Are Honorifics a Personal Right?
Hakkı Mert DoğuPersonal rights entail the rights individuals have over their personal property and can claim against anyone. The law does not define personality rights. In addition, identifying what is included in the scope of personal rights within definitive limits is not possible. Personality rights involve certain rights individuals recognize simply because they are persons. Personal rights are an absolute right, and personal property is considered among these rights. Personal rights cannot be transferred or waived and are closely tied to the individual. Evaluations regarding personal rights can be said to have been made in the legal systems of many countries, including the Turkish legal system. Although having various bases, personal rights have an extremely important place in terms of the laws of every country. When addressing personal rights, many concepts are seen to be accepted in this context whose boundaries have not been defined, the main examples being an individual’s life, health, bodily integrity, honor and dignity, title, visage, and photograph. Among these examples, titles are more a sign of respect, and whether or not the use of an individual’s title in addressing can be considered in this context should be evaluated. Titles and honorifics are the general names given to all the expressions parties use to address one another during a mutual conversation and are generally use to show respect. Honorifics, which as a rule are used obligatorily among people of a certain status, play an important role in the development and smooth progress of social relations. In this respect, the issue of whether honorifics can be evaluated within the right of personality emerges as a problem that needs to be examined. Whether honorifics are a personality right needs to be determined, and honorifics are acceptable as a personal right, how to protect this right will also need to be determined. In this respect, the relationship honorifics have with honor and dignity should be revealed, as well as the points where they diverge from each other. While considering this situation within the framework of personal rights, consideration should also be given to how honorifics are accepted and evaluated in different legal systems.
Hitap Bir Kişilik Hakkı Mıdır?
Hakkı Mert DoğuKişilik hakkı, kişinin kişisel değerleri üzerinde sahip olduğu ve herkese karşı ileri sürebildiği haklardan birisidir. Kanunlarda kişilik hakkının tanımı yapılmamaktadır. Ayrıca kişilik hakkının kapsamına nelerin girdiğini kesin sınırlarla belirlemek de mümkün değildir. Kişilik hakkı, kişilere sırf kişi olmalarından kaynaklı olarak tanınmış birtakım haklardır. Kişilik hakları mutlak haklardan biri olup; şahıs varlığı hakları içerisinde kabul edilmektedir. Kişilik haklarının devredilmesi ya da bu haklardan feragat edilmesi söz konusu değildir. Bu haklar, kişiye sıkı sıkıya bağlı olan haklardandır. Türk Hukuk sisteminde olduğu gibi birçok ülke hukuk sistemlerinde de kişilik haklarına ilişkin değerlendirmelerin yapıldığı söylenebilir. Farklı temeller üzerine oturtulsa da kişilik hakları, her ülke hukuku bakımından son derece önemli bir yere sahiptir. Kişilik hakları denildiğinde sınırları belirli olmayan pek çok kavramın bu kapsamda kabul edildiği görülmektedir. Kişinin hayatı, sağlığı, vücut bütünlüğü, şeref ve haysiyeti, adı, fotoğrafı, resmi ve benzerleri başlıca örneklerdir. Söz konusu örnekler arasında kişilere karşı kullanılan ve daha çok bir saygının belirtisi olan hitabın bu kapsamda ele alınıp alınamayacağı değerlendirilmelidir. Hitap, karşılıklı konuşma sırasında tarafların birbirlerine karşı kullanmış oldukları ve genellikle saygı amacını içeren ifadelerin tamamına verilen genel addır. Kural olarak belirli statüdeki kişiler arasında kullanılması zorunlu olan hitap kelimeleri, sosyal ilişkilerin gelişimi ve düzgün bir şekilde ilerlemesinde önemli bir rol oynamaktadır. Bu bakımdan hitabın, kişilik hakkı içerisinde değerlendirilip değerlendirilemeyeceği meselesi incelemeye tabi tutulması gerekli bir sorun olarak ortaya çıkmaktadır. Hitabın bir kişilik hakkı olup olmadığı; şayet kişilik hakları içerisinde kabul edilmesi mümkünse, bunun korunmasının ne şekilde sağlanacağının tespiti gerekir. Bu açıdan özellikle hitap ile şeref ve haysiyetin ilişkisi ve birbirlerinden ayrıldığı noktalar ortaya koyulmalıdır. Kişilik hakları çerçevesinde durum ele alınırken; farklı hukuk sistemlerindeki kabul ve değerlendirmelere de dikkat edilmelidir. Yapılan tespitler değerlendirildiğinde, 1958 Anayasası’nda 2003 yılında yapılan değişiklikle décentralisation esasının Anayasal dayanağa kavuştuğu tarihten günümüze kadar olan süreç dikkate alındığında dahi, Fransa’da mahalli idarelerin ve yerinden yönetim esasının merkezden yönetim esası karşısında emin adımlarla güçlenmekte olduğu sonucuna varmak mümkün görünmemektedir.
Personal rights entail the absolute rights a person has over their body and property that make up their personality. Personality rights recognize individuals as physical and spiritual beings and allow them to enjoy their sense of existence; these rights are protected to various degrees in different countries. The human-oriented nature of laws makes the regulations regarding personal rights and legal status even more important. The impact of this importance reveals itself not only in private law but also in all other legal areas. The first and most important feature of personality rights are that they are absolute rights. Other features of personality rights are that they involve the rights of personal property and are closely dependent on the individual. The principle of limited independent variety does not apply to personal rights, and things such as a person’s life, health, bodily integrity, title, visage, photograph, honor and dignity, voice, and living space are considered within the scope of personality rights. With regard to German Law, the presence of a general personality right can be mentioned that covers all aspects of personality and can be accepted as a source from which concrete, private personality rights arise spontaneously. The general personality right guaranteed by Grundgesetz [Basic Law/GG] § 1 is regulated in the Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch [Civil Law Book/BGB] § 823/1 as a fundamental norm in tort law. Basic norms regarding the protection of personality in Swiss privacy law appear in the Zivilgesetzbuch [Swiss Civil Codes/ZGB] Articles 27 and 28 These appear as general articles that should be specified in terms of personal rights and
protections. The concept of general personality rights cannot be mentioned with regard to English Law, whose legal system was largely developed on the basis of individual cases and case law. In terms of English Law, personal rights and their violations and protections are evaluated within the scope of tort law. Titles and honorifics are the general name given to all the forms parties use to address one another during mutual conversations and generally show a sign of respect. Honorifics are obligatorily used among people of a certain status and are extremely important for the development and smooth progress of social relations. However, as the degree of status inequality between people changes and familiarity increases, honorifics and any other titles are seen to be avoided. The honorifics that are used also reveal an effect in terms of establishing the connection to the language society uses with regard to social events. An individual’s reputation can be considered as an aspect of personality rights. Reputation arises from the fact that a person is just a human being and involves the values that embody that person in society in terms of moral value judgments. In addition, everyone has equal dignity and respectability. In this regard, a connection can be established between an individual’s reputation and the honorific used to address them. Based on all of these facts, this study believes that evaluating and linking honorifics to the social personality rights that are considered alongside an individual’s dignity and reputation to be appropriate. However, despite this relationship between honorifics and personality rights, points are also found where these things differ from each other. To abstain from using the honorifics that are generally used as a sign of respect in a society or to use slang or mockery to address an individual may constitute a violation of personal rights. However, while making this determination, each situation needs to be evaluated internally as well as through its dynamics. In
other words, things should be taken into account such as an individual’s position, social status, and the surrounding order of events. If some of the titles or honorifics used involve slangs or sarcasm, a violation of personal rights may occur here as well due to the ability this can have to damage a person’s social reputation.
