DİJİTAL KAPİTALİZM ÇAĞINDA YAPAY ZEKÂ, GÖZETİM VE İNSAN HAKLARI: MAHREMİYETİN VE ÖZGÜRLÜĞÜN GELECEĞİ
Anahtar Kelimeler:
Dijital Kapitalizm- İnsan Hakları- Dijital Mahremiyet- Uluslararası Hukuk- ÖzgürlükÖzet
Dijital kapitalizm çağında insan hakları ve özgürlüklerin korunması hem uluslararası hukuk hem de küresel politika açısından giderek daha kritik bir mesele haline gelmektedir. Yapay zekâ temelli gözetim sistemlerinin yaygınlaşmasıyla birlikte, bireylerin mahremiyeti, ifade özgürlüğü ve veri güvenliği gibi temel haklar, dijital altyapıların ekonomik ve siyasal işleyişi içinde yeniden tanımlanmaktadır. Bu çalışma, dijital kapitalizmin ekonomik mantığı ile gözetim teknolojilerinin toplumsal etkilerini kesiştiren kuramsal bir çerçeve sunarak, insan haklarının dijital çağda nasıl dönüşüme uğradığını incelemektedir. Sonuç olarak, gözetim kapitalizminin yıkıcı etkilerini önlemede mahremiyet yasalarının yeterli olmadığı, aynı zamanda kurumsal yapılar ve uluslararası hukuk düzenlemelerinde köklü reformlarla mümkün olabileceğini göstermektedir. Bu kapsamda çalışma, dijital haklar, algoritmik hesap verebilirlik ve veri egemenliği konularındaki küresel tartışmalara katkı sunmayı amaçlamaktadır. Ayrıca politika yapıcılar ve hukuk reformcuları için dijital gözetim karşısında bireysel özgürlükleri koruyacak normatif mekanizmaların geliştirilmesine teorik ve pratik bir temel oluşturmayı da amaçlamaktadır. Sonuç olarak makale, dijital kapitalizm çağında mahremiyetin, özgürlüğün ve insan onurunun geleceğine ilişkin bütüncül bir değerlendirme ortaya koymaktadır.
Referanslar
Allen, A. L. (2008). The virtuous spy: Privacy as an ethical limit. University of Pennsylvania Law School, 1–17. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship/168/.
ARTICLE 19. (2018). Side-stepping rights: Regulating speech by algorithm. https://www.article19.org.
Bentham, J. (1995). Panopticon (Preface). In Miran Bozovic (ed.), The Panopticon Writings, London: Verso, 29-95.
Bygrave, L. A. (2014). Data privacy law: An international perspective. Oxford University Press.
Citron, D. K., & Pasquale, F. (2014). The scored society: Due process for automated predictions. Washington Law Review, 89(1), 1–33.
Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). (2014). Digital Rights Ireland Ltd v Minister for Communications and Others, Joined Cases C 293/12 and C 594/12, Judgment of 8 April 2014. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62012CJ0293.
Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). (2016). Tele2 Sverige AB v Post-och telestyrelsen and Secretary of State for the Home Department, Joined Cases C 203/15 and C 698/15, Judgment of 21 December 2016. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62015CJ0203.
De Hert, P., & Gutwirth, S. (2006). Privacy, data protection and law enforcement: Opacity of the individual and transparency of power. In E. Claes, A. Duff, & S. Gutwirth (Eds.), Privacy and the criminal law, Intersentia, 61–104.
Drinhausen, K., & Brussee, V. (2021). China’s social credit system in 2021: From fragmentation towards integration. Mercator Institute for China Studies (MERICS). https://merics.org/en/report/chinas-social-credit-system-2021-fragmentation-towards-integration.
Dworkin, R. (1977). Taking rights seriously. Harvard University Press. https://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/Ronald%20Dworkin%20-%20Hard%20Cases.pdf.
European Court of Human Rights. (1950). European Convention on Human Rights. Official Journal of the Council of Europe. https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/convention_ENG.
European Court of Human Rights. (2008). S. and Marper v. The United Kingdom, Applications nos. 30562/04 and 30566/04, Judgment of 4 December 2008.
