T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130<\/p>\n
ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Y.T. BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2022\/23)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 18\/9\/2024<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
G\u0130ZL\u0130L\u0130K TALEB\u0130 KABUL<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fkan<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Basri BA\u011eCI<\/p>\n
\u00dcyeler<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Engin YILDIRIM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Metin KIRATLI<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Muhammed Nuri \u00d6ZG\u00dcR<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Y.T.<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Yusuf ASLAN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, beyanlar\u0131 belirleyici \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde h\u00fckme esas al\u0131nan tan\u0131klar\u0131n duru\u015fmada sorgulanamamas\u0131 nedeniyle adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. Diyadin Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131, PKK\/KCK silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn Tend\u00fcrek Da\u011f\u0131 b\u00f6lgesinde faaliyet g\u00f6steren \u00f6rg\u00fct \u00fcyeleriyle ilgili soru\u015fturma ba\u015flatm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Soru\u015fturma kapsam\u0131nda; \u00f6rg\u00fctten ka\u00e7arak teslim olan B.G. isimli \u015fah\u0131s, foto\u011frafl\u0131 te\u015fhis i\u015fleminde ba\u015fvurucuyu te\u015fhis etmi\u015ftir. B.G.; Tend\u00fcrek Da\u011f\u0131’nda \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn iki farkl\u0131 halkla ili\u015fkiler noktas\u0131 bulundu\u011funu, bu noktalardan birinde E. isimli bir \u015fah\u0131s ile bekledi\u011fi zamanlarda ismini bilmedi\u011fi ba\u015fvurucunun birka\u00e7 sefer yanlar\u0131na gelerek E. isimli \u015fah\u0131sla g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc, ayr\u0131ca buraya erzak getirdi\u011fini beyan etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. Soru\u015fturma s\u00fcrecinde gizli tan\u0131k T\u00fcrkmen’in ifadesi al\u0131nm\u0131\u015f; ayr\u0131ca ba\u015fvurucunun ileti\u015fiminin tespiti, dinlenmesi ve kayda al\u0131nmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir. Soru\u015fturma sonucunda ba\u015fvurucunun silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle iddianame d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. \u0130ddianamede; tan\u0131k B.G.nin te\u015fhis ifadesine, gizli tan\u0131k T\u00fcrkmen’in beyanlar\u0131na ve tespit edilen bir telefon g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme kayd\u0131na dayan\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u0130ddianamede bu telefon g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme kayd\u0131na yer verildikten sonra yap\u0131lan de\u011ferlendirme \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
“\u0130\u00e7eri\u011fi yukar\u0131da belirtilen (1) adet tape g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmesinde I\u011fd\u0131r ilinde ikamet eden ancak yaz aylar\u0131nda Tend\u00fcrek Da\u011f\u0131’nda yaylac\u0131l\u0131k yapan [Y.T.nin] yayladaki durumla ilgili g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131, s\u00f6z konusu \u015fahs\u0131n asker\u00ee g\u00fcvenlik b\u00f6lgesi olmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen PKK\/KCK ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc s\u00f6zde Serhat Eyaleti Tend\u00fcrek Da\u011f\u0131 Diyadin Birimi unsurlar\u0131n\u0131n faaliyet y\u00fcr\u00fctt\u00fc\u011f\u00fc Gurd b\u00f6lgesinde yaylac\u0131l\u0131k yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u00f6rg\u00fct mensuplar\u0131 ile ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 oldu\u011fu ve g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015ferek ihtiya\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu ba\u011flamda PKK\/KCK ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne destekte bulunarak yard\u0131m etti\u011finin anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/p>\n
\u00a0[B.G.] isimli \u00f6rg\u00fct mensubunun ve T\u00fcrkmen kod isimli gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n ifadelerinde, \u015f\u00fcpheli [Y.T.nin] \u00f6rg\u00fct mensuplar\u0131yla irtibatl\u0131 oldu\u011funu, \u00f6rg\u00fct mensuplar\u0131n\u0131n erzak ihtiyac\u0131n\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, onlardan ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 talimatlarla hareket etti\u011fini beyan ettikleri, \u015f\u00fcphelinin ileti\u015fim dinlenmesi s\u0131ras\u0131nda k\u0131rsala gitti\u011finin, \u00f6rg\u00fctle irtibatl\u0131 oldu\u011funun tespit edildi\u011fi, \u015f\u00fcpheli hakk\u0131ndaki beyanlar ve tape kayd\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde \u015f\u00fcphelinin \u00f6rg\u00fctle irtibatl\u0131 oldu\u011funun, \u00f6rg\u00fcte yard\u0131mda bulundu\u011funun ve \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn talimatlar\u0131 ile hareket etti\u011finin anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bu hususlar\u0131n \u015f\u00fcphelinin \u00f6rg\u00fct i\u00e7erisinde bulundu\u011fu anlam\u0131na geldi\u011fi, bu suretle \u015f\u00fcphelinin \u00f6rg\u00fct hiyerar\u015fisine dahil olarak \u00f6rg\u00fctle birlikte hareket edip silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7unu i\u015fledi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.”<\/p>\n
