Suchergebnisse

The aim of this study is the reconsideration of Turkey's geographical limitation to the 1951 Geneva Convention.Turkey has signed the 1951 Geneva Convention for the Status of Refugees, by making use of its right to sign the Convention with 'the geographical limitation' due to its unique geographical position. Turkey has declared that it will not grant 'refugee status' to those coming from outside of Europe albeit hosting millions of migrants under 'guest' status for humanitarian reasons. The lifting of the geographical limitation of the 1951 Geneva Convention has been brought to the negotiation table during Turkey's still ongoing attempt to become a member to the European Union. Discussions on the legal status of the Syrians in Turkey during the Syrian Civil War, which started in 2011 and continues in 2017, as a result of the 'open door policy' followed by Turkey, are frequently debated in the EU negotiations regarding the geographical limitation annotated in the Geneva Convention. In the scope of the study, asylum policy of Turkey and geographical limitation are discussed again in the last point reached. Key Words geographical limitation, refugee, asylum seeker, temprorary protection, Syrian asylum seekers, EU Common Immigration and Asylum Policy, 1951 Geneva Convention, Readmission Agreement ; TABLE OF CONTENTS ACCEPTANCE AND APPROVAL i DECLARATION ii PUBLISHING AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS.iii ETHICAL STATEMENT iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v ABSTRACT vi ÖZET. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS….………………………………….viii ABBREVIATIONS .……………………………………………….xi TABLES.……………………………………………….xiii FIGURES .…………………………………………………….xiv INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER 1: INTERNATIONAL REGULATIONS IN ASYLUM AND IMMIGRATION LAW.8 1.1.INITIAL REGULATIONS ABOUT THE REFUGEE RIGHTS DURING INTERWAR PERIOD 8 1.2.POST SECOND WORLD WAR ERA: PROTECTING REFUGEE RIGHTS, GENEVA CONVENTION AND OTHER LEGAL REGULATIONS. 15 1.3.CONCLUSION 25 CHAPTER 2: ESTABLISHMENT AND DEVELOPMENT OF EUROPEAN UNION COMMON ASYLUM AND MIGRATION POLICIES .27 2.1.WHY MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION NEEDED A COMMON MIGRATION AND ASYLUM POLICY? 28 2.2.SINGLE EUROPEAN ACT (1985), SCHENGEN AGREEMENT (1985) AND SCHENGEN CONVENTION (1990) 33 2.3.IRREGULAR MIGRATION: AS A SECURITY THREATENING ISSUE (1990-1999) 40 2.4.INCREASING SECURITY IN THE BORDERS OF EU AND FRONTEX .50 2.5.IMMIGRATION AS A SECURITY ISSUE: LIBERAL AND REALIST PARADIGMS TO THE CASE OF MIGRATION 55 2.6.CONCLUSION 66 CHAPTER 3: TURKEY'S LEGISLATIVE REGULATIONS ON MIGRATION AND ASYLUM AND THE DEBATE REGARDING THE LIFTING OF THE GEOGRAPHICAL LIMITATION APPLIED BY THE 1951 GENEVA CONVENTION 69 3.1.TURKEY'S MIGRATION HISTORY 75 3.1.1.Turkey as an Emigrant Country 75 3.1.2.Turkey as an Migrant Receiving and Transit Country 79 3.1.3.Encountering Different Immigrant Societies: Iranian and Iraqi Immigrants (1970-1990).82 3.2.LEGAL REGULATIONS IN THE MIGRATION LEGISLATION OF TURKEY AND THE EUROPEAN UNION MEMBERSHIP NEGOTIATIONS PROCESS 88 3.2.1.The First Legal Arrangement in Legislation: The 1994 Regulation 88 3.3.EUROPEAN UNION MEMBERSHIP NEGOTIATIONS PROCESS: FIRST PROGRESS REPORT AND ASYLUM AND MIGRATION NATIONAL ACTION PLAN INTERIM PERIOD (1998-2005) 91 3.3.1.A Brief History of Turkey-EU Relations 92 3.3.2.First Progress Report and Asylum and Migration National Action Plan Interim (1998-2005) 95 3.3.3.Period Between Asylum and Immigration National Action Plan-Signing of Readmission Agreement (2005-2012) 102 3.3.4.Target Country for Different Migrant Groups: Turkey 109 3.4.TURKEY-EU READMISSION AGREEMENT AND CRISIS OF SYRIANS IN THE TEMPORARY PROTECTION STATUS 116 3.4.1.Law No. 6458 on Foreigners and International Protection 117 3.4.2.Turkey-EU Visa Liberalisation Process and Readmission Agreement .119 3.4.3.Crisis of Syrians under Temporary Protection Status and Latest Discussions Related to Lifting of Geographical Limitation 126 3.4.4.Changing Political Conditions (2015-2016) 129 3.4.5.Paris Attack and Return to Fortress Europe Policies 132 3.4.6.Migration Wave of 9 February 2016 and Safe Country-Safe Third Country Discussions 135 3.4.7.Is the Geographic Limitation Attached by Turkey in 1951 Geneva Convention Still Valid? 138 CONCLUSION .…143 BIBLIOGRAPHY .147 APPENDIX 1: ORIGINALITY REPORTS……….…………….177 APPENDIX 2: ETHICS BOARD WAIVER FORMS FOR THESIS WORK.179 ; Çalışmanın amacı 1951 Cenevre Konvansiyonu'na koyulan coğrafi çekincenin yeniden tartışılmasıdır. Türkiye, Mültecilerin Hukuki Durumuna İlişkin 1951 Cenevre Konvansiyonu'nu, bulunduğu coğrafya sebebiyle Konvansiyon'da tanınan 'coğrafi çekince' koyma hakkını kullanarak imzalamıştır. Türkiye, Konvansiyona coğrafi çekince koyarak Avrupa kıtası dışından gelen göçmenleri 'mülteci' statüsü ile kabul etmeyeceğini beyan etmiş ancak insani nedenlerle milyonlarca göçmeni 'misafir' statüsünde sınırları içerisine kabul etmiştir. 1951 Cenevre Konvansiyonu'na koyulan coğrafi çekincenin kaldırılması Türkiye'nin Avrupa Birliği müzakereleri süresince gündem maddesi olmuştur. 2011 yılında başlayan ve 2017 yılı itibariyle devam eden Suriye İç Savaşı ile birlikte Türkiye'nin izlediği 'açık kapı politikası' neticesinde sınırlarından giren Suriyelilerin Türkiye'de bulundukları süre içerisindeki yasal statüleriyle ilgili tartışmalar, Cenevre Konvansiyonu'na koyulan coğrafi çekinceyi AB müzakerelerinde sıklıkla tartışılan bir konu haline getirmiştir. Çalışma kapsamında, gelinen son noktada Türkiye'nin göç ve sığınma politikası ve coğrafi çekince maddesi yeniden ele alınmıştır. Anahtar Sözcükler coğrafi çekince, mülteci, sığınmacı, geçici koruma, Suriyeli sığınmacılar, AB Ortak Göç ve İltica Politikası, Türkiye'nin Sığınma Politikası,1951 Cenevre Konvansiyonu, Geri Kabul Anlaşma