Security Sector Governance: Turkey and Europe - DCAF

taraf›ndan gelifltirilen ve akademik düzeyde
tart›fl›lan demokratik polislik ilkelerinin
baz›lar› flunlard›r: 28
‹nsan haklar›na sayg› (respect for human
rights): Güvenlik güçlerinin varl›k nedeni,
bireylerin hak ve özgürlüklerinin
korunmas›d›r. Bu nedenle kolluk, insan
haklar›n› ihlal eden de¤il, onlar›n
korunmas›n› sa¤layacak bir ortam›n
yarat›lmas›na ve sürdürülmesine katk›da
bulunan bir kurum olmal›d›r.
Hukukun üstünlü¤üne ba¤l›l›k
(commitment to the rule of law): Kolluk, hukuk
kurallar›n›n uygulanmas›n› sa¤lamakla
yükümlüdür. Dolay›s›yla, güvenlik güçleri
görevlerini yerine getirirken, hikmet-i
hükümet gibi hukuk d›fl› mülahazalarla
de¤il, hukuk devleti anlay›fl›na ba¤l›l›kla
hareket etmek durumundad›rlar.
Minimum düzeyde ve son çare olarak
kuvvete baflvurma (minimal, last resort use of
force): Meflru güç kullanma tekeline sahip
olan kolluk, bu gücü kullan›rken son derece
dikkatli olmal›d›r. Hem insan haklar›na
iliflkin uluslararas› sözleflmelerde hem de
demokratik ülkelerin ulusal mevzuatlar›nda
kuvvete son çare olarak baflvurulmas›
gerekti¤i belirtilmektedir.
Siyasal tarafs›zl›k (political neutrality):
Kolluk, görevini yaparken siyasal tarafs›zl›k
gösterebilmesi gere¤i, toplumdaki farkl›
görüfl, düflünce, inanç ve ideolojilere karfl› eflit
mesafede durmal›d›r.
Toplum destekli kolluk (community
policing): Toplum destekli kolluk, suçla
mücadelede özellikle önleyici tedbirler
bak›m›ndan, toplumun güvenlik
hizmetlerine kat›l›m›n› ifade etmektedir.
Bu ilkenin iflleyebilmesi; mikro düzeyde,
kolluk mensuplar›yla toplumun, makro
düzeyde ise devlet ile milletin bar›fl›k
olmas›na ba¤l›d›r. Kollu¤un, halk›n
de¤erlerine yabanc› olmas› durumunda,
28 Bkz. Caparini, Marina ve Otwin Marenin, 2004, ‘Police Transformation in Central
and Eastern Europe: The Challenge of Change’, M. Caparini ve O. Marenin (der.),
Transforming Police in Central and Eastern Europe: Process and Progress
içinde, LIT Verlag, Münster, s. 7.
rule of law. Therefore, when carrying out
their duties, security forces have to act within
the rule of law, and not outside or above it.
Minimal, last resort use of force: As the
sole practitioner of legitimate force, law
enforcement must be very careful when
employing this power. In international
conventions pertaining to human rights, as
well as the national law of democratic
countries, it is stated that use of force should
be the last resort.
Political neutrality: When carrying out its
duties, law enforcement should be at an equal
distance from the various views, ideas, beliefs
and ideologies in the society, as befits
political neutrality.
Community policing: Community policing
means society’s participation in security
services for fighting crime especially with
regards to preventive measures. In order for
this principle to work, law enforcement
officers should be at peace with the society on
a micro level, and the state should be at peace
with the nation on a macro level. In cases
where law enforcement is alienated from the
values of the society, it is not possible for
them to gain people’s support while carrying
out their duties. The societal alienation of law
enforcement will not only render
community policing non-functional, but also
negatively affect the legitimacy of law
enforcement. Also, as part of the accessibility
principle, law enforcement should open its
doors to the public. In a place where security
forces are inaccessible, it is hard to achieve
democratic supervision.
Accountability: Accountability in security
forces is a principle that should be practiced
at two levels. First, security forces should be
administratively and judicially accountable
for their illegal actions. This may bring about
administrative and judicial punishment.
Second, the political authorities should be
democratically accountable to the public for
domestic and foreign security policies.
Accordingly, actions of law enforcement
39