SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Public and Private International Law Bulletin / 2023 / Cilt: 43 Sayı: 1

Questioning the Legality and Effectiveness of Economic Sanctions in International Law

Uluslararası Hukukta Ekonomik Yaptırımların Hukuka Uygunluğu ve Etkinliği Sorunu

Ali Cenk Keskin(GALATASARAY ÜNİVERSİTESİ, HUKUK FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0002-9716-6845
Pages
139–176
Publication Date
2023-07-19
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The legal regime of effective economic sanctions that directly aim for results is currently taking shape against the perpetrators of unlawful behavior.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The international community is organized horizontally.
📊
Key Findings & Data:An increase has been observed in cooperation particularly with the increase of interdependencies due to globalization.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The legal regime of effective economic sanctions that directly aim for results is currently taking shape against the perpetrators of unlawful behavior.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Uluslararası Hukuk · Ekonomik Yaptırımlar · Uluslararası Sorumluluk

Abstract

The international community is organized horizontally. There is no hierarchically superior institution in the relations prescribed among equals, and rules are formed in the direction of common interests; thus, the legal order pertaining to the international community differs from classical municipal legal orders. Effective compliance with rules is ensured in proportion to the parallels of mutual interests in the international order. An increase has been observed in cooperation particularly with the increase of interdependencies due to globalization. Violating the rules of international law creates a responsibility for that state. Individual and collective means of enforcing a state to comply with international rules are observed to exist. However, despite any warning to comply with international law, some actors in this community continue to be in violation and insist on exhibiting illegal behaviors. Economic sanctions and countermeasures applied on the basis of erga omnes obligations do not yet grant the same rights as an injured state to third-party states that have not been directly harmed by an unlawful act. However, developments in the Russia-Ukraine war have brought forth a new perspective to international law. Economic sanctions have become increasingly popular as a form of sanction and within themselves also possess a rich variety. Some of these diverse sanctions are not as effective as was assumed and also lack legal support. Some economic sanctions with a long prior history have been observed to result in harsher outcomes than the use of force based on their effects and to also affect a largely innocent population instead of the perpetrators of the violations. The legal regime of effective economic sanctions that directly aim for results is currently taking shape against the perpetrators of unlawful behavior.

Özet

Bilindiği üzere uluslararası toplum yatay olarak organize olmuştur. Eşitler arasında düzenlenen ilişkilerde hiyerarşik bakımdan üstün bir kurum olmaması, kuralların ortak menfaatler doğrultusunda şekilleniyor olması bu hukuk düzenini klasik ulusal hukuk düzenlerinden ayırmaktadır. Bu durumun bir sonucu olarak uluslararası düzende karşılıklı menfaatlerin paralelliği oranında kurallara riayet etkin olarak sağlanmaktadır. Özellikle küreselleşmenin getirisi olarak karşılıklı bağımlılıkların artmasıyla iş birlikteliklerinde de bir yoğunlaşma gözlenmektedir. Milletlerarası hukuk kuralların ihlali ise söz konusu devletin sorumluluğunu doğurmaktadır. Uyarılara rağmen ihlale devam eden, aykırı tutumunda ısrar eden devleti uluslararası hukuka uymaya zorlayan ferdi ya da kolektif yollar bulunmaktadır. Erga omnes yükümlükler temel alınarak uygulanan ekonomik yaptırımlar ve karşı önlemler, hukuka aykırı fiilden doğrudan zarar görmeyen üçüncü taraf devletlere, zarar gören devletle aynı hakları henüz tanımamaktadır. Ancak Ukrayna-Rusya savaşında yaşanan gelişmeler uluslararası hukuka özellikle ekonomik yaptırımlar bakımından yeni bir perspektif getirmektedir. Farklı yaptırımlar arasında gittikçe daha fazla rağbet gören ekonomik yaptırımlar kendi içinde zengin bir çeşitliliğe sahiptir. Bu çeşitlilik içinde bazı yaptırımlar zannedildiği kadar etkin olmadıkları gibi hukuki destekten de yoksundur. Geçmişi çok eskilere dayanan bazı ekonomik yaptırımların ise etkileri bakımından kuvvet kullanılmasından daha da vahim sonuçlar doğurduğu, doğrudan sorumluları değil suçsuz geniş halk kitlelerini etkilediği tespit edilmektedir. Dolaylı yoldan sonuç hedeflemektense, doğrudan hukuka aykırı davranışın faillerine yönelik etkin ekonomik yaptırımlar ve bunların hukuki rejimi günümüz gelişmeleriyle yeniden şekillenmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Keskin, A. C., *, A. C. K. (2023). Questioning the Legality and Effectiveness of Economic Sanctions in International Law. Public and Private International Law Bulletin, Cilt: 43 Sayı: 1, 139–176. https://doi.org/10.26650/ppil.2023.43.1.1179962

