Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.advisorMutlu, Erdem İlker
dc.contributor.authorOnbaşıoğlu, Fehime
dc.date.accessioned2023-08-16T08:50:40Z
dc.date.issued2023-08-15
dc.date.submitted2023-06-16
dc.identifier.citationADEDE, Andronico O., The System for Settlement of Disputes Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: A Drafting History and a Commentary, Dordrecht/ Lancaster, Nijhoff Publishers, 1987. AYBAY, Rona / ORAL, Elif, Kamusal Uluslararası Hukuk, İstanbul, İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2016 BAŞLAR, Kemal, The Concept of he Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, The Hague, Nijhoff Publishers, 1997. BUSZYNSKI, Leszek, The origins and development of the South China Sea maritime dispute, (içinde) Leszek Buszynski, Christopher B. Roberts, The South China Sea Maritime Dispute: Political, legal and regional perspectives, Routledge, 2015. CARTER, Barry E., Making Progress in International Law and Institutions, CARTER, Barry E., WEINER, Allen S., International Law içinde: New York, Wolters Kluwer Law & Business, 2011. CARTY, Anthony, The South China Sea Disputes are Not Yet Justiciable, Ed. Shicun Wu, Keyuan Zou, ‘Arbitration Concerning the South China Sea: Philippines versus China’, Routledge, 2016. CASSESE, Antonio, International Law, New York, Oxford University Press Inc.,2005. CHEN, Lung-Chu, An Introduction to Contemporaray International Law: A Policy-Oriented Perspective, New York, Oxford University Press, 2015. CHURCHILL, Robin, Some Reflections on the Operation of the Dispute Settlement System of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, The Law of the Sea: Progress and Prospects içinde, Ed. FREESTONE, David, BARNES, Richard, ONG, David, New York, Oxford University Press, 2006. DOUZINAS, Costas, İnsan Hakları ve İmparatorluk: Kozmopolitanizmin Siyasal Felsefesi, (Çev. AKBAŞ, Kasım/ SAĞLAM, Rabia), İstanbul, Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2017 DOUZINAS, Costas, Speaking Law: on Bare Theological and Cosmopolitan Sovereignty, International Law and its Others (s. 35-56), Ed. Anne ORFORD, United Kingdom, Cambridge University Press, 2009. DUGUIT, Leon, Egemenlik ve Özgürlük, (s. 379-400), Der. Cemal Bali AKAL, Devlet Kuramı, Ankara, Dost Kitabevi, 2018 DUNOFF, Jeffrey L., RATNER, Steven R., WIPPMAN, David, International Law Norms, Actors, Process: A Problem-Oriented Approach, New York, Aspen Publishers, 2006. FENWICK, Charles G., International Law, New York, D. Appleton-Century- Crofts Company Inc., 1965. GROTIUS, Hugo, The Freedom of the Seas or the Right which Belongs to the Dutch to Take Part in the East Indian Trade, (Org. 1633), Transl. MAGOFFIN, Ralph Van Deman, Ed. SCOTT, James Brown, New Jersey, The Lawbook Exchange, 2001. JAYAKUMAR, S., and Others, Conclusion, “The South China Sea Arbitration: The Legal Dimension” içinde, (Eds.) JAYAKUMAR S., and Others, United Kingdom, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018 KINGSBURY, Benedict, ” International Courts: uneven judicialisation in global order”, The Cambridge Companion To International Law, Ed. James Crawford and Marti Koskenniemi, New York, Cambridge University Press, 2012. KLEIN, Natalie, Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, New York, Cambridge University Press, 2005. KOSKENNIEMI, Martti, What Should International Lawyers Learn from Karl Marx?, (içinde) MARKS, Susan, “International Law on the Left: Re-examining Marxist Legacies”, New York, Cambridge University Press, 2008. LAUTERPACHT, Hersch, The Function of Law in the International Community, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2011. LYONS, Youna, and Others, Determining High-Tide Features (or Islands) in the South China Sea under Article 121(1): A Legal and Oceanography