The evolution of direct effect doctrine in the framework of notion of `right`, the direct effect doctrine: Sword or shield?

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı kırk yılı aşkın bir süredir Avrupa'da tartışma konusu olan doğrudan etki doktrininin analiz edilmesidir. Doktrinin temel ilkeleri ve ön koşulları Van Gend en Loos adlı davada belirlenmiştir. Avrupa Adalet Divanı bu davada verdiği kararla Topluluk Hukukunun doğrudan etkisini kâbul etmiş ve AB vatandaşlarına haklar verdiğini belirlemiştir. Bireyler söz konusu haklara dayanarak ulusal mahkemeler önünde haklarını savunabilirler. Doğrudan etki doktrininin üzerinde fikir birliğine varılmış bir tanımlaması yoktur. `Hak' kavramının doğrudan etkinin varlığı için bir ön koşul olup olmadığı hâlâ bir tartışma konusudur. Kimileri doğrudan etkinin olabilmesi için AB hükümlerinin bireylere `hak' vermesinin bir ön koşul olduğunu savunurken, diğerleri bunun gerekli olmadığını Van Gend en Loos'ta belirlenen kriterlerin gerçekleşmesinin doğrudan etkinin kâbulu için yeterli olacağını savunmaktadırlar. Bu tartışma sübjektif doğrudan etki ve objektif doğrudan etki ayrımını da beraberinde getirmiştir.

The aim of this paper is to analyse the doctrine of direct effect, which have been a subject of debate and controversy for more than four decades, still preoccupies European minds. As is well known, the ECJ set out the main principles of doctrine through the Van Gend en Loos case. In this significant case, the Court held Community law directly effective and thus creating rights for individuals that are enforceable before national courts. The existence of direct effect, which affects both the member-states and their citizens, resulted in remarkable changes in the evolution of the Community law. Not only the meaning of direct effect doctrine but also to determine whether provisions of a Community directive are capable of producing direct effect, if so to what extent is a question that results in severe discussions among the scholars for a long period of time. In addition to those complexities, different perceptions of the member-states have led to conceptual confusions. The question whether the existence of individual rights has something to do with the conditions of direct effect is one other issue that has been the focus of discussions among different point of views. This debate results in the separation between `subjective? direct effect and `objective? direct effect. Such a study will be useful in analysing the distinction between `subjective? direct effect and `objective? direct effect; and to understand the logical background of this distinction. In other words, how this distinction reflected in different articles? This study also seeks to investigate whether the existence of individual rights is a precondition for a directive to be capable of direct effect. Another crucial question that has to be evaluated is whether the existence of direct effect doctrine, which is diluted by the different perceptions, is an obstacle to the development of Community law.