4. A\u011fr\u0131 1. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi (Mahkeme) iddianameyi kabul ederek yarg\u0131lamaya ba\u015flam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Mahkeme, duru\u015fma haz\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015flemleri kapsam\u0131nda -di\u011ferlerinin yan\u0131 s\u0131ra- tan\u0131k B.G.nin istinabe yoluyla dinlenmesine karar vermi\u015ftir. Duru\u015fman\u0131n birinci celsesine m\u00fcdafi ile kat\u0131lan ba\u015fvurucu savunmas\u0131n\u0131 yapm\u0131\u015f, hakk\u0131ndaki su\u00e7lamay\u0131 ink\u00e2r etmi\u015ftir. Mahkeme ba\u015fvurucuya, gizli tan\u0131\u011fa sorulmas\u0131n\u0131 istedi\u011fi sorular\u0131n\u0131 yaz\u0131l\u0131 olarak sunmas\u0131 i\u00e7in s\u00fcre vererek duru\u015fmay\u0131 ertelemi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, gizli tan\u0131\u011fa sorulmas\u0131n\u0131 istedi\u011fi sorular\u0131 yaz\u0131l\u0131 olarak sunmu\u015ftur. Mahkeme, hakk\u0131nda tan\u0131k koruma tedbir karar\u0131 bulunan gizli tan\u0131k T\u00fcrkmen’in beyanlar\u0131n\u0131 ba\u015fvurucunun haz\u0131r olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 celsede alm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Gizli tan\u0131k ifadesinde; PKK kamp\u0131n\u0131n yak\u0131n\u0131nda yaylac\u0131l\u0131k yapan ba\u015fvurucuyu iki veya \u00fc\u00e7 kez \u00f6rg\u00fct mensuplar\u0131na yiyecek malzeme g\u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fcrken g\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc belirtmi\u015ftir. Mahkeme 27\/12\/2007 tarihli ve 5726 say\u0131l\u0131 Tan\u0131k Koruma Kanunu h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine g\u00f6re ba\u015fvurucunun sorular\u0131ndan uygun g\u00f6rd\u00fcklerini gizli tan\u0131\u011fa y\u00f6neltmi\u015f, tan\u0131k; anlatt\u0131\u011f\u0131 olaylar\u0131n 2015 y\u0131l\u0131n\u0131n yaz aylar\u0131nda ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011fini, ya\u015fam malzemesi g\u00f6t\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc tarihlerde \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm s\u00fcrecinin devam etmesi nedeniyle ba\u015fvurucunun saklama gere\u011fi duymadan \u00f6rg\u00fcte a\u00e7\u0131ktan yard\u0131m etti\u011fini, ba\u015fka ki\u015filerin bu hadiseye \u015fahit olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilmedi\u011fini ifade etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. Tan\u0131k B.G.nin istinabe yoluyla ifadesi al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Tan\u0131k B.G.; ba\u015fvurucuyu tan\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ba\u015fvurucunun ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcyeli\u011fi konusunda bilgi sahibi olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmi\u015ftir. Tan\u0131k B.G.nin bu beyan\u0131 ile gizli tan\u0131k T\u00fcrkmen’in ifadesi duru\u015fmada okunmu\u015ftur. Tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 ba\u015fvurucu; \u00f6rg\u00fctle ba\u011f\u0131 bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, \u00f6rg\u00fct taraf\u0131ndan ka\u00e7\u0131r\u0131lan k\u0131z\u0131n\u0131 Kuzey Irak’a giderek kurtard\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, yaylada bulunma sebebinin \u00f6rg\u00fct \u00fcyelerine yard\u0131m etmek olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n ifadesini kabul etmedi\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir. Yarg\u0131lama sonucunda Mahkeme, silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc \u00fcyesi olma su\u00e7undan ba\u015fvurucunun 6 y\u0131l 3 ay hapis cezas\u0131 ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. Gerek\u00e7eli karar\u0131n ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
“Tan\u0131k [B.G.nin] gizli tan\u0131k T\u00fcrkmen’in ifadesiyle de \u00f6rt\u00fc\u015fen beyanlar\u0131ndan; san\u0131k [Y.T.nin] \u00f6rg\u00fct mensuplar\u0131yla irtibatl\u0131 oldu\u011fu, k\u0131rsalda bulunan \u00f6rg\u00fct mensuplar\u0131n\u0131n yan\u0131na gitti\u011fi ve g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, \u00f6rg\u00fct mensuplar\u0131na erzak g\u00f6t\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, telefonda yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme i\u00e7eri\u011finden san\u0131\u011f\u0131n de\u015fifre olmamak i\u00e7in gizlilik kurallar\u0131na riayet ederek g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na g\u00f6re bu t\u00fcr bir g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmeden \u00e7e\u015fitli \u00f6rg\u00fct faaliyetlerini takip etti\u011fi ve \u00f6rg\u00fcte milislik faaliyeti y\u00fcr\u00fctt\u00fc\u011f\u00fc anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Her ne kadar tan\u0131k [B.G.] kovu\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda al\u0131nan ifadesinde \u00f6nceki beyanlar\u0131n\u0131 kabul etmemi\u015fse de, tan\u0131k beyan\u0131n\u0131n gizli tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131yla da \u00f6rt\u00fc\u015fmesi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n soru\u015fturma beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n ger\u00e7ekli\u011fe daha uygun oldu\u011fu sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve bu beyanlara itibar edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Her ne kadar san\u0131k savunmas\u0131nda at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7lamalar\u0131 kabul etmemi\u015fse de, tan\u0131k ve gizli tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda bu savunmalar\u0131n\u0131n su\u00e7tan kurtulmaya y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve bu savunmalara itibar edilmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
…ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fctlerinin ama\u00e7 su\u00e7un i\u015flenmesi yolunda g\u00fcven, disiplin ve s\u0131k\u0131 irtibata \u00f6nem veren i\u015f b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcne dayal\u0131, hiyerar\u015fik d\u00fczene sahip yap\u0131lar olarak istihbarat, gizlilik, g\u00fcvenlik ve denetim konular\u0131nda duyarl\u0131 olduklar\u0131, i\u015fleyi\u015f ve yap\u0131lanma itibariyle bu \u00f6zellikleri g\u00f6steren ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fctlerinin, irtibat halinde olmad\u0131klar\u0131, g\u00fcvenilir bulmad\u0131klar\u0131, denetlemedikleri kaynaklardan yap\u0131lan her t\u00fcrl\u00fc destek ve yard\u0131m\u0131 kabul etmeyecekleri gibi, gizlilik ve g\u00fcvenlik kurallar\u0131 ile hiyerar\u015fiye uymayan ki\u015filerin bu t\u00fcr faaliyetlerine de izin vermeyecekleri anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