Perspective, (Eds.) JAYAKUMAR S., and Others, içinde, 2018 MAALANCZUK, P., Akerhurst’s Modern Introduction to International Law, New York, Routledge, 1997. MERRILLS, J. G., International Dispute Settlement, New York, Cambridge University Press, 2011. MUTLU, Erdem İlker, Savaşın ve Barışın Hukuku: Modern Dönemin Etik İkilemleri, Ankara, Turhan Kitabevi, 2016. NOYES, John E., The Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone, ROTHWELL, ELFERINK and others, 2015, içinde. OPPENHEIM, Lassa F. L., ‘International Law: A Treatise, Vol. II War and Neutrality’, Gece Kitaplığı, 2018, s. 23. OPPENHEIM, Lassa F. L., International Law; a Treatise, Vol. I., Ankara, Gece Kitaplığı, 2018. ÖZDEMİR, Ali Murat, Güç Buyruk Düzen: Uluslararası Hukuk Kuramında Eleştirellik ve Emperyalizm, Ankara, İmge Kitabevi, 2011. ÖZDEMİR, Ali Murat, Uluslararası Hukukun Nesnesi ve Tarihi Üzerine Deneme, (içinde) Der. ÖZDEMİR, Ali Murat, “Emperyalizmin Hayaletleri: Küresel Düzenlemenin Bugünü”, Ankara, İmge Kitabevi, 2013. ROTHWELL, Donald R., STEPHENS, Tim, The International Law of the Sea, United Kingdom, Hart Publishing, 2010. SALIL, S., China’s Strategy in the South China Sea: Role of the United States and India, KW Publishers Pvt Ltd, 2012. SANDS Philippe, Lawless World: America and the Making and Breaking of Global Rules from FDR’s Atlantic Charter to George W. Bush’s Illegal War, United States of America, Penguin Books, 2005. SCHACHTER, Oscar, International Law in Theory and Practice, Dordrecht, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1991. SCHOFIELD, Clive, STOREY, Ian, ‘The South China Sea Dispute: Increasing Stakes and Rising Tensions’, The Jamestown Foundation, 2009. SHAW, Malcolm N., Uluslararası Hukuk, Ankara, TÜBA Yayınları, 2018 SYMMONS, Clive Ralph, Historic Waters in the Law of the Sea: A Modern Re-appraisal, Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2008. TALMON, Stefan, JIA, Bing Bing, (Ed.), The South China Sea Arbitration: A Chinese Perspective, Portland, Hart Publishing, 2014. TALMON, Stefan, The South China Sea Arbitration: Is There a Case to Answer?, (içinde) Ed. TALMON, Stefan, JIA, Bing Bing, 2014. TALMON, Stefan, The South China Sea Arbitration: Jurisdiction, Admissibility, Procedure, Leiden, Nijhoff Publishers, 2022 TANAKA, Yoshifumi , The Peaceful Settlement of International Dispute ,Cambridge, Cambridge University Press , 2018. TANAKA, Yoshifumi, The International Law of the Sea, United Kingdom, Cambridge University Press, 2015. TANAKA, Yoshifumi, The South China Sea Arbitration: Toward an International Legal Order in the Oceans, England, Hart Publishing, 2019. TREVES, Tullio, Historical Development of the Law of the Sea, The Oxford Handbook of the Law of the Sea içinde, Ed. ROTHWELL, Donald R., OUDE ELFERINK, Alex G., SCOTT, Karen N., STEPHENS, Tim, United Kingdom, Oxford University Press, 2015. TZANAKOPOULOS, Antonios / METHYMAKI, Eleni, Another Brick in the Wall - Reflexivity of the Sources and the Enforcement of International Law: Domestic Courts as Sources and Enforcers, The Oxford Handbook on the Sources of International Law(s. 812-832), Ed. Samantha BESSON / Jean d’Aspremont, Oxford University Press, 2017 (Oxford Legal Studies Research Paper No. 13/2017) WANG, Kuan-Hsiung, The ROC’s Maritime Claims and Practices with Special Reference to the South China Sea, Maritime Issues in the South China Sea: Troubled Waters or A Sea of Opportunity içinde, Ed. Nien-Tsu Alfred Hu and Ted L. McDorman, New York, Routledge, (pp. 54-69), 2013. WU, Shicun, Competing Claims over the South China Sea Islands and the Way Forward: A Chinese Perspective on the Philippine-China Arbitration Case, Ed. Shicun Wu, Keyuan Zou, ‘Arbitration Concerning the South China Sea: Philippines versus China’, Routledge, 