RCA and Ovey C, Jacobs, White and Ovey the European Convention on Human Rights (5th edn, OUP 2010).