T\u00fcm bu nedenlerle yukar\u0131da s\u00fcbuta erdi\u011fi anla[\u015f]\u0131lan san\u0131k eylemlerinin s\u00fcreklilik, \u00e7e\u015fitlik, yo\u011funluk g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi ve san\u0131\u011f\u0131[n] b\u00f6ylece art\u0131k \u00f6rg\u00fct hiyerar\u015fisine girdi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmakla san\u0131\u011f\u0131n silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc PKK\/KCK’ya \u00fcye olmak su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 yoluna gidilmi\u015ftir.”<\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvurucu; istinaf ve temyiz dilek\u00e7elerinde -di\u011fer nedenlerle birlikte- tan\u0131klar\u0131n mahkeme huzurunda dinlenmemesi nedeniyle tan\u0131klar\u0131 sorgulayamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve tan\u0131k anlat\u0131mlar\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvenilirli\u011finin denetlenemedi\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir. Mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131, kanun yolu denetiminden ge\u00e7erek 9\/6\/2021 tarihinde kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
7. Ba\u015fvurucu nihai karar\u0131 26\/11\/2021 tarihinde \u00f6\u011frendikten sonra 6\/12\/2021 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
8. Komisyon; adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki \u015fik\u00e2yetlerin kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa, an\u0131lan hakka ili\u015fkin \u015fik\u00e2yetin kabul edilebilirlik incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME<\/p>\n
9. Ba\u015fvurucu, tan\u0131k B.G.nin talimat mahkemesinde ink\u00e2r etti\u011fi soru\u015fturma beyanlar\u0131 ile gizli tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131na dayan\u0131larak, unsurlar\u0131 olu\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 h\u00e2lde ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan mahk\u00fbmiyetine karar verildi\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir. Tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n kimli\u011finin gizlenmesi i\u00e7in sebep g\u00f6sterilmedi\u011fini belirten ba\u015fvurucu, A\u0130HM i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131na g\u00f6re gizli tan\u0131k beyan\u0131n\u0131n belirleyici delil olarak kullan\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 vurgulam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bunun yan\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucu; tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n ifadesinin istinabe yoluyla al\u0131nmas\u0131, gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n dinlendi\u011fi duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131 imk\u00e2n\u0131 tan\u0131nmamas\u0131 nedenleriyle tan\u0131klar\u0131 sorgulayamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n alt\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7izmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
10. Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Bakanl\u0131k); Mahkemenin dava konusu maddi olay ve olgular\u0131, delillerin de\u011ferlendirmesini, hukuk kurallar\u0131n\u0131n yorumlanmas\u0131 ve uygulanmas\u0131n\u0131, uyu\u015fmazl\u0131kla ilgili vard\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucu ve kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdir yetkisinin sebeplerini makul bir \u015fekilde gerek\u00e7elendirdi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc bildirmi\u015ftir. Bakanl\u0131k; ba\u015fvurucu ve m\u00fcdafiinin, ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131ndaki b\u00fct\u00fcn su\u00e7 isnatlar\u0131n\u0131, aleyhe beyanda bulunan tan\u0131k B.G.nin beyanlar\u0131 ile T\u00fcrkmen kod adl\u0131 gizli tan\u0131ktan ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131ndaki elde edilen veriler d\u00e2hil olmak \u00fczere su\u00e7 isnad\u0131n\u0131n temelini olu\u015fturan delilleri i\u00e7eren iddianameye eri\u015fme imk\u00e2n\u0131 buldu\u011funu, duru\u015fmada bu delillerin okundu\u011funu, ba\u015fvurucunun tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131na ve at\u0131l\u0131 di\u011fer su\u00e7lamalara kar\u015f\u0131 itirazlar\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrebilme olana\u011f\u0131na sahip oldu\u011funu vurgulam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
11. Ba\u015fvurucunun \u015fik\u00e2yetleri, adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvencelerinden biri olan tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
12. A\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve kabul edilemezli\u011fine karar verilmesini gerektirecek ba\u015fka bir neden de bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lan ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
13. Anayasa Mahkemesi, bir\u00e7ok karar\u0131nda tan\u0131k kavram\u0131n\u0131 san\u0131\u011fa isnat edilen fiil hakk\u0131nda bilgi veren herhangi bir ki\u015fi \u015feklinde \u00f6zerk olarak yorumlam\u0131\u015f ve tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131 ile ilgili ilkeleri belirlemi\u015ftir (Atila O\u011fuz Boyal\u0131, B. No: 2013\/99, 20\/3\/2014; Sel\u00e7uk Demir, B. No: 2014\/9783, 22\/1\/2015; AZ. M., B. No: 2013\/560, 16\/4\/2015; Baran Karada\u011f, B. No: 2014\/12906, 7\/5\/2015; Orhan G\u00fclery\u00fcz, B. No: 2019\/30221, 28\/12\/2021). Buna g\u00f6re bir ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131nda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n aleyhine olan tan\u0131klar\u0131 sorguya \u00e7ekme veya \u00e7ektirme hakk\u0131 vard\u0131r. Hakk\u0131nda ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 s\u00fcrecinde san\u0131\u011f\u0131n tan\u0131klara soru y\u00f6neltebilmesi, onlarla y\u00fczle\u015febilmesi ve tan\u0131klar\u0131n beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n do\u011frulu\u011funu s\u0131nama imk\u00e2n\u0131na sahip olmas\u0131 adil bir yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yap\u0131labilmesi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan gereklidir (AZ. M., \u00a7 55). Di\u011fer yandan bir mahk\u00fbmiyet -tek veya belirleyici \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde- san\u0131\u011f\u0131n soru\u015fturma veya yarg\u0131lama a\u015famas\u0131nda sorgulama veya sorgulatma imk\u00e2n\u0131 bulamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir kimse taraf\u0131ndan verilen ifadelere dayand\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve dengeleyici g\u00fcvenceler sa\u011flayan bir usul \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015f ise san\u0131\u011f\u0131n haklar\u0131 Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesindeki g\u00fcvencelerle ba\u011fda\u015fmayacak \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde k\u0131s\u0131tlanm\u0131\u015f olur (Orhan G\u00fclery\u00fcz, \u00a7 35).<\/p>\n
