Legal Hukuk Dergisi, Year 2023 Issue 247 (TEMMUZ)

RETHINKING FREE MOVEMENT RIGHTS UNDER EU LAW: ARE THEY AS ‘FREE’ AS PROMISED?

Gözde KAYA — 2024-08-29

Abstract

The free movement of workers and the freedom of establishment as well as the freedom to provide services are considered as the core rights attached to the European Union (EU) Internal Market. The mobility rights of the economically active were formulated under the Founding Treaties at the outset of the integration project. Yet, recently still there exist numerous challenges and difficulties that stand before the effective exercise of these freedoms by the rights holders. This study seeks to analyse how these freedoms are formulated under primary and secondary sources of EU law under the light of rich case law of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and to question as well as to demonstrate the major obstacles that hinder the ‘free’ exercise of these freedoms in practice.

ICC’S JURISDICTION AND PUTIN’S INDIVIDUAL CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY REGARDING THE RUSSIAN-UKRAINIAN WAR

Derya Nur KAYACAN — 2024-08-29

On 24 February 2022, Russia launched an invasion of Ukraine, intensifying the ongoing conflict that actually began in 2014. The situation has since had devastating impact on the protection of human rights. Reports from Ukraine indicate the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Ukraine has been active in the international scene by involving international human rights organizations and applying to international courts, including the International Criminal Court (ICC), to hold Russia accountable for its aggression. While neither Ukraine nor Russia is party to the Rome Statute, Ukraine has accepted the ICC’s jurisdiction by making two declarations. This brings the question of whether Vladimir Putin, the head of State and Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, can be held individually accountable for alleged crimes committed on Ukrainian territory.

Analysis of the Recent Amendments in the Act on the Regulation of Electronic Commerce with the Law No. 7214 in terms of Competition Policy II: Rules Aimed at Controlling Monopolization

Kerem Cem Sanlı — 2024-08-29

Today, it is accepted that certain economic qualities of the markets in which digital platforms operate, results in economic concentration, and the competition law enforcement, it is thought, might not be sufficient to solve this problem. For this reason, ex-ante regulation of digital platforms has been put forward as a solution of this problem. Accordingly, new regulations are come into effect or are being introduced in various legal systems, e.g., the European Union law. It can be thought that the amendment made in Law No. 6563 is an extension of this global trend. Indeed, the preamble explicitly states that the main purpose of the new obligations that are targeted to platforms is to ensure competition. The structure of the Law, threshold system, also seems to be compatible with this foresight at first glance. Platforms are subjected to certain obligations provided their transaction value exceeds relevant monetary thresholds. Data usage restrictions, discount and advertising budget limitations, data access obligation, data portability obligation and most favored customer provision prohibition are some of the obligations set out in the Act. However, when the provisions of the Law are examined in detail, the Amendment is not necessarily compatible with the purpose of protecting competition, and there are provisions that are difficult to explain in terms of sound legal policy. The main problem is the monetary threshold system stipulated in the Law. The level of monetary thresholds, the obligations associated with them, and the existence of three thresholds cannot be fully explained by monopoly control. Apart from this, there are some obligations that are difficult to serve to the aim of fostering competition in digital markets. For example, discount and advertising budget limitations and license fee obligations are the foremost examples that come to mind. Apart from this, the prohibition of the platform's brand from being sold in the marketplace is another problematic rule. As a matter of fact, these obligations and prohibitions have no equivalent in comparative law. In this article, we will seek to explain the obligations regarding controlling economic concentration and try to find out their implications in terms of competition policy.

ARMED UKRAINIAN CITIZENS: THE PRINCIPLE OF DISTINCTION AND THE MAIN PURPOSE OF THE RULES OF ARMED CONFLICT

PERÇEM ARMANNABİ BERKUT — 2024-08-29

The main basis of the law of armed conflict is the principle of distinction. This principle obliges parties to a conflict to distinguish between civilians and combatants and civilian property and military targets when making target-setting decisions. The media states that Ukraine's resistance forces consist of civilian volunteers. Various terms are used for these groups and individuals, such as paramilitary groups, militants, militia, resistance fighters. These terms used have different definitions and threshold criteria in international law of armed conflict. Therefore, while we encounter difficulties in identifying relevant groups, the different characterizations of these groups raise important legal questions.