2016. WU, Shicun, Solving Disputes for Regional Cooperation and Development in the South China Sea: A Chinese Perspective, Chandos Asian Studies Series, Cambridge, Chandos Publishing, 2013. YE, Qiang , Does China’s Position Paper on the South China Sea Arbitration Constitute a Preliminary Objection?, Ed. Shicun Wu, Keyuan Zou, ‘Arbitration Concerning the South China Sea: Philippines versus China’, Routledge, 2016 ZOU, Keyuan, China’s Approach to UNCLOS and its Application to Disputed Issues in the South China Sea, “Law of the Sea: UNCLOS as a Living Treaty” içinde; Ed. BARRETT, Jill, BARNES, Richard, England, British Institute of International and Comparative Law, 2016. ZOU, Keyuan, LIU, Xinchang, The U-Shaped Line and Historic Rights in the Philippines v. China Arbitration, Ed. Shicun Wu, Keyuan Zou, ‘Arbitration Concerning the South China Sea: Philippines versus China’, Routledge, 2016. SÜRELİ YAYINLAR AKİPEK, Serap, Eritre-Yemen Hakem Kararı Işığında Kızıldeniz Adalarının Aidiyeti Sorunu, Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt 49 (1), (s. 1-30), 2000. BARCELO, John J. III, Who Decides the Arbitrators’ Jurisdiction? Seperability and Competence-Competence in Transnational Perspective, Vanderblit Journal of Transnational Law, Vol. 36 (4), Art. (2), 2003. BAYILLIOĞLU, Uğur, Güney Çin Denizi Tahkiminde Hakemlik Mahkemesi’nin İnsanlığın Ortak Mirası ve Diğer Devletlerin Deniz Alanlarına Sağladığı Koruma: Ada Statüsünün Sınırlanması, TBB Dergisi, 2017, Sayı 130 BAZANTH, Barbara, An Unresolved Question: Optional Declarations at the Intersection of Jura Novit Curia, Competence-Competence, and Non Ultra Petita, New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, Vol. 54 (3), (pp. 1053-1064), 2022. BESSON, Samantha, State Consent and Disagreement in International Law-Making, Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol. 29 (2), (pp. 289-316), 2016. BOWETT, Derek W., The Second United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 9 (3), p. 415-435, 2008. BURGESS, J. Peter, The Politics of the South China Sea: Territoriality and International Law’, Security Dialogue, Vol. 34, No. 1, 2003. CHARNEY, Jonathan, The Implications of Expanding International Dispute Settlement Systems: The 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea, Vol. 90 (1), p. 69-75, 1996 DAVENPORT, Tara, Island Building in the South China Sea: Legality and Limits, Asian Journal of International Law, 8 (01), (pp. 76-90), 2018 DUPUY, Florian, DUPUY, Pierre-Marie, A Legal Analysis of China’s Historic Rights Claim in the South China Sea, The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 107 (1), 2013, (pp. 124-141). EPSTEIN, Richard A., Consent, Not Power, as the Basis of Jurisdiction, The University of Chicago Legal Forum, Vol. 2001(1), Art. 2, (pp. 1-34), 2001. EVANS, Malcolm D., LOWE, Vaughan, The M/V Saiga: The First Case in the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 48 (1), p. 187-189, 1999. FAYETTE, Louis de La, ITLOS and the Saga of the Saiga: Peaceful Settlement of a Law of the Sea Dispute, The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, 15 (3), 2000, 355-392. FITZMAURICE, Gerald G., The Foundations of the Authority of International Law and the Problem of Enforcement, The Modern Law Review, Vol. 19 (1), 1956. GAO, Zhiguo, JIA, Bing Bing, The Nine-Dash Line in the South China Sea: History, Status, and Implications, The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 107 (1), 2013, (pp. 98- 124), GRAY, Christine, KINGSBURY, Benedict, Developments in Dispute Settlement: Inter-State Arbitration since 1945, The British Yearbook of International Law, Vol 63(1), p. 97-134, 1992. GUILFOYLE, Douglas, ‘Philippines v China: First Thoughts on the Award in the South China Seas Case’, European Journal of