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (105)

  1. Kitaplar ve Kitap Bölümleri/ Books and Book Chapters google scholar
  2. Cassese A, International Law (2nd edn, OUP 2005) google scholar
  3. Charron A, ‘Sanctions and Africa: United Nations and Regional Responses’ in Boulden J (ed), Responding to Conflict in Africa: The United Nations and Regional Organizations (Palgrave 2013) 77-98 google scholar
  4. Dupont PE, ‘Human rights implications of sanctions’ in Masahiko Asada (ed) Economic Sanctions in International Law and Practice (Routledge 2020) 39-61 google scholar
  5. Giumelli F, ‘Implementation of sanctions: European Union’ in Asada M (ed), Economic Sanctions in International Law and Practice (Routledge 2020) 116-135 google scholar
  6. Gordon R, Smyth M and Cornell T, Sanctions Law (Hart 2018) google scholar
  7. Hayashi M, ‘Russia: The Crimea Question and autonomous sanctions’ in Masahiko Asada (ed), Economic Sanctions in International Law and Practice (Routledge 2019) 223-243 google scholar
  8. Keskin AC, Avrupa Birliği Temel Kurum ve Değerleri (On İki Levha 2019) google scholar
  9. Lowenfeld A, International Economic Law (OUP 2002) google scholar
  10. Milaninia N, ‘Jus ad bellum economicum and jus in bello economico: The Limits of Economic Sanctions Under the Paradigm of International Humanitarian Law’ in Ali Z Marossi and Marisa R Bassett (eds),
  11. Economic Sanctions Under International Law (TMC Asser and Springer 2015) 95-124 google scholar
  12. Ruys T, ‘Sanctions, Retorsions and Countermeasures: Concept and International Legal Framework’ in van den Herik L (ed), Research Handbook on UN Sanction and International Law (Elgar 2017) google scholar
  13. Shaw M, International Law (6th edn, Cambridge 2008) google scholar
  14. White ND and Abass A, ‘Countermeasures and Sanctions in International Law’ in Malcolm Evans (ed) International Law (OUP 2018) 521-547 google scholar
  15. Makaleler/Articles google scholar
  16. Ahn DP, ‘Economic Sanctions: Past, Present and Future’ (2019) 20 Georgetown Journal of International Affairs 126-132 google scholar
  17. Carter BE and Farha R, ‘Overview and Operation of U.S. Financial Sanctions, Including the Example of Iran’ (2013) 44 Georgetown Journal of International Law 903-913 google scholar
  18. Chacko E, ‘Due Process Is in the Details: U.S. Targeted Economic Sanctions and International Human Rights Law’ (2019) 113 AJIL Unbound 157-162 google scholar
  19. Gordon J, ‘The Invisibility of Human Harm: How Smart Sanctions Consumed All the Oxygen in the Room’ (2015) 82(4) Social Research 863-874 google scholar
  20. Gutmann J, Neuenkirch M, Neumeier F and Steinbach A, ‘Economic sanctions and human rights: Quantifying the legal proportionality principle’ (2018) 2/18 Research Papers in Economics, Universität Trier google scholar
  21. Hofer A, ‘The Developed/Developing Divide on Unilateral Coercive Measures: Legitimate Enforcement or Illegitimate Intervention?’ (2017) 16(2) Chinese Journal of International Law 175-214 google scholar
  22. Hovell D, ‘Unfinished business of international law: The questionable legality of autonomous sanctions’ (2019) 113 AJIL Unbound 140-145 google scholar
  23. Ilieva J, Aleksandar Dashtevski, and Filip Kokotovic, ‘Economic Sanctions in International Law’ (2018) 9(2) UTMS Journal of Economics 201-211 google scholar
