Türkiye’de Aile Arabuluculuğu Üzerine Çalışmalar: Eleştirel Bir Değerlendirme
Hatice Kübra KahyaTürkiye’de aile arabuluculuğuna ilişkin düzenlemeler, 2012 yılında yürürlüğe giren Hukuk Uyuşmazlıklarında Arabuluculuk Kanunu ile birlikte yasal bir çerçeveye kavuşmuştur. HUAK’ın yürürlüğe girmesinden bu yana, aile hukuku alanına özel ve etkin bir arabuluculuk mevzuatının geliştirilmesi yönünde çalışmalar sürmektedir. Bu makale, aile arabuluculuğuna ilişkin mevcut öğretideki farklı yaklaşımları ele almaktadır. Türk aile hukukuna hakim ilkeler, aile arabuluculuğu müessesesine elverişli uyuşmazlık alanını oldukça sınırlar. Mali uyuşmazlıklar haricindeki neredeyse hiçbir aile uyuşmazlığı arabuluculuğa elverişli değildir. Bu sınırlılığı gidermek adına, öğretide, arabuluculuğa engel şiddete ilişkin kanun yorumunun fiziksel ve cinsel şiddetle sınırlı dar bir çerçevede yapılması gibi farklı fikirler ortaya atıldığı gibi aile arabuluculuğuna zorunlu dava şartı arabuluculuk modelinin getirilmesinin savunulduğu da görülür. Aile arabuluculuğunda, mahkeme içi-mahkeme dışı arabuluculuk sistemlerinden hangisinin benimseneceği noktasında baskın kanaat, mahkeme temelli arabuluculuk modelinden yanadır. Bazı öğreti yazarları, daha etkili olacağı gerekçesiyle bir terapist veya sosyal bilimler-davranış bilimleri alanında uzman bir kişinin yer aldığı eş arabuluculuk sistemini benimser. Bu makale, çoğunluğu Müslüman bireylerden oluşan Türkiye’de, İslam aile arabuluculuğu pratiğine yer açan, din adamlarının sürece dahil olabileceği ve taraflara İslam hukuku prensipleri çerçevesinde öneride bulunabileceği değerlendirici ve eş arabuluculuk modelinin daha etkili olabileceğini savunur. Bu noktada sulh ve tahkim kurumlarını içeren daha etkin bir arabuluculuk sürecinin geliştirilebilmesi için İslam ülkelerinin farklı pratiklerinin de dikkate alınmasını önerir.
Studies on Family Mediation in Türkiye: A Critical Analysis
Hatice Kübra KahyaThe regulations concerning family mediation in Türkiye were granted a legal framework with the enactment of Law on Mediation in Civil Disputes in 2012. Since the enforcement of this law, many studies have been conducted to develop a specific and effective mediation law on family law disputes. This article examines the various approaches in the existing literature on family mediation. The principles governing Turkish family law significantly restrict the scope of disputes that are suitable for mediation. Aside from the ones including financial issues, almost no family law dispute is considered applicable to mediation. To address this limitation, some scholars have proposed a restrictive interpretation of the legal provisions on domestic violence as an impediment to mediation, limiting the concept to physical and sexual violence. Others argue for the introduction of mandatory mediation as a precondition for litigation in family disputes. The prevailing opinion favors a court-based model over an out-of-court mediation system. Some scholars advocate for co-mediation systems that include a therapist or an expert in social and behavioral sciences, arguing that this approach would be more effective. This article also argues that a more effective model in Türkiye -where most of the population is Muslim- should incorporate Islamic family mediation practices. In this model, religious leaders could participate in the mediation process and provide guidance to the parties based on principles of Islamic law. It also highlights that by considering existing practices in various Islamic countries, a more effective mediation process could be developed that integrates the institutions of sulh (reconciliation) and tahkim (arbitration).
The regulations concerning family mediation in Türkiye were granted a legal framework with the enactment of the Law on Mediation in Civil Disputes (HUAK) in 2012. Since the enforcement of this law, many studies have been conducted to develop a specific and effective mediation law on family law disputes. This article examines the various approaches in the existing literature on family mediation. The principles governing Turkish family law significantly restrict the scope of disputes that are suitable for mediation. Besides the ones including financial issues, almost no family law dispute is considered applicable to mediation. In its current form, the Law on Mediation has not introduced any specific regulations regarding family mediation. It merely states that disputes involving allegations of domestic violence are not suitable for mediation and that, in disputes eligible for family mediation, the examination required for enforceability approval must be conducted in a hearing. To address this limitation, some scholars have proposed a restrictive interpretation of the legal provisions on domestic violence as an impediment to mediation, limiting the concept to physical and sexual violence. Another contentious issue in the scholarly debate on family mediation is the introduction of mandatory mediation as a prerequisite for filing a lawsuit in family disputes. The Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on family mediation emphasises that family mediation should, a rule, remain voluntary. However, the Ministry of Justice in Türkiye is working on transitioning to mandatory mediation in family law disputes. Some scholars argue that mandatory mediation could yield positive results in family law conflicts, particularly in fostering settlements before judicial proceeding starts. Others, however, contend that implementing mandatory mediation would not yield significant benefits. Among these critics, there are those who advocate for a model akin to that in England, where attendance at a mediation information and assessment meeting is mandatory before initiating a lawsuit, while the continuation of mediation itself remains at the discretion of the parties involved. Additionally, the prevailing opinion favours a court-based model over an out-of-court mediation system. Some scholars advocate for co-mediation systems that include a therapist or an expert in social and behavioural sciences, arguing that this approach would be more effective. The modern family mediation model developed in the West does not guide the parties towards reconciliation or propose solutions to prevent the dissolution of their union. Instead, the role of the modern family mediator is to facilitate communication between the parties and manage a process that renders the separation economically feasible, emotionally healthier, and less harmful for children. Family mediation, at least from the perspective of Turkish society, is perceived as a reconciliation effort aimed at preserving the unity of the family, whereas family mediation in its Western form seeks to resolve divorce proceedings through out-of-court methods, since it contributes to reducing the workload of the courts. However, it is unlikely to provide any benefit in preventing or even reducing divorces as a societal issue. The high volume of inquiries directed to the Diyanet fatwa hotline demonstrates that religious guidance could play a significant role in both preserving family unity and resolving divorce-related disputes in Türkiye. An important factor that is absent in psychological counselling and guidance but stands out in such religious guidance is the divine sanctioning power inherent in Islamic law. In Islamic law, an examination of the classical framework of family mediation-arbitration reveals a robust practice that combines mediation and arbitration processes hybrid. This approach fundamentally protects the family unit and seeks to achieve a binding resolution. Indeed, the hybrid model of mediation and arbitration as an alternative dispute resolution method is also being applied in various fields in the West today. This article argues that a more effective model in Türkiye -where most of the population is Muslim- should incorporate Islamic family mediation practices. In this model, religious leaders could participate in the mediation process and provide guidance to the parties based on the principles of Islamic law. It also highlights that by considering existing practices in various Islamic countries, a more effective mediation process could be developed that integrates the institutions of sulh (reconciliation) and tahkīm (arbitration).