14. Baz\u0131 olaylarda tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n kim oldu\u011funun san\u0131klar taraf\u0131ndan bilinmesi, tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n kendisi veya yak\u0131nlar\u0131 i\u00e7in tehlike do\u011furabilir (Baran Karada\u011f, \u00a7 57). Kamu g\u00f6revini yerine getirerek verdi\u011fi bilgiler dolay\u0131s\u0131yla tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n kendisinin veya tan\u0131kl\u0131\u011f\u0131 nedeniyle yak\u0131nlar\u0131n\u0131n ya da mallar\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131n\u0131 isteme hakk\u0131 bulunmaktad\u0131r. Zira korunamayan ve kendisinin veya yak\u0131nlar\u0131n\u0131n hayat\u0131ndan endi\u015fe duyan bir tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n -ceza alacak bile olsa- bildiklerini anlatmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olamayabilecektir. Buna g\u00f6re kamu g\u00f6revini yerine getiren tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n verdi\u011fi bilgiler dolay\u0131s\u0131yla zarara u\u011framamas\u0131 i\u00e7in gerekli tedbirleri almak da devletin sorumlulu\u011fundad\u0131r (AYM, E.2008\/12, K.2011\/104, 16\/6\/2011; Canda\u015f Bozkurt, B. No: 2018\/27301, 30\/3\/2022, \u00a7 51).<\/p>\n
15. Bununla birlikte tan\u0131klar taraf\u0131ndan duyulan her t\u00fcrl\u00fc korku, onlar\u0131n kimliklerinin sakl\u0131 tutulmas\u0131na ve duru\u015fmada taraflar\u0131n huzurunda dinlenmemesine gerek\u00e7e yap\u0131lmaz. B\u00f6ylesi bir durumda duyulan korkunun objektif nedenlere dayan\u0131p dayanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve somut temellerinin bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ortaya konulmal\u0131d\u0131r. Nitekim bu gereklilikler ilgili kanunlarda da belirtilmi\u015ftir. 4\/12\/2004 tarihli ve 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu’nun 58. maddesi uyar\u0131nca tan\u0131k olarak dinlenecek ki\u015filerin kimliklerinin ortaya \u00e7\u0131kmas\u0131 kendileri veya yak\u0131nlar\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan a\u011f\u0131r bir tehlike olu\u015fturacaksa kimlikleri gizli tutulabilecektir. Ayn\u0131 \u015fekilde tan\u0131k i\u00e7in a\u011f\u0131r bir tehlike te\u015fkil edecek ve bu tehlike ba\u015fka t\u00fcrl\u00fc \u00f6nlenemeyecekse ya da maddi ger\u00e7e\u011fin ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan tehlike olu\u015fturacaksa h\u00e2kim haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131na sahip bulunanlar olmadan da tan\u0131\u011f\u0131 dinleyebilecektir. 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun, b\u00f6ylelikle hem tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n kimli\u011finin gizli tutulmas\u0131 hem de duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131na sahip olan ki\u015filerin yoklu\u011funda tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n dinlenmesi i\u00e7in a\u011f\u0131r bir tehlikenin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 aramaktad\u0131r. 5276 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunu da a\u011f\u0131r ve ciddi bir tehlikenin var olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde bu t\u00fcr tedbirlere ba\u015fvurma imk\u00e2n\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6ng\u00f6rmektedir (Serdar Batur, B. No: 2014\/15652, 24\/5\/2018, \u00a7 46; Canda\u015f Bozkurt, \u00a7 52).<\/p>\n
16. Anayasa Mahkemesi; somut norm denetimi kapsam\u0131nda A\u0130HM kararlar\u0131na da at\u0131fta bulunmak suretiyle verdi\u011fi bir karar\u0131nda, muhakemenin bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak adil olmas\u0131 \u015fart\u0131yla san\u0131ktan gelecek haks\u0131z m\u00fcdahalelerden korunmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeterli sebep mevcutsa tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n kimli\u011finin gizli tutulmas\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olabilece\u011fini, a\u00e7\u0131k celse d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda verilen bu tarz ifadelerin ancak savunma i\u00e7in tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n ve ifadesinin inan\u0131l\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve g\u00fcvenilirli\u011fini sorgulama f\u0131rsat\u0131n\u0131 teminat alt\u0131na alan telafi edici \u00f6nlemlerin sa\u011flanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini, savunma hakk\u0131 \u00fczerindeki k\u0131s\u0131tlamalar\u0131n asgaride tutulmu\u015f olmas\u0131 ve bu k\u0131s\u0131tlamalar\u0131n tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n korunmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamak i\u00e7in l\u00fczumlu olmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00e7\u0131karlar\u0131n\u0131n ona kar\u015f\u0131 ifade veren tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00e7\u0131karlar\u0131yla dengelenmesinin zorunlu oldu\u011funu belirtmi\u015ftir (AYM, E.2008\/12, K.2011\/104, 16\/6\/2011).<\/p>\n