  24. Kirilakha A, Felbermayr G, Syropulos C, Yalcin E and Yotov Y, ‘The Global Sanctions Data Base: An Update that Includes the Years of the Trump Presidency’ (2021) 10 School of Economics Working Paper Series
  25. LeBow College of Business, Drexel University Erişim Tarihi 10 Aralık 2022 google scholar
  26. Lopez GA, ‘In defence of Smart Sanctions: A Response to Joy Gordon’ (2012) 26(1) Ethics & International Affairs 135-146 google scholar
  27. Mack A and Khan A, ‘Efficacy of UN sanctions’ (2000) 31(3) Security Dialogue 279-292 google scholar
  28. Martin C, ‘Economic sanctions under international law: A Guide for Canadian Policy’, Rideau Institute on International Affairs and the Human Rights Research and Education Centre, University of Ottawa Research Report (2021), Erişim Tarihi 10 Aralık 2022 google scholar
  29. Meissner K, ‘How to sanction international wrongdoing? The design of EU restrictive measures.’ [2022] Review of International Organizations Erişim Tarihi 12 Mayıs 2022 google scholar
  30. Özdamar Ö and Shahin E, ‘Consequences of Economic Sanctions: State of the Art and Paths Forward’ (2021) 23 International Studies Review 1646-1671 google scholar
  31. Pape RA, ‘Why economic sanctions do not work’ (1997) 22(2) International Security 90-136 google scholar
  32. , ‘Why economic sanctions still do not work’ (1998) 23(1) International Security 66-77 google scholar
  33. Peksen D and Drury AC, ‘Economic Sanctions and Political Repression: Assessing the Impact of Coercive Diplomacy on Political Freedoms’ (2019) 10(3) Human Rights Review 393-411 google scholar
  34. , ‘Coercive or Corrosive: The Negative Impact of Economic Sanctions on Democracy’ (2010) 36(3) International Interactions 240-264 google scholar
  35. Peksen D, ‘Economic Sanctions and Human Security: The Public Health Effect of Economic Sanctions’ 7(3) Foreign Policy Analysis 237-251 google scholar
  36. , ‘Economic Sanctions and Official Ethnic Discrimination in Target Countries, 1950-2003’ (2016) 27(4) Defence and Peace Economics 480-502 google scholar
  37. , ‘How Do Target Leaders Survive Economic Sanctions? The Adverse Effect of Sanctions on Private Property and Wealth’ (2016) 13(1) Foreign Policy Analysis 215-232 google scholar
  38. Peksen D, Peterson TM and A. Drury AC, ‘Media-Driven Humanitarianism? News Media Coverage of Human Rights Abuses and the Use of Economic Sanctions’ (2014) 58(4) International Studies Quarterly, 855-866 google scholar
  39. Pirim CZ, ‘Uluslararası Sorumluluk Hukukunda Devletlerin Ağırlaştırılmış Sorumluluğu: Kuramsal Bir Değerlendirme’ [2012] Public and Private International Law Bulletin 147-182 google scholar
  40. Reisman WM and Stevick DL, ‘The Applicability of International Law Standards to United Nations Economic Sanctions Programmes’ (1998) 9(1) EJIL 86-141 google scholar
  41. Schmidt J, ‘The Legality of Unilateral Extra-Territorial Sanctions under International Law’ (2022) 27(1) Journal of Conflict and Security Law 53-81 google scholar
  42. Şimşek GE, ‘Uluslararası Hukuk Açısından Ekonomik Yaptırımlar ve ABD’nin Tek Taraflı Yaptırımlarının Kısa Bir Değerlendirilmesi’ (2020) 78/4 İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası 2049-2078 erişim 23 Mart 2023 google scholar
  43. Tzanakopoulos A, ‘The Right to Be Free from Economic Coercion’, Oxford Legal Studies Research Paper (41/2015) google scholar
  44. İnternet Kaynakları/Online Resources google scholar
