Geri Dön

Judicial review mechanisms in global administrative lawhow can international courts bring accountability to global governance?

Başlık çevirisi mevcut değil.

  1. Tez No: 770927
  2. Yazar: TAHA EMRE BAŞBAY
  3. Danışmanlar: PROF. DR. NİELS BLOKKER
  4. Tez Türü: Yüksek Lisans
  5. Konular: Hukuk, Law
  6. Anahtar Kelimeler: Belirtilmemiş.
  7. Yıl: 2022
  8. Dil: İngilizce
  9. Üniversite: Universiteit Leiden
  10. Enstitü: Yurtdışı Enstitü
  11. Ana Bilim Dalı: Belirtilmemiş.
  12. Bilim Dalı: Belirtilmemiş.
  13. Sayfa Sayısı: Belirtilmemiş.

Özet

In recent years, the classical international law perspective, which is based on inter-state relations, consent-based framework and sovereign equality of states, is being challenged by globalisation and global governance. The proliferation of global regulatory bodies and the increase in their areas of activities created pressure on the classical structure of international law. As a result of this process, today, the distinction between international law and domestic law is unclear, soft-law rules are commonly used, and most importantly, international law is considered less legitimate. Global Administrative Law (GAL) is one of the responses to this issue. GAL, as a concept, is based on the idea that global governance can be understood as an administration, and as it has been in domestic administrative law, administrative-law-like principles are emerging in global space, such as transparency, consultation, participation, reasoned decisions and review mechanisms. This thesis aims to analyse the judicial review mechanisms and their role in bringing accountability and legitimacy to global governance. Including the increasing activities of the international courts and tribunals, which attracts criticism and appraisals simultaneously, regional and national courts have also been actively involved with global affairs recently. While some arguing national authorities are wellsuited to review global regulatory bodies, others claim that the international courts are the better choice? However, even supporters of international courts cannot agree on mechanisms or procedures. Within this myriad of choices and approaches, in this study, it is suggested that the independent and impartial internal review mechanisms with compulsory jurisdiction and allowing private actors to refer this courts is the best way to achieve this goal

Özet (Çeviri)

Özet çevirisi mevcut değil.

Benzer Tezler

  1. Türkiye'de su hakkı

    The right to water in Turkey

    YILDIZ AKEL ÜNAL

    Doktora

    Türkçe

    Türkçe

    2021

    HukukGalatasaray Üniversitesi

    Kamu Hukuku Ana Bilim Dalı

    PROF. DR. ERDOĞAN BÜLBÜL

  2. Gümrük Birliği sürecinin Türk sermaye piyasasına etkileri

    The Effects of Customer Union course on Turkish capital market

    ÖNDER HALİSDEMİR

    Yüksek Lisans

    Türkçe

    Türkçe

    1997

    EkonomiMarmara Üniversitesi

    Sermaye Piyasası ve Borsa Ana Bilim Dalı

    PROF. DR. İLHAN ULUDAĞ

  3. Ceza muhakemesinde tutukluluğun denetimi

    Review of detention in criminal procedure

    CANSU TÜRKMEN

    Yüksek Lisans

    Türkçe

    Türkçe

    2021

    HukukGalatasaray Üniversitesi

    Kamu Hukuku Ana Bilim Dalı

    DOÇ. DR. PINAR MEMİŞ KARTAL

  4. Hannah Arendt'in haklara sahip olma hakkı ve mülteci krizi

    Hannah Arendt's right to have rights and the crisis of refugees

    IRMAK KEPENEK

    Yüksek Lisans

    Türkçe

    Türkçe

    2021

    HukukGalatasaray Üniversitesi

    Kamu Hukuku Ana Bilim Dalı

    DOÇ. DR. BİRDEN GÜNGÖREN BULGAN

  5. Kurumsal ve maddi boyutuyla Avrupa Birliğinde iyi yönetişim ilkeleri ve iyi idare hakkı

    Good governance principles and right to good administration in the European Union with its instutional and substantive dimension

    İSMAİL YEŞİL

    Doktora

    Türkçe

    Türkçe

    2023

    HukukAnkara Üniversitesi

    Avrupa Birliği ve Uluslararası Ekonomik İlişkiler Ana Bilim Dalı

    PROF. DR. İLKE GÖÇMEN