European Court of Human Rights. (2015). Roman Zakharov v. Russia, Application no. 47143/06, Judgment of 4 December 2015.
European Court of Human Rights. (2016). Szabó and Vissy v. Hungary, Application no. 37138/14, Judgment of 12 January 2016.
European Court of Human Rights. (2023). Mass surveillance – Factsheet. Press Unit. https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/fs_mass_surveillance_eng.
Fikfak, V., & Izvorova, L. (2022). Language and persuasion: Human dignity at the European Court of Human Rights. Human Rights Law Review, 22(3), 1–30.
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (A. Sheridan, Trans.). Vintage Books.
Gonzales, J. T. (2023). Implications of AI innovation on economic growth: A panel dataset analysis. Journal of Economic Structures, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40008-023-00307-w
Green, B. (2022). The flaws of policies requiring human oversight of government algorithms. Computer Law & Security Review, 45, 1–22. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3921216 or https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3921216.
Grundgesetz, Article 1 of the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany, (1949). Federal Law Gazette I p. 1.
Guida, S., & Tozzi, D. (2020). The assessment of the proportionality of the measures that limit the privacy fundamental rights in the new guidelines of the European Data Protection Supervisor. European Journal of Privacy Law & Technologies, 2020(1), 195–207.
Harris, D., O’Boyle, M., Bates, E., & Buckley, C. (2018). Law of the European Convention on Human Rights (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Hildebrandt, M., & Tielemans, L. (2013). Data protection by design and technology neutral law. Computer Law & Security Review, 29(5), 509–521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2013.07.005.
Kilic, B., & Carr-Ryan, D. (2025). The geopolitics of surveillance capitalism [Working paper]. Harvard Kennedy School. https://www.hks.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/2025-10/25_Kilic_Tech_Paper_0.pdf?utm.
Lessig, L. (2000). Code is law: On liberty in cyberspace. Harvard Magazine. https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2000/01/code-is-law-html.
Letwin, J. (2023). Proportionality, stringency and utility in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. Human Rights Law Review, 23(3), 478–503. https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngad014.
Lissens, S. (2024). The foundations of EU personal data protection law: Privacy and human dignity. EU-Renew. https://eu-renew.eu/the-foundations-of-eu-personal-data-protection-law-privacy-and-human-dignity/.
Lyon, D. (2017). Surveillance culture: Engagement, exposure, and ethics in digital modernity. International Journal of Communication, 11, 824–842. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/5527.
Moore, A. D. (2010). Privacy rights: Moral and legal foundations. Penn State University Press.
Nissenbaum, H. (2004). Privacy as contextual integrity. Washington Law Review, 79(1), 119–157. https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol79/iss1/10.
Özlük, D. (2023). Next stage of global capitalism: Digital platforms and rentier capitalism. Ekonomi, Politika ve Finans Araştırmaları Dergisi (EPFAD), 8(4), 681–695. https://doi.org/10.30784/epfad.1350739.
Pasquale, F. (2015). The black box society: The secret algorithms that control money and information. Harvard University Press.
Rawls, J. (1999). A theory of justice (Rev. ed.). Harvard University Press. (Original work published 1971)
Solove, D. J. (2007). The digital person: Technology and privacy in the information age. New York University Press.
Sterz, S., Baum, K., Biewer, S., Hermanns, H., Lauber-Rönsberg, A., Meinel, P., & Langer, M. (2024). On the quest for effectiveness in human oversight: Interdisciplinary perspectives. arXiv preprint, arXiv:2404.04059. https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.04059.
Waldron, J. (2010). Dignity, rights, and responsibilities (Public Law Research Paper No. 10-83). New York University School of Law.
Whitman, J. Q. (2004). The two Western cultures of privacy: Dignity versus liberty. Yale Law Journal, 113(6), 1151–1221. https://doi.org/10.2307/4135739.
Yeung, K. (2018). Algorithmic regulation: A critical interrogation. Regulation & Governance, 12(4), 505–523. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12160
Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. PublicAffairs.
İndir
Yayınlanmış
Nasıl Atıf Yapılır
Sayı
Bölüm
Lisans
Bu çalışma Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License ile lisanslanmıtır.