  45. ‘European External Action Service’ Erişim Tarihi 10 Aralık 2022 google scholar
  46. European Union, ‘EU Priorities 2019-2024’ (2019) Erişim Tarihi 13 Ağustos 2022 google scholar
  47. Frost L, ‘Primer: Sanctions on Russia and Their Implications’ (IFLR, 22 March 2022) Erişim Tarihi 11 Aralık 2022 google scholar
  48. Garfield G, ‘Morbidity and Mortality Among Iraqi Children from 1990 to 1998: Assessing the Impact of the Golf War and Economic Sanctions’ (2019) Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies, University of Notre
  49. Dame, Erişim Tarihi 8 Aralık 2022 google scholar
  50. Ongena S, Pestova A and Mamonov M, ‘The price of war: Macroeconomic effects of the 2022 sanctions on Russia’ (VoxEU & CEPR, 15 April 2022) Erişim Tarihi 11 Aralık 2022 google scholar
  51. Pekşen D, ‘Socio-Economic and Political Consequences of Economic Sanctions for Target and Third-Party Countries’ Erişim Tarihi 11 Aralık 2022 google scholar
  52. ‘Russia Faces ‘Reverse Industrialization’ in Sanction Squeeze’ (Bloomberg, 22 April 2022) www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-22/russia-faces-reverse-industrialization-in-sanctions-squeeze> Erişim Tarihi 11 Aralık 2022 google scholar
  53. UN Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs, ‘United Nations Security Council Sanctions Regimes’ (2022) Erişim Tarihi 11 Aralık 2022 google scholar
  54. ‘UN Sanctions’ (Security Council Report, 25 November 2013) Erişim Tarihi 8 Ağustos 2022 google scholar
  55. UN Security Council (UNSC), ‘Sanctions’. Erişim Tarihi 19 Ağustos 2022 google scholar
  56. US Department of Treasury, ‘U.S. Treasury Announces Unprecedented & Expansive Sanctions Against Russia, Imposing Swift and Severe Economic Costs’ Erişim Tarihi 11 Aralık 2022 google scholar
  57. von der Leyen U, ‘Speech by President von der Leyen at the EP Plenary on the social and economic consequences for the EU of the Russian war in Ukraine - reinforcing the EU’s capacity to act’ (European Commission Press Corner, 4 May 2022) Erişim Tarihi 11 Mayıs 2022 google scholar
  58. Uluslararası Andlaşmalar/ International Treaties google scholar
  59. Birleşmiş Milletler Andlaşması RG 6902/24.08.1945 (24 Ağustos 1945) google scholar
  60. Charter of the Organization of American States (Date of Conclusion 30 April 1948) 119 UNTS 3 google scholar
  61. Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union [2012] OJ C326/47 google scholar
  62. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Date of Signature 9 December 1948) 78 UNTS 277 google scholar
  63. General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (Date of Signature 30 October 1947) 55 UNTS 194 google scholar
  64. Havana Charter for an International Trade Organisation (24 March 1948) UN Doc E/C.2/78 google scholar
  65. Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community [2007] OJ C306/01 google scholar
  66. European Convention on Human Rights (Date of Conclusion 04 November 1950) 213 UNTS 221 google scholar
  67. Uluslararası Örgüt Metinleri/ International Organization Texts google scholar
  68. BM google scholar
  69. ‘Draft articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Text adopted by the International Law Commission at its fifty-third session’ (2001) 2(2) YILC google scholar
  70. International Law Commission, ‘Summary records of the second session’ [1950] 1 YILC 130-150 google scholar
