Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
Tezin Türü: Yüksek Lisans
Tezin Yürütüldüğü Kurum: Ankara Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Türkiye
Tezin Onay Tarihi: 2020
Tezin Dili: İngilizce
Öğrenci: BARIŞ SEVEN
Danışman: SELİN ÖZDEN MERHACI
Özet:This thesis aims to consider the Turkish legislation that introduced plain packaging in Turkey, by using the implications derived from the landmark cases mounted against similar measures of other jurisdictions, namely Australia and Uruguay. This thesis is comprised of an introduction, three separate chapters, and a conclusion. In the first chapter, it discusses what is plain packaging and how it emerged within the context of tobacco control policies. The reasons underlying the adoption of this measure are explained by providing the purposes it achieves to serve. Then, as an important milestone in global tobacco control policies, as well as a foundation for plain packaging, it explores the FCTC and its relevant guidelines. The second chapter first explores the Australian plain packaging legislation and three legal challenges mounted against it: the constitutional challenge, investment treaty arbitration, and WTO complaints. Thereafter, it explores the Uruguayan measures and the investment treaty arbitration filed against them. Through engaging in these disputes, the main legal issues concerning plain packaging of tobacco products are highlighted. Third chapter addresses the Turkish legislation that introduced plain packaging of tobacco products. First, it provides a brief overview concerning the history of Turkish tobacco market and tobacco control policies. Second, it evaluates the legislation that incorporated plain packaging measures and the related regulations. Then it considers the plain packaging’s compatibility with Turkish trademark law and constitutional law. Finally, it discusses the main implications for Turkey under its international obligations. While this thesis draws the conclusion that the outcomes of the cases against Australia and Uruguay were important victories for public health; it also underlines that there is still a need to be cautious when adopting such restrictive measures.