A Comparative Constitutional Judicial Review on Violence Against Women
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33831/jws.v25i2.510Keywords:
comparative constitutional jurisprudence, violence against women, judicial dialogue, non-discrimination, positive obligations of the stateAbstract
Combating violence against women stands as one of the most critical social objectives of the 21st century. The United Nations highlights this issue through various instruments, particularly the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). This study examines the treatment of violence against women as a violation of human rights by supranational judicial oversight mechanisms, with a focus on the framework of judicial dialogue. Supranational oversight mechanisms, when addressing cases of violence against women, interpret norms of a similar nature in a consistent manner by
engaging in judicial dialogue with one another. Through this interaction, universal standards for monitoring and addressing such violations are developed. These standards, in turn, influence subsequent national and supranational legal frameworks. Key decisions such as the European Court of Human Rights’ Opuz v. Turkey, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights’ Cotton Field Decision, and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights’ Lenahan Report underscore that violence against women constitutes a gender-based human rights violation and affirm the positive obligations of states in this context. This study demonstrates that the interactions and judicial dialogue established between supranational judicial bodies have a transformative impact on the protection of human rights globally.
References
Acar, F. (2014). CEDAW’dan İstanbul Sözleşmesi’ne: Kadınların İnsan Hakları ve Kadınlara Karşı Şiddete İlişkin Uluslararası Standartların Evrimi, Kadına Yönelik Şiddet ve Ev-İçi Şiddet. (Ed: Kaya, F./ Özdemir, N./ Uygur, G.). Ankara: Savaş.
Conference Report (2021). Gender Equality and the Istanbul Convention: a decade of action. Berlin: Council of Europe.
Di Razza, N. & Sherman, J. (2020). Integrating Human Rights into the Operational Readiness of UN Peacekeepers. International Peace Ins-titute.
Fukuyama, F. (2018). Identity: The Demand for Dignity and the Politics of Resentment. Farrar, Straus and Giroux Publishing.
Huntington, S. P. (2010). Üçüncü Dalga: Geç 20. Yüzyılda Demokratikleşme. (Çev. Ergun Özbudun). Ankara: Yetkin.
Jackson, V. C. (2004). Constitutional Dialogue and Human Dignity: States and Transnational Constitutional Discourse. Montana Law Review, 65(1), ss. 15-40.
Karan, U. (2013). Eşitlik İlkesi ve Ayrımcılık Yasağı. İnsan Hakları Avrupa Sözleşmesi ve Anayasa. (Ed. Sibel İnceoğlu). İstanbul: Beta.
Kontacı, E. (2021). Anayasa Yargısında Yargısal Karşılaştırmacılık ve Türk Anayasa Mahkemesi. Ankara: Seçkin Yayınları.
Landes, J.B. (1988). Women and the Public Sphere in the Age of the French Revolution. Ithaca ve Londra: Cornell University Press.
Mac-Gregor, E. F. (2017). What Do We Mean When We Talk About Judicial Dialogue?: Reflections of a Judge of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Harvard Human Rights Journal, 30, ss. 89-127.
Morsink, J. (1991). Women’s Rights in the Universal Declaration. Human Rights Quarterly, 13/2, ss. 229-256.
Öden, M. (2014). Türk Anayasa Hukukunda Devletin Kadınları Ev-İçi Şiddete Karşı Koruma Ödevi. Kadına Yönelik Şiddet ve Ev-İçi Şiddet. (Ed: Kaya, F./ Özdemir, N./ Uygur, G.). Ankara: Savaş.
Öden, M. (2003). Türk Anayasa Hukukunda Eşitlik İlkesi, Ankara: Yetkin.
Örücü, E. (2007). Ulusal Anayasa Mahkemelerinde Yargısal Karşılaştırmacılık ve Mahkemeler Arası Diyalog. Anayasa Yargısı, 24, ss. 433-459.
Saunders, C. (2011). Judicial Engagement With Comparative Law. Comparative Constitutional Law. (Eds. Ginsburg, T./ Dixon, R.). Edward Elgar Publishing, ss. 571-598.
Shapiro, M. (1999). The Success of Judicial Review. Constitutional Dialogues in Compatarive Perspective. (Eds: Kenny, S.L./ Resinger, W.M./ Reitz, J.C.) Londra: Macmillian.