17. Bu durumda ilk olarak tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n kimli\u011fini gizlemek i\u00e7in makul gerek\u00e7elerin olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ve ikinci olarak gizli tan\u0131k ifadesinin verilecek h\u00fckm\u00fcn dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 tek veya belirleyici delil olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekir. Gizli tan\u0131k beyan\u0131n\u0131n mahkeme karar\u0131n\u0131n dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirleyici delil oldu\u011fu bu \u015fekilde tespit edildikten sonra \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc olarak savunma taraf\u0131na dengeleyici g\u00fcvenceler sa\u011flayan bir usul\u00fcn y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fcl\u00fcp y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmedi\u011fi de belirlenmelidir. H\u00fckm\u00fcn b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde veya yaln\u0131zca gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n ifadesine dayanmas\u0131 durumunda yarg\u0131lama detayl\u0131 incelemelere tabi tutulmal\u0131d\u0131r. E\u011fer san\u0131k veya m\u00fcdafii taraf\u0131ndan g\u00fcvenilirli\u011finin ve do\u011frulu\u011funun saptanmas\u0131 amac\u0131yla sorgulanmam\u0131\u015f tan\u0131k delili, mahkeme karar\u0131n\u0131n dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 esas veya belirleyici delil ise ve dengeleyici g\u00fcvenceler sa\u011flayan bir usul \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015f ise adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlali s\u00f6z konusu olabilecektir (Baran Karada\u011f, \u00a7\u00a7 68, 72; Canda\u015f Bozkurt \u00a7 54).<\/p>\n
18. Somut olayda Mahkeme; hakk\u0131nda tan\u0131k koruma tedbir karar\u0131 bulunan ve kimli\u011fi gizli tutulan tan\u0131\u011f\u0131, ba\u015fvurucunun haz\u0131r bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 duru\u015fmada dinlemi\u015ftir. Mahkeme, gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n -\u00e7e\u015fitli teknikler kullan\u0131larak- duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r edilmesine ili\u015fkin bir \u00e7aba g\u00f6stermemi\u015ftir. Ancak bu durum tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011finin kabul edilmesi i\u00e7in yeterli de\u011fildir. Bunun d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda h\u00fckm\u00fcn tek ba\u015f\u0131na veya belirleyici \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde ba\u015fvurucunun sorgulama veya sorgulatma imk\u00e2n\u0131na sahip olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 tan\u0131klar taraf\u0131ndan verilen ifadeye dayal\u0131 olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve b\u00f6yle ise savunmaya kar\u015f\u0131 dengeleyici g\u00fcvenceler sa\u011flan\u0131p sa\u011flanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
19. Mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131nda Mahkeme; tan\u0131k B.G.nin kovu\u015fturmada ink\u00e2r etti\u011fi soru\u015fturma beyan\u0131na, gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n a\u015famalardaki anlat\u0131mlar\u0131na ve tespit edilen bir telefon g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme kayd\u0131na dayanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Tan\u0131k B.G., istinabe yoluyla al\u0131nan ifadesinde ba\u015fvurucuyu tan\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmi\u015f ve soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda kolluk taraf\u0131ndan yapt\u0131r\u0131lan te\u015fhis i\u015flemindeki ifadesini kabul etmemi\u015ftir. Mahkeme, tan\u0131k B.G.nin soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131ndaki beyan\u0131n\u0131n gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131yla \u00f6rt\u00fc\u015fmesi nedeniyle ger\u00e7e\u011fe daha uygun oldu\u011funu de\u011ferlendirmi\u015f ve soru\u015fturma beyan\u0131na itibar etmi\u015ftir. Tan\u0131k B.G. ve gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131na g\u00f6re ba\u015fvurucunun \u00f6rg\u00fct mensuplar\u0131 ile g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ve onlara erzak g\u00f6t\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc de\u011ferlendiren Mahkeme, telefon g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme i\u00e7eri\u011finden de ba\u015fvurucunun de\u015fifre olmamak i\u00e7in gizlilik kurallar\u0131na riayet etti\u011fi, \u00f6rg\u00fct faaliyetlerini bu \u015fekilde takip ederek \u00f6rg\u00fcte milislik yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna ula\u015fm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Mahkemenin delilleri bu \u015fekilde de\u011ferlendirdi\u011fi dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n anlat\u0131mlar\u0131n\u0131n mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131nda tek olmasa da belirleyici delil oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
20. Son olarak savunmaya, mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131nda belirleyici oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lan gizli tan\u0131k anlat\u0131mlar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 dengeleyici g\u00fcvenceler sa\u011flan\u0131p sa\u011flanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. Mahkeme tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n ve ifadesinin inan\u0131l\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve g\u00fcvenilirli\u011fini sorgulama f\u0131rsat\u0131n\u0131 teminat alt\u0131na alan telafi edici \u00f6nlemleri sa\u011flamak amac\u0131yla, gizli tan\u0131\u011fa sorulmas\u0131n\u0131 istedi\u011fi sorular\u0131n\u0131 sunmas\u0131 i\u00e7in ba\u015fvurucuya s\u00fcre vermi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, gizli tan\u0131\u011fa y\u00f6neltilmesini istedi\u011fi sorular\u0131n\u0131 yaz\u0131l\u0131 olarak sunmu\u015ftur. Mahkeme, gizli tan\u0131\u011fa bu sorular\u0131n bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131 y\u00f6neltmi\u015f ve tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n cevaplar\u0131n\u0131 tutanak alt\u0131na alm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Mahkeme, gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131n\u0131 duru\u015fmada okumu\u015f; ba\u015fvurucu gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131n\u0131 kabul etmemi\u015ftir (bkz. \u00a7\u00a7 4, 5). Ba\u015fvurucu ve m\u00fcdafii, gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n tespiti s\u0131ras\u0131nda haz\u0131r bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan -gizli