  71. OHCHR, ‘Analytical study focusing on gender-based and sexual violence in relation to transitional justice’ UN Doc A/HRC/27/21 google scholar
  72. UN Doc A/RES/ES-11/1 google scholar
  73. UN Human Rights Council Rep 37/21 (2018) google scholar
  74. UN Human Rights Council, ‘Situation of Human Rights in Cuba’ (27 January 2007), UN Doc A/ HRC/4/12 google scholar
  75. UN Secretary General, ‘Annual Report on the work of the Organisation’ (1998) UN Doc A/53/1 google scholar
  76. UNCHR, ‘Report of the Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights’ (2018) UN Doc A/73/175 google scholar
  77. UNHRC Rep ‘Report of the Human Rights Council on its thirtieth session’ UN Doc A/HRC/30/2 google scholar
  78. UNHRC Rep ‘Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review’ (2017) UN Doc A/ HRC/36/10 google scholar
  79. UNHRC ‘Human Rights and Unilateral Coercive Measures’ (2018) UN Doc A/HRC/RES/37/21 google scholar
  80. UNGA Res 36/103 (9 December 1981) UN Doc A/RES/36/103 google scholar
  81. UNGA ‘Human rights and unilateral coercive measures’ (18 January 2019) UN Doc A/RES/73/167 google scholar
  82. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, UNGA Res 217 A(III) (10 December 1948) google scholar
  83. UNSC Res 1267 (15 Oct 1999) UN Doc S/RES/1267 google scholar
  84. UNSC Res 1333 (19 Dec 2000) UN Doc S/RES/1333 google scholar
  85. UNSC Res 1390 (16 Jan 2002) UN Doc S/RES/1390 google scholar
  86. UNSC Res 1718 (14 Oct 2006) UN Doc S/RES/1718 google scholar
  87. DTÖ/GATT google scholar
  88. United States Exports Restrictions (Czechoslovakia) (8 June 1949) BISD II/28 google scholar
  89. Yargı Kararları/ Judgments google scholar
  90. ABD Mahkemeleri google scholar
  91. Al Haramain Islamic Found Inc v US Dep’t of Treasury, 686 F 3d 965 (9th Cir 2012) google scholar
  92. Kadi v Geithner, 42 F Supp 3d 1 (DDC 2012) 6-7, 11-13, 29 google scholar
  93. Kindhearts v Geithner, 647 F Supp 2d 857 (ND Ohio 2009). google scholar
  94. Avrupa Birliği Adalet Divanı google scholar
  95. Joined Cases C-584/10 P, C-593/10 P and C-595/10 P Commission and United Kingdom v Kadi [2013] Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 18 July 2013 google scholar
  96. Joined Cases C-584/10 P, C-593/10 P, and C-595/10 P European Commission and the Council of the European Union v Yassin Abdullah Kadi [2013] google scholar
  97. Joined Cases C-402/05 P and C-415/05 Yassin Abdullah Kadi and Al Barakaat International Foundation v Council of the European Union and Commission of the European Communities [2008] ECR I-06351 google scholar
  98. Case T-85/09 Yassin Abdullah Kadi v European Commission [2010] ECHR II-05177 google scholar
  99. Uluslararası Adalet Divanı google scholar
  100. Allegations of Genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Ukraine v. Russia) (Order) 7 March 2022, Erişim Tarihi 9 Aralık 2022 google scholar
  101. Alleged Violations of the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America) (Order) [2018] ICJ Rep 623 google scholar
  102. Application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Qatar v. United Arab Emirates) (Merits) [2021] ICJ Rep 71 google scholar
  103. The Case of the S.S. “Lotus” (France v Turkey) PCIJ Rep Ser A No 10 google scholar
  104. Yasa Metinleri/ Law Texts google scholar
  105. Public Law 115-44 (2 August 2017). 31 USC 5326 google scholar