Shapiro, M. (1986). Courts: A Comparative and Political Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Šimonović, D. (2014). Global and Regional Standards on Violence Against Women: The Evolution and Synergy of the CEDAW and Istanbul Conventions. Human Rights Quarterly, 36/3, ss. 590-606.
Slaughter, A.M. (2009). A New World Order. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Tushnet, M. (2014). Advanced Introduction to Comparative Constitutional Law, Edward Elgar Publishing.
Frankenberg, G. (2018). Comparative Constitutional Studies: Between Magic and Deceit. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Colon-Rios, J. I. (2021). Judge-Made Constitutional Change. Routledge Handbook of Comparative Constitutional Change. (Eds. Contiades, X./ Fotiadou, A.). Taylor and Francis, ss. 217-231.
Mcquigg, R. J.A. (2012). Domestic Violence and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights: Jessica Lenahan (Gonzales) v United States. Human Rights Law Review, 12(1), ss. 122-134.
Tilly, L. A. & Scott, J. W. (1978). Women, Work, and Family. Routledge.
İNTERNET KAYNAKLARI
Avrupa Komisyonu (2015). Roadmap on the EU's accession to the Istanbul Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence. https://ec.europa.eu/smart-regula-tion/roadmaps/docs/2015_just_010_istanbul_convention_en.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 01.11.2024).
International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA) (2016). Constitution assessment for women’s equa-lity. Stockholm: International IDEA. https://www.idea.int/sites/default/files/publications/constitution-assessment-for-womens-equality.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 01.11.2024).
Avrupa Konseyi Venedik Komisyonu Raporu (2023) Compilation of Venice Commission opinions and reports concerning courts and co-uncils of justice. 18.07.2023, CDL-PI(2023)020. https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-PI%282023%29020-e (Erişim Tarihi: 01.11.2024).
UN General Assembly (2012). Report of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, Rashida Manjoo. A/HRC/20/16/Add. 4, https://www.refworld.org/reference/themreport/unhrc/2012/en/87596 (Erişim Tarihi: 30.01.2024)
UN WOMEN (2022). Progress on the Sustainable Development Goals: The Gender Snapshot 2022. https://www.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/publications/2022/09/progress-on-the-sustainable-development-goals-the-gender-snapshot-2022 (Erişim Tarihi: 5.11.2024).
UN Secretary General’s Campaign (2008). Unite to end Violence Against Women. Factsheet, DPI/2498, United Nations Department of Public Information. http://www.un.org/en/women/endviolence/pdf/VAW (Erişim Tarihi: 19.03.2017).
Viyana Deklarasyonu ve Eylem Planı (1993). A/CONF.157/23. https://www.un.org/en/conferences/human-rights/vienna1993 (Erişim Tarihi 01.11.2024).
Londra Antlaşması (1949). https://www.mfa.gov.tr/avrupa-konseyi_.tr.mfa#:~:text=AK'%C4%B1%20kuran%20Londra%20Antla%C5%9Fmas%C4%B1,'de%20Roma'da%20imzalanm%C4%B1%C5%9Ft%C4%B1r. (Erişim Tarihi: 01.11.2024).
United Nations (1979). Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. https://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/text/econvention.htm (Erişim Tarihi: 03.11.2024).
United Nations (2001). Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/optional-protocol-convention-elimination-all-forms (Erişim Tarihi: 03.11.2024).
CEDAW Committee (1992). General Recommendation No. 19: Violence against women. Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. https://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/recommendations/recomm.htm (Erişim Tarihi: 03.11.2024).
MAHKEME KARARLARI
AİHM (2009). Case of Opuz v. Turkey, (33401/02), 9.6.2009.
Amerikalılar Arası İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi (2009). Gonzalez et al. (Cotton Field) v. Mexico Judgement, 16.11.2009.
Amerikalılar Arası İnsan Hakları Komisyonu (2011). Case 12.626, Jessica Lenahan (Gonzales) et al. v. United States, Report No. 80/11, 21.7.2011.
Amerikalılar Arası İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi (1988). Velasquez-Rodriguez/ Honduras, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. C) no. 4, 29.07.1988.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Kadın/Woman 2000, Journal for Women's Studies
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication, with the work [6 months] after publication simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access)