tan\u0131klara \u00f6zg\u00fc- ses veya g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc ba\u011flant\u0131s\u0131 yoluyla da olsa gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131 sorgulayamam\u0131\u015f; sorulan sorulara verdi\u011fi cevaplar hakk\u0131nda ki\u015fisel izlenim edinme f\u0131rsat\u0131 bulamam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu y\u00fczden savunma taraf\u0131 sorgulama yoluyla gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n g\u00fcvenilirli\u011fini test edememi\u015ftir. Gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n dinlenmesinden \u00f6nce ba\u015fvurucuya sorular\u0131n\u0131 sunmas\u0131 i\u00e7in s\u00fcre verilmi\u015f ve gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n ifadesi duru\u015fmada okunarak ba\u015fvurucuya tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 diyecekleri sorulmu\u015f ise de bu durum tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 savunmaya tan\u0131nan yeterli bir g\u00fcvence olarak de\u011ferlendirilemez.<\/p>\n
21. Sonu\u00e7 olarak tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n neden savunman\u0131n haz\u0131r bulundu\u011fu celselerde dinlenmedi\u011fi, istinabe yolu ile ifadesi al\u0131nan tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n ise ayn\u0131 anda -gizli tan\u0131klara \u00f6zg\u00fc- ses veya g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc ba\u011flant\u0131s\u0131 kullan\u0131lmak suretiyle al\u0131nmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunda bir gerek\u00e7eye yer verilmedi\u011fi, h\u00fckm\u00fcn belirleyici \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n ifadelerine dayand\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve san\u0131k (ba\u015fvurucu) lehine al\u0131nan teminatlar g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n menfaatleri ile san\u0131\u011f\u0131n adil yarg\u0131lanma \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctleri i\u00e7inde yer alan haklar\u0131n\u0131n adil bir \u015fekilde dengelenmedi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
22. \u00d6te yandan mahk\u00fbmiyet sonucuna g\u00f6t\u00fcren delillerden bir di\u011feri olan tan\u0131k B.G.nin bilgi ve g\u00f6rg\u00fcs\u00fc istinabe yoluyla tespit edilmi\u015ftir. Tan\u0131k B.G. talimat mahkemesi huzurunda ba\u015fvurucuyu tan\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmi\u015f; Mahkeme bu tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n, gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n anlat\u0131mlar\u0131 ile \u00f6rt\u00fc\u015fen soru\u015fturma beyanlar\u0131na itibar edilmesi gerekti\u011fini de\u011ferlendirmi\u015ftir. B\u00f6ylece tan\u0131k B.G.nin soru\u015fturmadaki anlat\u0131mlar\u0131 h\u00fckme esas al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 h\u00e2lde ba\u015fvurucuya bu tan\u0131\u011f\u0131 da sorgulama imk\u00e2n\u0131 verilmemi\u015f, savunman\u0131n maruz kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 bu olumsuzlu\u011fun telafi edilmesi i\u00e7in kar\u015f\u0131 dengeleyici g\u00fcvenceler ba\u015fvurucuya sa\u011flanmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
23. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU bu sonuca kat\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
24. Ba\u015fvurucu, ayr\u0131ca yeterli delil bulunmadan ve gerek\u00e7esi a\u00e7\u0131klanmadan mahk\u00fbmiyetine karar verilmesi nedeniyle masumiyet karinesinin ve gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ula\u015f\u0131lan sonu\u00e7 g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde ba\u015fvurucunun bu iddialar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ayr\u0131ca bir inceleme yap\u0131lmas\u0131na gerek bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M<\/p>\n
25. Ba\u015fvurucu, ihlalin tespiti ile 250.000 TL manevi tazminat talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
26. Ba\u015fvuruda tespit edilen hak ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131nda hukuki yarar bulunmaktad\u0131r. Bu kapsamda karar\u0131n g\u00f6nderildi\u011fi yarg\u0131 mercilerince yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken i\u015f, yeniden yarg\u0131lama i\u015flemlerini ba\u015flatmak ve Anayasa Mahkemesini ihlal sonucuna ula\u015ft\u0131ran nedenleri gideren, ihlal karar\u0131nda belirtilen ilkelere uygun yeni bir karar vermektir (Mehmet Do\u011fan [GK] B. No: 2014\/8875, 7\/6\/2018, \u00a7\u00a7 54-60; Alig\u00fcl Alkaya ve di\u011ferleri (2), B. No: 2016\/12506, 7\/11\/2019, \u00a7\u00a7 53-60, 66; Kadri Enis Berbero\u011flu (3) [GK], B. No: 2020\/32949, 21\/1\/2021, \u00a7\u00a7 93-100).<\/p>\n
27. Belirli bir davaya ili\u015fkin olarak delilleri de\u011ferlendirme ve g\u00f6sterilen delilin davayla ilgili olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na karar verme yetkisi kural olarak yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 y\u00fcr\u00fcten derece mahkemelerine aittir (Orhan K\u0131l\u0131\u00e7 [GK], B. No: 2014\/4704, 1\/2\/2018, \u00a7 44). Bu ba\u011flamda somut olayda su\u00e7un s\u00fcbutu konusunda karar vermek Anayasa Mahkemesinin g\u00f6revi de\u011fildir. Anayasa Mahkemesince verilen ihlal karar\u0131, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n beraat etti\u011fi anlam\u0131na gelmedi\u011fi gibi ihlal karar\u0131n\u0131n gereklerinin yerine getirilmesi amac\u0131yla yap\u0131lacak yeniden yarg\u0131lama neticesinde san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda mutlaka beraat karar\u0131 verilmesi gerekti\u011fi anlam\u0131na da gelmemektedir. \u0130hlalin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 gidermek \u00fczere gereken i\u015flemler yerine getirildikten sonra yap\u0131lacak de\u011ferlendirmede Mahkemenin mevcut belgelerle birlikte delillerin takdir bi\u00e7imine g\u00f6re benzer veya farkl\u0131 bir sonuca varmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
28. \u00d6te yandan ihlalin tespiti ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yeterli bir giderim sa\u011flayaca\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan manevi tazminat talebinin reddine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. Kamuya a\u00e7\u0131k belgelerde ba\u015fvurucunun kimli\u011finin gizli tutulmas\u0131 talebinin KABUL\u00dcNE,<\/p>\n
B. Tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE,<\/p>\n
C. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU’nun kar\u015f\u0131oyu ve OY\u00c7OKLU\u011eUYLA,<\/p>\n
D. Masumiyet karinesi ve gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden \u0130NCELEME YAPILMASINA YER OLMADI\u011eINA,<\/p>\n
E. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere A\u011fr\u0131 1. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesine (E.2017\/285, K.2018\/239) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
F. Ba\u015fvurucunun manevi tazminat talebinin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
G. 487,60 TL har\u00e7 ve 18.800 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan toplam 19.287,60 TL yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
H. \u00d6demenin karar\u0131n tebli\u011fini takiben ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n Hazine ve Maliye Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na ba\u015fvuru tarihinden itibaren d\u00f6rt ay i\u00e7inde yap\u0131lmas\u0131na, \u00f6demede gecikme olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde bu s\u00fcrenin sona erdi\u011fi tarihten \u00f6deme tarihine kadar ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre i\u00e7in yasal FA\u0130Z UYGULANMASINA,<\/p>\n
\u0130. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 18\/9\/2024 tarihinde karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KAR\u015eIOY<\/p>\n
1. \u00c7o\u011funluk taraf\u0131ndan \u201cAnayasa\u2019n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine\u201d dair karar\u0131na i\u015ftirak etmemekteyim. \u015e\u00f6yle ki;<\/p>\n
2. Mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131; hakk\u0131nda tan\u0131k koruma karar\u0131 bulunan gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n anlat\u0131mlar\u0131, di\u011fer tan\u0131k B.G.\u2019nin istinabe yoluyla al\u0131nan ifadesinde inkar etmesine ra\u011fmen soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda kolluk taraf\u0131ndan yapt\u0131r\u0131lan te\u015fhis i\u015flemindeki ifadesi ile bir telefon g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme kayd\u0131na dayand\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
3. Mahkeme, tan\u0131k B.G.\u2019nin soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131ndaki beyan\u0131n\u0131n gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131yla \u00f6rt\u00fc\u015fmesi nedeniyle ger\u00e7e\u011fe daha uygun oldu\u011funu de\u011ferlendirmi\u015f ve soru\u015fturma beyan\u0131na itibar etmi\u015ftir. Tan\u0131k B.G. ve gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131na g\u00f6re Ba\u015fvurucunun \u00f6rg\u00fct mensuplar\u0131 ile g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ve onlara erzak g\u00f6t\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc de\u011ferlendiren Mahkeme, telefon g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme i\u00e7eri\u011finden ve ba\u015fvurucunun de\u015fifre olmamak i\u00e7in gizlilik kurallar\u0131na riayet etti\u011fi, \u00f6rg\u00fct faaliyetlerini bu \u015fekilde takip ederek \u00f6rg\u00fcte milislik yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna ula\u015fm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
4. Mahkemenin karar\u0131na bak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n anlat\u0131mlar\u0131n\u0131n mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131nda tek delil olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir.<\/p>\n
5. Tan\u0131k B.G.\u2019nin kolluk g\u00fc\u00e7lerince yapt\u0131r\u0131lan te\u015fhis i\u015flemindeki beyan\u0131;<\/p>\n
\u00a0\u201cBana g\u00f6stermi\u015f oldu\u011funuz \u015fahs\u0131n ismini bilmiyorum. Tend\u00fcrek Da\u011f\u0131nda bizim 2 tane halkla ili\u015fkiler noktam\u0131z vard\u0131. Bunlardan birtanesi daha \u00f6nce te\u015fhislerde bahsetti\u011fim g\u00f6l noktas\u0131 idi. Birde Tend\u00fcre\u011fin bat\u0131s\u0131nda Ke\u00e7itepenin alt taraf\u0131nda \u00e7e\u015fme dedi\u011fimiz bir nokta var. Ben bazen halka ili\u015fkiler sorumlusu Ercan kodla beraber bu yerde de bulundu\u011fum oldu. Bulundu\u011fum zamanlarda bu \u015fahs\u0131n birka\u00e7 kez yan\u0131m\u0131za gelerek Ercan kodla g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc erzak getirdi\u011fini g\u00f6rd\u00fcm. Biz yeni kat\u0131l\u0131m \u00f6rg\u00fct mensubu oldu\u011fumuz i\u00e7in g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme yaparlarken bizi yanalar\u0131nda bulundurmuyorlard\u0131. Bu sebepten ne konu\u015ftuklar\u0131n\u0131 duymad\u0131m.\u201d \u015feklindedir.<\/p>\n
6. Gerek A\u0130HM, gerekse AYM bir\u00e7ok karar\u0131nda adil yarg\u0131lanma g\u00fcvencelerinden a\u00e7\u0131k bir \u015fekilde feragat edilebilece\u011fi gibi \u00f6rt\u00fcl\u00fc \u015fekilde feragat edilmesinin de m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011funa i\u015faret etmi\u015flerdir. Yarg\u0131lama s\u0131ras\u0131nda, istinabe yoluyla dinlenen tan\u0131klar\u0131n huzurda da beyan vermelerini ve tan\u0131klar\u0131 sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131 kullanmay\u0131 istememesinin Ba\u015fvurucunun tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131ndan feragat etti\u011fi anlam\u0131na da gelmesi s\u00f6z konusu olabilecektir. Bu hususu de\u011ferlendirecek olan da t\u00fcm tan\u0131k ve delilleri y\u00fcz y\u00fcze ilkesi gere\u011fince dinleyen ve yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 y\u00fcr\u00fcten derece mahkemesidir.<\/p>\n
7. Ba\u015fvuru konusu olayda Ba\u015fvurucu ilk derece yarg\u0131lamas\u0131nda yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 yapan mahkeme huzurunda tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131 kullanma y\u00f6n\u00fcnde bir talepte bulunmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