International Law(EJIL), Temmuz 2016. HAYTON, Bill, The Modern Origins of China’s South China Sea Claims: Maps, Misunderstandings, and the Maritime Geobody, Modern China, Vol. 45 (2), (pp.127-170), 2019. JACOVIDES, Andreas J., Peaceful Settlement of Disputes in Ocean Conflicts: Does UNCLOS III Point the Way?, Contemporary Issues in International Law, Essays in Honor of Louis B. Sohn, (Ed. Thomas BUERGENTHAL), (p. 165-169), 1984 VIII JOHNSON, D. H. N., The Anglo-Norwegian Fisheries Case, The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 1 (2), 1952, (pp. 145-180), KEYVAN, Özlem Z., Güney Çin Denizi’nde Tahkim: Çin-Filipinler Rekabeti, ANKASAM, 2017, Yıl 1, Sayı 3. LISTER, Matthew J., The Legitimating Role of Consent in International Law, Chicago Journal of International Law, Vol. 11(2), (pp. 663-691), 2010, University of Penn Law School Public Law Research Paper No: 10-22. MCDORMAN, Ted L., An International Law Perspective on Insular Features (Islands)and Low-tide Elevations in the South China Sea, The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Vol. 32, 2017. NGUYEN, D.M., Settlement of Disputes under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: The Case of the South China Sea Dispute, The University of Queensland Law Journal, Vol 25(1), 2006. NOYES, John E., The Common Heritage of Mankind: Past, Present and Future, USA, Denver Journal of International LAw and Policy, , 2011, Vol. 40(Article 24, s. 447-471) PAIK, Jin-Hyun, South China Sea Arbitral Awards: Main Findings and Assessment, Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law, Vol. 20(1), 2017, (pp. 367-407) PEKCAN, Cemre, Güney Çin Denizi Sorunu Çerçevesinde Çin-Hindistan İlişkileri, ÇOMÜ Uluslararası Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Yıl 1, Sayı 1, 2016. PEKCAN, Cemre, Uluslararası Hukuk Çerçevesinde Güney Çin Denizi Krizinin Değerlendirilmesi, Uluslararası Kriz ve Siyaset Araştırmaları Dergisi, Yıl 1, Sayı 3, Aralık 2017. PINOTTI, Talita, ‘China and Vietnam in the South China Sea: Disputes and Strategic Questions’, Brazilian Journal of Strategy & International Relations, Vol. 4, No. 8, July/December 2015. PURI, R., SAHGAL, A., The South China Sea Dispute: Implications for India, Indian Foreign Affairs Journal, Vol 6, No 4, 2011. SEVERINO, Rodolfo C., ASEAN and the South China Sea, Security Challenges, Vol. 6 (2), (pp. 37-47), 2010. THANG, Nguyen-Dang, THAO, Nguyen Hong, China’s Nine Dotted Lines in the South China Sea: The 2011 Exchange of Diplomatic Notes Between the Philippines and China, Ocean Development & International Law, Vol. 43(1), 2012, (pp. 35-56). TONNESSON, Stein, The South China Sea in the Age of European Decline, Modern Asian Studies, Vol 40 (1), (pp. 1-57), 2006. WATSON, J. Shand, State Consent and the Sources of International Obligation, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting: “The Jurisprudence of International Law: Classic and Modern Views”, American Society of International Law, Vol. 86, (pp. 108-113), 1992. YU, Mincai, China’s Responses to the Compulsory Arbitration on the South China Sea Dispute: Legal Effects and Policy Options, Ocean Development & International Law(2014), 45:1-16 ZHONG, Hui, WHITE, Michael, South China Sea: Its Importance for Shipping, Trade, Energy and Fisheries, Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy (2), 2017, p. 9-24 ULUSLARARASI ÖRGÜTLERE İLİŞKİN BELGELER International Law Commission, Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, Yearbook of International Law Commission, 2001, Vol. 2, Part 2, p. 26, para. 76. [A/CN.4/SER.A/2001/Add.1 (Part 2)] Second United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, Summary Records of Plenary Meetings of the Committee of the Whole (17 March – 26 April 1960), (A/CONF.19/C.1/L.10) Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, 182nd Meeting, 30 April 1982, Plenary Meetings, 11th Session, (A/CONF.62/SR.182) U.N. Doc. A/C.1/PV.1516 (November 1, 1967) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1833 UNTS 397, 21 ILM 1261 (1982) Yearbook of International Law Commission, 1236th meeting, 1973 vol. I, June 1973 Yearbook of International Law Commission, 1949, (A/CN.4/SR.7) (A/CN.4/SR.32) (A/CN.4/SR.118) (A/CN.4/SR.125) Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1958 Vol II (A/CN.4/SER.A/1958/Add.l). Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1965 Vol I (A/CN.4/SR. 1-330), Vol II (A/CN.4/SER.A/1956/Add.l) ULUSLARARASI YARGI KARARLARI ICJ Reports 1951, Fisheries Case, Judgement of December 18th, 1951, (United Kingdom v. Norway) ICJ Reports, Case Concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), Judgment of 26 February 2007 ICJ Reports, Case Concerning the Arbitral Award Made by the King of Spain on 23 December 1906 (Honduras v. Nicaragua), Judgment of 18 November 1960 ICJ Reports, Judgement of 24 February 1982, (Tunisia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya) ICJ Reports, Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Judgment of 27 June 1986 ITLOS Reports, M/V “SAIGA” (No. 2), (Saint Vincent and the Grenadines v. Guinea), Judgment of 1 July 1999. PCA, The Arctic Sunrise Arbitration, (Netherlands v. Russia), Award on the Merits, 14 August 2015. PCA, The Eritrea v. Yemen Arbitration, Phase I: Territorial Sovereignty and Scope of Dispute, 9 October 1998. PCA, The Eritrea v. Yemen Arbitration, The Second Stage: Maritime Delimitation, 17 December 1999. PCA, The Island of Palmas Case, (United States of America v. Netherlands), 4 April 1928. PCA, The South China Sea Arbitration ( The Republic of the Philippines v. The People’s Republic of China) , Judgment of 12 July 2016. PCA, The South China Sea Arbitration Award (Jurisdiction and Admissibility), 29 October 2015. RESMİ KAYNAKLAR ‘Final Act of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea’. (www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/final_act_eng.pdf) Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Economic Co-Operation Between ASEAN and the People’s Republic of China (https://asean.org/?static_post=framework-agreement-on-comprehensive-economic-co-operation-between-asean-and-the-people-s-republic-of-china-phnom-penh-4-november-2002-4) Memorial of the Philippines, Vol. I, 30 March 2014. (https://files.pca-cpa.org/pcadocs/Memorial%20of%20the%20Philippines%20Volume%20I.pdf) Model Rules on Arbitral Procedure, 1958, (https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/draft_articles/10_1_1958.pdf) PCA, Rules of Procedure, (https://pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/233). People’s Republic of China, Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf Act, 26 June 1998.(https://www.un.org/depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/chn_1998_eez_act.pdf) Position Paper of the Government of the People’s Republic of China on the Matter of Jurisdiction in the South China Sea Arbitration Initiated by the Republic of the Philippines, (https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/nanhai/eng/snhwtlcwj_1/t1368895.htm ) Statement of Ministry of Foreign Affairs, (https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/nanhai/eng/snhwtlcwj_1/t1379492.htm) Statue of the ICJ, 1945. (https://legal.un.org/avl/pdf/ha/sicj/icj_statute_e.pdf) The Philippines’ Supplemental Written Submissions, Vol. I, 16 March 2015. (https://files.pca-cpa.org/pcadocs/Supplemental%20Written%20Submission%20Volume%20I.pdf) Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Dışişleri Bakanlığı web sayfası, Uluslararası Kuruluşlar ve İlişkilerimiz başlığı altında; Daimi Hakemlik Mahkemesi. http://www.mfa.gov.tr/daimi-hakemlik-mahkemesi.tr.mfa.tr_TR