8. Somut olay\u0131n t\u00fcm bu \u00f6zellikleri birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde ba\u015fvurucu ve m\u00fcdafiinin tan\u0131k B.G. nin istinabe yoluyla dinlenmesinin ne gibi sonu\u00e7lar do\u011furaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 makul bir \u015fekilde \u00f6ng\u00f6rebilecek durumda olduklar\u0131, imkanlar\u0131 varken zaman\u0131nda tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131 yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 yapan mahkeme huzurunda kullanmayan Ba\u015fvurucu ve m\u00fcdafiinin bu tav\u0131rlar\u0131 s\u00f6z konusu haktan z\u0131mnen feragat anlam\u0131na gelmektedir.<\/p>\n
9. Tan\u0131k B.G. nin istinabe yoluyla al\u0131nan beyanlar\u0131 esasen Ba\u015fvurucunun lehinedir. \u0130stinabe yoluyla al\u0131nan ifadesinde \u00f6nceki beyanlar\u0131n\u0131 (5 numaral\u0131 paragraftaki beyanlar) kabul etmemi\u015ftir. Mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131nda, tan\u0131k B.G.nin istinabe yoluyla al\u0131nan beyanlar\u0131 mahkemece h\u00fckme esas al\u0131nmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Mahk\u00fbmiye th\u00fckm\u00fc tan\u0131k B.G. nin soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131ndaki beyanlar\u0131 ile gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n ifadeleri ile \u00f6rt\u00fc\u015fmesi ve telefon g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme i\u00e7eri\u011finden ve ba\u015fvurucunun de\u015fifre olmamak i\u00e7in gizlilik kurallar\u0131na riayet etti\u011fi gerek\u00e7elerine dayand\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Hal b\u00f6yleyken, \u00e7o\u011funluk taraf\u0131ndan \u201cAdil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine\u201d dair karar\u0131na i\u015ftirak edilmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
10. Ayr\u0131ca \u00e7o\u011funluk karar\u0131nda \u201cGiderim\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 alt\u0131nda \u201cBa\u015fvuruda tespit edilen hak ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131nda hukuki yarar bulunmaktad\u0131r.\u201d \u015feklindeki karar\u0131na kat\u0131lmak m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n
11. \u00c7o\u011funluk taraf\u0131ndan \u201cKarar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere A\u011fr\u0131 A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesine g\u00f6nderilmesi\u201d karar\u0131n\u0131n da prati\u011fi s\u00f6z konusu olmayacakt\u0131r. H\u00fckme esas al\u0131nmayan tan\u0131k beyan\u0131n\u0131n, \u00e7o\u011funluk karar\u0131 ile mahkeme huzurunda tekrar dinlenmesinin sonuca etkisi olmayaca\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Delillerin de\u011ferlendirilmesi ve takdiri yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 yapan mahkemelere aittir. Su\u00e7un s\u00fcbutu konusunda karar vermek Anayasa Mahkemesinin g\u00f6revi de\u011fildir. Ba\u015fka bir deyi\u015fle tan\u0131k B.G.nin istinabe yoluyla al\u0131nan ifadesinin yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 yapan mahkemede bizzat dinlenmesinin (verdi\u011fi beyanlar dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda) davan\u0131n sonucunu etkileyecek nitelikte olmayacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n
\u00dcye<\/p>\n
\u00a0Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 18\/9\/2024 tarihli ve 2022\/23 ba\u015fvuru numaral\u0131 karar\u0131\u00a0Hukuki Haber<\/p>\n
Haberin Al\u0131nt\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kaynak: www.hukukihaber.net<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130 ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 Y.T. BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2022\/23) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 18\/9\/2024 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 G\u0130ZL\u0130L\u0130K TALEB\u0130 KABUL \u00a0 Ba\u015fkan : Basri BA\u011eCI \u00dcyeler : Engin YILDIRIM \u00a0 \u00a0 R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7 \u00a0 \u00a0 Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU \u00a0 \u00a0 Metin KIRATLI Raport\u00f6r : Muhammed Nuri \u00d6ZG\u00dcR Ba\u015fvurucu : Y.T. Vekili : Av. Yusuf ASLAN \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru, beyanlar\u0131 belirleyici \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde h\u00fckme esas al\u0131nan tan\u0131klar\u0131n duru\u015fmada sorgulanamamas\u0131 nedeniyle adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. Diyadin Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131, PKK\/KCK silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn Tend\u00fcrek Da\u011f\u0131 b\u00f6lgesinde faaliyet g\u00f6steren \u00f6rg\u00fct \u00fcyeleriyle ilgili soru\u015fturma ba\u015flatm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Soru\u015fturma kapsam\u0131nda; \u00f6rg\u00fctten ka\u00e7arak teslim olan B.G. isimli \u015fah\u0131s, foto\u011frafl\u0131 te\u015fhis i\u015fleminde ba\u015fvurucuyu te\u015fhis etmi\u015ftir. B.G.; Tend\u00fcrek Da\u011f\u0131’nda \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn iki farkl\u0131 halkla ili\u015fkiler noktas\u0131 bulundu\u011funu, bu noktalardan birinde E. isimli bir \u015fah\u0131s ile bekledi\u011fi zamanlarda ismini bilmedi\u011fi ba\u015fvurucunun birka\u00e7 sefer yanlar\u0131na gelerek E. isimli \u015fah\u0131sla g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc, ayr\u0131ca buraya erzak getirdi\u011fini beyan etmi\u015ftir. 3. Soru\u015fturma s\u00fcrecinde gizli tan\u0131k T\u00fcrkmen’in ifadesi al\u0131nm\u0131\u015f; ayr\u0131ca ba\u015fvurucunun ileti\u015fiminin tespiti, dinlenmesi ve kayda al\u0131nmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir. Soru\u015fturma sonucunda ba\u015fvurucunun silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle iddianame d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. \u0130ddianamede; tan\u0131k B.G.nin te\u015fhis ifadesine, gizli tan\u0131k T\u00fcrkmen’in beyanlar\u0131na ve …<\/p>","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[27,535],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-19185","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber","category-uncategorized-tr"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n