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11655/33923
dc.description.abstractThe South China Sea is a sea where interests often conflict, as it is a semi-enclosed sea and subject to sovereignty claims by more than one state. However, the scope of the disputes in the region became clearer in 2016 when the Philippines referred its maritime dispute with China to international dispute settlement for the first time. In terms of this dispute, which was only brought to arbitration by the Philippines, some elements put forward by China, such as historical rights, need to be discussed in order to see the perspective of international law on the delimitation of maritime areas. In addition to the legitimacy of China's claims regarding the South China Sea under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, it is essential to evaluate the place of the general acceptance of the consent of states in compulsory dispute settlement in this arbitration process. In the South China Sea arbitration, similar to many international judicial decisions, it is observed that the assessment of jurisdiction is made by the arbitral tribunal instinctively. Considering that the nature of each dispute will be diverse, various factors need to be taken into consideration in making this assessment. In the South China Sea arbitration, the evaluation of these factors is particularly relevant in terms of China's absence from the proceedings and the consent of the parties to compulsory dispute settlement.tr_TR
dc.language.isoturtr_TR
dc.publisherSosyal Bilimler Enstitüsütr_TR
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesstr_TR
dc.subjectGüney çin denizitr_TR
dc.subjectGüney çin denizi tahkimitr_TR
dc.subjectZorunlu uyuşmazlık çözümütr_TR
dc.subjectDaimi tahkim mahkemesitr_TR
dc.subject.lcshUluslararası hukuktr_TR
dc.titleGüney Çin Denizi Tahkimi’nin Zorunlu Uyuşmazlık Çözümü Bakımından Değerlendirilmesitr_TR
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesistr_TR
dc.description.ozetGüney Çin Denizi, yarı-kapalı bir deniz olması ve birden fazla devletin egemenlik iddialarına konu olması sebebiyle çıkarların sık sık çatıştığı bir denizdir. Ancak ilk defa 2016 yılında Çin ile aralarındaki deniz alanlarına ilişkin uyuşmazlığın Filipinler tarafından uluslararası uyuşmazlık çözümüne taşınması ile bölgedeki anlaşmazlıkların kapsamı daha açık bir biçimde anlaşılmıştır. Yalnızca Filipinler tarafından tahkim yoluna taşınan bu uyuşmazlık bakımından Çin’in öne sürdüğü özellikle tarihsel haklar gibi bazı unsurlar, uluslararası hukukun deniz alanlarının sınırlandırılmasına bakış açısını görebilmek adına tartışılmaya muhtaçtır. Çin’in Güney Çin Denizi’ne ilişkin iddialarının Birleşmiş Milletler Deniz Hukuku Sözleşmesi’ne göre geçerliliğinin bulunup bulunmamasının yanı sıra, esasen zorunlu uyuşmazlık çözümünde devletlerin rızasına ilişkin genel kabulün bu tahkim sürecindeki yerinin değerlendirilmesi önem taşımaktadır. Güney Çin Denizi tahkiminde de, pek çok uluslararası yargı kararındakine benzer şekilde, yargılama yetkisine ilişkin değerlendirmenin tahkim mahkemesi tarafından kendiliğinden yapıldığı görülmektedir. Bu değerlendirmenin yapılması bakımından, her uyuşmazlığın mahiyetinin farklı olacağı dikkate alındığında, çeşitli unsurların göz önünde bulundurulması gerekliliği ortaya çıkmaktadır. Güney Çin Denizi tahkiminde bu unsurların değerlendirilmesi, özellikle Çin’in yargılamadaki yokluğu ve zorunlu uyuşmazlık çözümüne ilişkin tarafların rızası bakımından söz konusu olmaktadır.tr_TR
dc.contributor.departmentKamu Hukukutr_TR
dc.embargo.termsAcik erisimtr_TR
dc.embargo.lift2023-08-16T08:50:40Z
dc.fundingYoktr_TR


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster