T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130<\/p>\n
ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
MEHMET BOZAN KARAYILAN BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/55075)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 23\/10\/2024<\/p>\n
B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fkan<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Hasan Tahsin G\u00d6KCAN<\/p>\n
\u00dcyeler<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Yusuf \u015eevki HAKYEMEZ<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Selahaddin MENTE\u015e<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u0130rfan F\u0130DAN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Y\u0131lmaz AK\u00c7\u0130L<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Ay\u00e7a GAN\u0130DA\u011eLI DEM\u0130RC\u0130<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Mehmet Bozan KARAYILAN<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Sedat G\u00d6ZKIRAN<\/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\u0131\u011f\u0131n san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan sorgulanmas\u0131na imk\u00e2n verilmemesi nedeniyle tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. Suru\u00e7 Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen soru\u015fturma kapsam\u0131nda PKK\/KCK \u00fcyeli\u011fi su\u00e7undan tutuklu bulunan G.P. isimli \u015f\u00fcpheli, kolluk birimlerine vermi\u015f oldu\u011fu ifadede kendisinin \u00fclkeye giri\u015finde ve kalmas\u0131nda yard\u0131mc\u0131 olan ki\u015finin ba\u015fvurucu oldu\u011funu belirtmi\u015ftir. Ayr\u0131ca \u00e7oktan se\u00e7meli foto\u011fraflar ile yap\u0131lan te\u015fhis tutana\u011f\u0131nda, kendine yard\u0131m eden \u015fahs\u0131n ba\u015fvurucu oldu\u011funu te\u015fhis etmi\u015ftir. Bunun \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan soru\u015fturma ba\u015flat\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
3. Suru\u00e7 Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n 2011\/1977 say\u0131l\u0131 soru\u015fturma dosyas\u0131nda dinlenen K\u0131smet isimli gizli tan\u0131k beyan\u0131nda; Suru\u00e7 Belediyesinin ta\u015feron \u015firketi olan B. Limited \u015eirketinde 2008-2012 y\u0131llar\u0131 aras\u0131 \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ba\u015fvurucunun da bu firmada \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu firmada \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131rken kendisi gibi \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar\u0131n maa\u015flar\u0131ndan kesinti yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu paralar\u0131n PKK\/KCK ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne g\u00f6nderildi\u011fini, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar\u0131n aras\u0131nda bu konular\u0131n konu\u015fuldu\u011funu beyan etmi\u015ftir. O d\u00f6nem \u015eirkette 80-90 kadar i\u015f\u00e7i \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ancak bu i\u015f\u00e7ilerin bir\u00e7o\u011funun i\u015fe gelmedi\u011fini fakat bu ki\u015filere d\u00fczenli olarak maa\u015f \u00f6dendi\u011fini, i\u015fe gelmeyen i\u015f\u00e7ilerin hepsinin Suru\u00e7 il\u00e7esinde PKK\/KCK ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne m\u00fczahir bas\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131, miting gibi yasa d\u0131\u015f\u0131 etkinliklere kat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu eylem ve etkinliklere kendilerinin de kat\u0131lmalar\u0131n\u0131n gerekti\u011fini yoksa i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131laca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n s\u00f6ylendi\u011fini ifade etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
4. Ba\u015fvurucunun ikametg\u00e2h\u0131nda arama yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f; yap\u0131lan arama ve el koyma sonucunda ba\u015fvurucunun r\u0131zas\u0131yla kolluk g\u00f6revlilerine teslim etti\u011fi, \u00f6n inceleme yap\u0131lmas\u0131na r\u0131za g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi ak\u0131ll\u0131 telefonda yap\u0131lan incelemede, ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc \u00fcyesi iken \u00e7\u0131kan \u00e7at\u0131\u015fmada \u00f6len bir kimse i\u00e7in “\u015eehidimiz var, taziyedeyim.” \u015feklinde mesaj yazd\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespit edilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda verdi\u011fi ifadesinde; M.K. isimli \u015fahs\u0131n \u00fcvey a\u011fabeyi oldu\u011funu ancak onun ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc \u00fcyesi olmas\u0131n\u0131n kendisinin de ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc \u00fcyesi olmas\u0131 anlam\u0131na gelmeyece\u011fini, telefonunda yer alan mesajda ”\u015fehidimiz var” diye bahsetti\u011fi ki\u015finin yak\u0131n k\u00f6yl\u00fcs\u00fc oldu\u011funu, bu y\u00fczden \u015fehidimiz var diye mesaj yazd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. Ba\u015fvurucu 27\/12\/2019 tarihinde Suru\u00e7 Sulh Ceza H\u00e2kimli\u011fi taraf\u0131ndan an\u0131lan su\u00e7tan tutuklanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Soru\u015fturma sonucunda 27\/12\/2019 tarihinde Suru\u00e7 Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan d\u00fczenlenen fezleke \u00fczerine \u015eanl\u0131urfa Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k) taraf\u0131ndan tanzim edilen iddianamenin kabul\u00fc ile ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan kamu davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u0130ddianamede, ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda eylem yapmak i\u00e7in yasal olmayan yollardan yurda giri\u015f yapan Asi Hazal kod adl\u0131 G.P. isimli \u015fahs\u0131n kolluk birimlerine verdi\u011fi beyanlar\u0131nda, kendisinin \u00fclkeye giri\u015fine ve \u00fclke i\u00e7inde dola\u015fmas\u0131na ve kalmas\u0131na yard\u0131mc\u0131 olan ki\u015finin ba\u015fvurucu oldu\u011funu beyan etmesine, ba\u015fvurucunun telefonda yap\u0131lan incelemede, ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc \u00fcyesiyken \u00e7\u0131kan \u00e7at\u0131\u015fmada \u00f6len bir kimse i\u00e7in “\u015eehidimiz var, taziyedeyim.” \u015feklinde mesaj bulundu\u011fu hususlar\u0131na dayan\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
6. \u0130ddianamenin kabul\u00fc ile \u015eanl\u0131urfa 6. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi (Mahkeme) taraf\u0131ndan y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen yarg\u0131lama 6 celse s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Mahkeme celse aras\u0131nda tan\u0131k G.P.nin beyanlar\u0131n\u0131 soru\u015fturma makamlar\u0131ndan istemi\u015f ve bu beyanlar dosyaya getirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
7. Tan\u0131k G.P.nin ifadesi \u0130stanbul 32. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi huzurunda 24\/2\/2020 tarihinde istinabe yoluyla al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Tan\u0131k G.P. ifadesinde; 14 ya\u015f\u0131ndayken PKK taraf\u0131ndan Erzurum H\u0131n\u0131s’tan ka\u00e7\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, daha sonra \u015eanl\u0131urfa Suru\u00e7’ta ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan kar\u015f\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ba\u015fvurucunun ismini Bozan olarak hat\u0131rlad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ba\u015fvurucunun onlar\u0131 \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn faaliyetleri kapsam\u0131nda Suriye’ye ge\u00e7irmek i\u00e7in ba\u015fka bir ara\u00e7la ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, buradan bir eve ge\u00e7tiklerini, orada birka\u00e7 saat kald\u0131ktan sonra oradan farkl\u0131 bir arac\u0131n onlar\u0131 ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, b\u00f6ylelikle d\u00f6rt erkek ve kendi olmak \u00fczere Suriye’ye Kobani olarak da bilinen Ayn el-Arab b\u00f6lgesine ge\u00e7tiklerini, ba\u015fvurucuyu ilk ve son olarak bu sebeple g\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc ve daha sonra kolluktaki sorgusunda te\u015fhis etti\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir. Ayr\u0131ca tan\u0131k soru\u015fturma evresindeki beyanlar\u0131n\u0131 do\u011frulam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
8. Ba\u015fvurucuya m\u00fcdafiinin de haz\u0131r bulundu\u011fu celsede s\u00f6z konusu beyanlar okunmu\u015f ve ba\u015fvurucu tan\u0131\u011f\u0131 tan\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek su\u00e7lamalar\u0131 reddetmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
9. Mahkeme, ayr\u0131ca K\u0131smet isimli gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n bir \u00fcye h\u00e2kim taraf\u0131ndan al\u0131nmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. Al\u0131nan ifadesinde K\u0131smet isimli tan\u0131k; tarihini net olarak hat\u0131rlayamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir d\u00f6nemde Suru\u00e7 Belediyesinin ta\u015feron \u015firketi olan B. Limited \u015eirketinde temizlik g\u00f6revlisi olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, kendisinin ve di\u011fer \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar\u0131n maa\u015flar\u0131ndan \u00e7o\u011fu zaman net olarak hat\u0131rlayamamakla birlikte 50-10-20 TL kesinti yap\u0131lmakta oldu\u011funu ifade etmi\u015ftir. Kesintinin sebebini sorduklar\u0131nda bu kesintinin vergi kesintisi oldu\u011fu, “Sizin vergiye gidiyor.” denildi\u011fini, kendi maa\u015f\u0131ndan bir defa, di\u011fer \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar\u0131n maa\u015f\u0131ndan birka\u00e7 defa 350,00 TL kesinti yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu paran\u0131n ne i\u00e7in ne ama\u00e7la kesildi\u011fini bilmedi\u011fini, ba\u015fvurucunun da bu \u015firkette \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131p \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilmedi\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir. 9\/7\/2020 tarihli celsede K\u0131smet isimli gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131 ba\u015fvurucu ve m\u00fcdafiine okunmu\u015ftur. Ba\u015fvurucu ve m\u00fcdafii gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131n\u0131 reddetmi\u015ftir. <\/p>\n
10. Yarg\u0131laman\u0131n 10\/9\/2020 tarihli son celsesine ba\u015fvurucu ile m\u00fcdafii kat\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu, bu celsede di\u011ferlerinin yan\u0131 s\u0131ra tan\u0131k G.P.nin mahkemede dinlenmedi\u011fini ifade etmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k, esas hakk\u0131ndaki m\u00fctalaas\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucunun silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 talep etmi\u015ftir. Mahkeme, ba\u015fvurucunun silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan 9 y\u0131l hapis cezas\u0131 ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve h\u00fckmen tutukluluk h\u00e2linin devam\u0131na h\u00fckmetmi\u015ftir. Mahkeme mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131nda tan\u0131k G.P.nin beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n yan\u0131s\u0131ra K\u0131smet isimli gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131na, ba\u015fvurucudan elde edilen dijital materyallerin incelenmesinde bir ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc mensubu i\u00e7in “\u015fehidimiz var taziyedeyim” \u015feklinde mesaj att\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tespit edilmesine ve yine ayn\u0131 materyallerde ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn silahl\u0131 mensuplar\u0131n\u0131n birden fazla foto\u011fraf\u0131n\u0131n bulunmas\u0131na vurgu yapm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Gerek\u00e7eli karar\u0131n ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015fu \u015fekildedir:<\/p>\n
” San\u0131k Mehmet Bozan KARAYILAN’\u0131n r\u0131zas\u0131yla al\u0131nan ak\u0131ll\u0131 telefonunda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n r\u0131zas\u0131 ile yap\u0131lan incelemede, whatsapp isimli anl\u0131k mesajla\u015fma program\u0131ndan at\u0131lan mesajlar\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fcleri ve yaz\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131n dosya i\u00e7erisine al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, yap\u0131lan mesajla\u015fmalar\u0131nda ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcnde bulunan ve \u00e7\u0131kan \u00e7at\u0131\u015fma da \u00f6len bir kimse i\u00e7in ‘\u015fehidimiz var taziyedeyim’ \u015feklinde mesaj att\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tespit edildi\u011fi, san\u0131ktan ele ge\u00e7irilen Dijital materyallere ili\u015fkin d\u00fczenlenen raporda silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn silahl\u0131 mensuplar\u0131n\u0131n birden fazla foto\u011fraflar\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011fu, <\/p>\n
Mehmet Bozan KARAYILAN’\u0131n [B.] Limitet \u015eirketinde s\u00f6zde \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 d\u00f6nemin: 2008\/12-2012\/1 aras\u0131 oldu\u011fu,<\/p>\n
…<\/p>\n
San\u0131k mahkememizde al\u0131nan savunmas\u0131nda ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131n\u0131 kabul etmedi\u011fini savunmu\u015f, gizli tan\u0131k K\u0131smet mahkememizce al\u0131nan beyan\u0131nda \u00f6nceki beyan\u0131n\u0131n aksine beyanda bulunmu\u015f ve san\u0131k m\u00fcdafisi de m\u00fcvekkilinin \u00fczerine at\u0131l\u0131 Silahl\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00dcye Olma su\u00e7unu i\u015flemedi\u011fini, su\u00e7un unsurlar\u0131n\u0131n olu\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 savunmu\u015f ise de, mahkememizce yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonucunda dosya i\u00e7erisinde bulunan san\u0131ktan ele ge\u00e7irilen dijital materyallerde ve ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn silahl\u0131 mensuplar\u0131n\u0131n foto\u011fraflar\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011funa dair dijital veri inceleme ve de\u011ferlendirme tutana\u011f\u0131, tan\u0131k [G.P.nin] t\u00fcm a\u015famalardaki tutarl\u0131 beyanlar\u0131, ara\u015ft\u0131rma tutanaklar\u0131, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n SGK kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6sterir MASAK raporu ve t\u00fcm dosya kapsam\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde san\u0131\u011f\u0131n savunmas\u0131n\u0131n cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmaktan kurtulmaya y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fu ve yine gizli tan\u0131k K\u0131smet’in mahkememizdeki beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n dosyadaki somut deliller ile desteklenmedi\u011fi dikkate al\u0131narak san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sabit olan Silahl\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00dcye Olma su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 yoluna gidilmi\u015ftir. <\/p>\n
5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 TCK’n\u0131n 314\/2 f\u0131kras\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenen Ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7unun olu\u015fabilmesi i\u00e7in failin hiyerar\u015fik yap\u0131 i\u00e7erisinde yer almas\u0131 ve \u00f6rg\u00fct ile organik ba\u011f\u0131n bulunmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. Hiyerar\u015fik yap\u0131ya dahil olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 tespit etmek i\u00e7in failin eylemlerinin ve faaliyetlerinin s\u00fcreklilik, \u00e7e\u015fitlilik ve yo\u011funlu\u011funa veya eylemin niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re belirlenmesi gerekmektedir. Somut olay\u0131m\u0131zda dijital veri ve inceleme tutana\u011f\u0131ndaki \u00f6rg\u00fct mensuplar\u0131na ait foto\u011fraflar, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00f6rg\u00fct mensuplar\u0131ndan \u015fehit diye bahsetmesi, san\u0131k hakk\u0131ndaki d\u00fczenlenen ara\u015ft\u0131rma tutanaklar\u0131, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n SGK kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6sterir MASAK raporu, tan\u0131k [G.P.nin] t\u00fcm a\u015famalardaki tutarl\u0131 beyanlar\u0131, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n tan\u0131k G.P.nin \u00f6rg\u00fcte kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131ndaki katk\u0131s\u0131, Gizli Tan\u0131k K\u0131smet’in \u015eanl\u0131urfa Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda vermi\u015f oldu\u011fu beyanlar\u0131, ve dosya i\u00e7erisinde bulunan t\u00fcm bilgi ve belgeler birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde san\u0131\u011f\u0131n PKK\/YPG silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn hiyerar\u015fisi i\u00e7erisinde yer ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve su\u00e7un unsurlar\u0131 ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011finden san\u0131\u011f\u0131n 5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 TCK’n\u0131n 314\/2 f\u0131kras\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenen Silahl\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00dcye Olma su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 yoluna gidilmi\u015ftir”.<\/p>\n
11. H\u00fck\u00fcm, kanun yolu incelemesinden ge\u00e7erek kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
12. Ba\u015fvurucu 12\/11\/2021 tarihinde nihai karar\u0131 \u00f6\u011frenmesinin ard\u0131ndan 23\/11\/2021 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
13. Komisyon; tan\u0131k sorgulama 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
14. Ba\u015fvurucu, tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n mahk\u00fbmiyet h\u00fckm\u00fcnde belirleyici delil olarak de\u011ferlendirildi\u011fini ancak kendisine bu tan\u0131\u011f\u0131 sorgulama imk\u00e2n\u0131n\u0131n verilmedi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
15. Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde, tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fvurucu ve m\u00fcdafiinin bulundu\u011fu duru\u015fmalarda okundu\u011funu, b\u00f6ylece tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131ndan bilgi sahibi olan ba\u015fvurucu ve m\u00fcdafiinin bu beyanlara kar\u015f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamada bulunma ve itirazlar\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrme imk\u00e2n\u0131na sahip oldu\u011funu ancak tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmada dinlenilmesine dair bir beyan\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 vurgulam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Mahkemenin ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131ndaki mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131nda gizli tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n yan\u0131 s\u0131ra ba\u015fvurucudan elde edilen dijital materyallerin incelenmesi sonucu haz\u0131rlanan raporlara da yer verdi\u011fini belirterek bu hususun gizli tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n tek ba\u015f\u0131na veya belirleyici \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde h\u00fckme esas al\u0131n\u0131p al\u0131nmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 konusunda yap\u0131lacak incelemede g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde bulundurulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi ifade edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
16. Ba\u015fvurucu, Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 ba\u015fvuru formundaki beyanlar\u0131n\u0131 tekrar etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
17. Ba\u015fvuru, tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
18. 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
19. 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 sorgulama veya sorgulatma 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 kovu\u015fturma evresinde sorgulama ya da 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
20. Anayasa Mahkemesi, tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131yla ilgili olarak verdi\u011fi kararlar\u0131nda somut bir yarg\u0131lama \u00f6ncesinde veya haricinde elde edilen tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n delil olarak kabul\u00fcn\u00fcn yarg\u0131laman\u0131n adilli\u011fine zarar verip vermedi\u011fini de\u011ferlendirmek i\u00e7in \u00fc\u00e7 a\u015famal\u0131 bir test uygulanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini ifade etmektedir. Buna g\u00f6re ilk olarak tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n mahkemede haz\u0131r edilmemesi ge\u00e7erli bir nedenin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131na bak\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. \u0130kinci olarak san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgulama veya sorgulatma imk\u00e2n\u0131 bulamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 tan\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan verilen beyan\u0131n mahk\u00fbmiyetin dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 tek veya belirleyici delil olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilmelidir. Sorgulama veya sorgulatma imk\u00e2n\u0131 tan\u0131nmayan tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyan\u0131n\u0131n tek veya belirleyici delil oldu\u011funun tespit edilmesi durumunda ise \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc a\u015fama olarak savunma taraf\u0131n\u0131n maruz kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 bu zorluklar\u0131n telafi edilmesi amac\u0131yla yeterli d\u00fczeyde kar\u015f\u0131 dengeleyici g\u00fcvenceler sa\u011flayan bir usul\u00fcn y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fcl\u00fcp y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmedi\u011fi ortaya konulmal\u0131d\u0131r (baz\u0131 de\u011fi\u015fikliklerle birlikte bkz. Abdurrahim Balur, B. No: 2013\/5467, 7\/1\/2016, \u00a7 80; Onur Urbay, B. No: 2014\/6222, 6\/3\/2019, \u00a7\u00a7 36, 40; Zekeriya Sevim, B. No: 2018\/18989, 16\/6\/2021, \u00a7\u00a7 44, 51). Bu kapsamda h\u00fckme ula\u015f\u0131l\u0131rken sorgulanmam\u0131\u015f tan\u0131k beyan\u0131n\u0131 destekleyen ba\u015fka do\u011frulay\u0131c\u0131 delillere dayan\u0131lmas\u0131 telafi edici g\u00fcvencelerden biri olarak kabul edilebilir (Orhan G\u00fclery\u00fcz, \u00a7 39). Duru\u015fmada sorgulanmayan tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyan\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvenilirli\u011finin ve do\u011frulu\u011funun saptanmas\u0131 amac\u0131yla savunma taraf\u0131na sa\u011flanabilecek bir di\u011fer telafi edici g\u00fcvence, san\u0131\u011fa olay\u0131n kendi versiyonunu anlatma ve delillerini sunma imk\u00e2n\u0131n\u0131n tan\u0131nmas\u0131d\u0131r (Orhan G\u00fclery\u00fcz, \u00a7 40). Yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 y\u00fcr\u00fcten mahkemenin yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki tan\u0131klar\u0131n savunman\u0131n onlara soru sormas\u0131na imk\u00e2n sa\u011flayacak \u015fekilde Ses ve G\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc Bili\u015fim Sistemi (SEGB\u0130S) gibi vas\u0131talarla dinlenilmesi de telafi edici g\u00fcvencelerden biri olarak de\u011ferlendirilebilir (Metin Akdemir (2), B. No: 2020\/3964, 21\/9\/2022 \u00a7 36).<\/p>\n
21. Somut olayda ba\u015fvurucunun aleyhinde beyanda bulunan tan\u0131k G.P., PKK ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne y\u00f6nelik olarak y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen ba\u015fka bir soru\u015fturma kapsam\u0131nda verdi\u011fi ifadesinde kendisinin \u00fclkeye giri\u015finde ve \u00fclkede kalmas\u0131nda yard\u0131mc\u0131 olan ki\u015finin ba\u015fvurucu oldu\u011funu belirtmi\u015f ve ba\u015fvurucuyu te\u015fhis etmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n bu ifadesi \u00fczerine soru\u015fturma ba\u015flat\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucunun ikametg\u00e2h\u0131nda arama yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve yap\u0131lan arama ve el koyma sonucunda ba\u015fvurucunun r\u0131zas\u0131yla kolluk g\u00f6revlilerine teslim etti\u011fi ve \u00f6n inceleme yap\u0131lmas\u0131na r\u0131za g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi ak\u0131ll\u0131 telefonda yap\u0131lan incelemede, ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc \u00fcyesi iken \u00e7\u0131kan \u00e7at\u0131\u015fmada \u00f6len bir kimse i\u00e7in “\u015eehidimiz var, taziyedeyim.” \u015feklinde mesaj yazd\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespit edilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucunun telefonunda yer alan mesajda ”\u015eehidimiz var.” diye bahsetti\u011fi ki\u015finin yak\u0131n k\u00f6yl\u00fcs\u00fc oldu\u011funu, bu y\u00fczden \u015fehidimiz var diye mesaj yazd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ifade etti\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
22. Mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan aleyhe beyanda bulunan tan\u0131k G.P.nin istinabe yoluyla al\u0131nan beyanlar\u0131 ba\u015fvurucu ve m\u00fcdafiine okunmu\u015f ancak tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmada dinlenilmesine ili\u015fkin herhangi bir \u00e7aba g\u00f6sterilmemi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, yarg\u0131lama s\u0131ras\u0131nda 10\/9\/2020 tarihli son celsede tan\u0131k G.P.nin mahkemede dinlenmedi\u011fini ifade etmi\u015ftir. B\u00f6ylelikle ba\u015fvurucu, aleyhinde beyanda bulunan tan\u0131\u011f\u0131 sorgulama imk\u00e2n\u0131 bulamam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u0130lgili duru\u015fma tutana\u011f\u0131 ve gerek\u00e7eli kararda da tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n Mahkemede haz\u0131r edilememesinin veya ayn\u0131 anda g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fcl\u00fc ve sesli ileti\u015fim tekni\u011finin kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 suretiyle dinlenilmemesinin hangi ge\u00e7erli nedene dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin bir a\u00e7\u0131klamaya yer verilmemi\u015ftir. Ancak buna ili\u015fkin ge\u00e7erli bir nedenin ortaya konulmamas\u0131, tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011finin kabul edilmesi i\u00e7in yeterli de\u011fildir. \u0130kinci olarak 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 bir tan\u0131k\/tan\u0131klar taraf\u0131ndan verilen ifadeye dayal\u0131 olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
23. Mahkemenin duru\u015fmada dinlenmeyen tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n ifadesine ek olarak ba\u015fvurucunun ak\u0131ll\u0131 telefonunda yap\u0131lan incelemede, ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc \u00fcyesi iken \u00e7\u0131kan \u00e7at\u0131\u015fmada \u00f6len bir kimse i\u00e7in “\u015eehidimiz var, taziyedeyim.” \u015feklinde yazd\u0131\u011f\u0131 mesaja, ele ge\u00e7irilen dijital materyallerde ve ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn silahl\u0131 mensuplar\u0131n\u0131n foto\u011fraflar\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011funa dair dijital veri inceleme ve de\u011ferlendirme tutana\u011f\u0131na, ba\u015fvurucunun SGK kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6sterir MASAK raporuna da dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131ndaki gerek\u00e7eli karar incelendi\u011finde duru\u015fmada dinlenmeyen tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n ba\u015fvurucu aleyhine verdi\u011fi beyanlar\u0131n ve di\u011fer delillerin a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunda Mahkemece herhangi bir de\u011ferlendirmede bulunulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
24. Somut olayda Mahkeme, mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131nda di\u011ferlerinin yan\u0131 s\u0131ra san\u0131\u011f\u0131n (ba\u015fvurucunun) duru\u015fmada sorgulamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131na dayanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Gerek\u00e7eli karar i\u00e7eri\u011finden duru\u015fmada sorgulama imk\u00e2n\u0131 verilmeyen ve eylem yapmak i\u00e7in yasal olmayan yollardan yurda giri\u015f yapan tan\u0131k G.P.nin te\u015fhis tutana\u011f\u0131nda kendisine yard\u0131m eden \u015fahs\u0131n ba\u015fvurucu oldu\u011funu a\u00e7\u0131k ve net \u015fekilde te\u015fhis etmi\u015f olmas\u0131n\u0131n ve kendisinin \u00fclkeye giri\u015finde, \u00fclke i\u00e7erisinde dola\u015fmas\u0131nda ve kalmas\u0131nda yard\u0131mc\u0131 olan ki\u015finin ba\u015fvurucu oldu\u011funu beyan etmesinin G.P.nin \u00f6rg\u00fcte kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucunun rol\u00fc bak\u0131m\u0131ndan h\u00fckme esas al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (bkz. \u00a7 10). K\u0131smet isimli gizli tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n soru\u015fturma evresindeki beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n aksine kovu\u015fturma evresinde ba\u015fvurucuyu tan\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etti\u011fi b\u00f6ylelikle ba\u015fvurucunun \u00f6rg\u00fct i\u00e7erisindeki konumunun temel olarak tan\u0131k G.P.nin beyanlar\u0131 esas al\u0131narak belirlendi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131ndaki yarg\u0131lama bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde te\u015fhis ve beyan\u0131 \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131ndaki soru\u015fturman\u0131n ba\u015flat\u0131lmas\u0131na ve di\u011fer delillerin ele ge\u00e7irilmesine neden olan tan\u0131k G.P.nin ba\u015fvurucu aleyhine verdi\u011fi ifadenin mahk\u00fbmiyet h\u00fckm\u00fcnde tek olmamakla birlikte belirleyici nitelikte delil olarak esas al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kabul edilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
25. Yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcrecinde ba\u015fvurucuya olaylar\u0131 kendi bak\u0131\u015f a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131na g\u00f6re anlatma ve delillerini sunma imk\u00e2n\u0131 tan\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Buna ek olarak h\u00fckme ula\u015f\u0131l\u0131rken sorgulanmam\u0131\u015f tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyan\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda ba\u015fka delillere de dayan\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ancak gerek\u00e7eli kararda ba\u015fvurucunun y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki sorgulanamayan tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131n\u0131 do\u011frulayan ba\u015fkaca delile dayan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin bir a\u00e7\u0131klamaya yer verilmemi\u015ftir. Ayr\u0131ca Mahkemenin yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki tan\u0131\u011f\u0131, ba\u015fvurucunun da ona soru sormas\u0131na imk\u00e2n sa\u011flayacak \u015fekilde SEGB\u0130S gibi vas\u0131talarla neden dinlemedi\u011fine ya da tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n istinabe olunan Mahkemede dinlenirken ba\u015fvurucunun haberdar edilip edilmedi\u011fine ili\u015fkin bir bilgi ve belgeye ula\u015f\u0131lamam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n istinabe mahkemelerince al\u0131nm\u0131\u015f yaz\u0131l\u0131 beyanlar\u0131 duru\u015fmada okunmu\u015fsa da ba\u015fvurucu, tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n tespiti s\u0131ras\u0131nda haz\u0131r bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ses ve g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc nakli yoluyla da olsa onlar\u0131 sorgulayamam\u0131\u015f; sorulan sorulara verdikleri cevaplar hakk\u0131nda izlenim edinme f\u0131rsat\u0131 elde edememi\u015ftir. Bu y\u00fczden tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n tepkileri konusunda Mahkemenin dikkati \u00e7ekilememi\u015f, tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n do\u011frulu\u011fu ve g\u00fcvenilirli\u011fi test edilememi\u015ftir. Mahkeme de tan\u0131k beyanda bulunurken tepkileriyle ilgili olarak izlenim edinememi\u015ftir. \u00d6te yandan h\u00fckme ula\u015f\u0131l\u0131rken sorgulanmam\u0131\u015f tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyan\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda ba\u015fka delillere de dayan\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n beyanlar\u0131 belirleyici \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde mahk\u00fbmiyete temel al\u0131nan tan\u0131\u011f\u0131 sorgulama imk\u00e2n\u0131 tan\u0131nmamas\u0131 nedeniyle savunma makam\u0131n\u0131n maruz kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u0131n\u0131rlamay\u0131 telafi etti\u011fini s\u00f6ylemek de m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. Sonu\u00e7 olarak do\u011frulu\u011fu ve g\u00fcvenilirli\u011fi test edilmemi\u015f tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131 belirleyici \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde h\u00fckme esas al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 h\u00e2lde savunman\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 zorluklar\u0131 telafi edecek kar\u015f\u0131 dengeleyici g\u00fcvenceler sa\u011flanmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu ba\u011flamda tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmada veya SEGB\u0130S yoluyla dinlenmemesinin bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak yarg\u0131laman\u0131n hakkaniyetini zedeledi\u011fi sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
26. 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
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M<\/p>\n
27. Ba\u015fvurucu; ihlal tespiti ile yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131, maddi ve manevi tazminata h\u00fckmedilmesini talep etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
28. 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 (6216 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 50. maddesinin (2) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenen bireysel ba\u015fvuruya \u00f6zg\u00fc yeniden yarg\u0131lama kurumunun \u00f6zelliklerine ili\u015fkin kapsaml\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamalar i\u00e7in bkz. 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
29. Belirtilmelidir ki su\u00e7lu-su\u00e7suz karar\u0131 vermek ya da daha hafif veya a\u011f\u0131r ceza belirlemek de Anayasa Mahkemesinin g\u00f6revi de\u011fildir (baz\u0131 de\u011fi\u015fikliklerle birlikte bkz. Ruh\u015fen Mahmuto\u011flu, B. No: 2015\/22, 15\/1\/2020, \u00a7 67). 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 ba\u015fvurucunun silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde 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 delillerin takdir bi\u00e7imine g\u00f6re mahkemenin benzer veya farkl\u0131 bir sonuca varmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
30. Tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131 tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n yarg\u0131lama evrelerindeki beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n delil de\u011feriyle ilgili bir derecelendirme yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na almamaktad\u0131r. Di\u011fer bir ifadeyle bu hak, tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmadaki beyanlar\u0131na \u00fcst\u00fcnl\u00fck tan\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde bir g\u00fcvence i\u00e7ermemektedir. Savunmaya duru\u015fmada tan\u0131\u011f\u0131 sorgulama f\u0131rsat\u0131 tan\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve san\u0131\u011f\u0131n di\u011fer haklar\u0131na sayg\u0131 g\u00f6sterildi\u011fi s\u00fcrece tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n yarg\u0131lama evresindeki beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n hangisine itibar edilece\u011fi meselesi karar veren mahkemenin takdirindedir (baz\u0131 de\u011fi\u015fikliklerle birlikte bkz. Musa Y\u0131lmaz Acar, B.No:2013\/1664, 16\/7\/2014,\u00a7 53).<\/p>\n
31. \u00d6te yandan ihlalin niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re yeniden yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yeterli bir giderim sa\u011flayaca\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan manevi tazminat, ba\u015fvurucu u\u011frad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia etti\u011fi maddi zararla ilgili bilgi ve belge sunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan da maddi tazminat talebinin reddine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. Tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
B. 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,<\/p>\n
C. 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 \u015eanl\u0131urfa 6. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesine (E.2020\/30, K.2020\/266) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
D. Ba\u015fvurucunun tazminat taleplerinin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. 487,60 TL har\u00e7 ve 30.000 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan 30.487,60 TL tutar\u0131ndaki yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
F. \u00d6demenin karar\u0131n tebli\u011fini takiben ba\u015fvurucunun 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
G. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 23\/10\/2024 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 23\/10\/2024 tarihli ve 2021\/55075 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 B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 MEHMET BOZAN KARAYILAN BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/55075) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 23\/10\/2024 B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 \u00a0 Ba\u015fkan : Hasan Tahsin G\u00d6KCAN \u00dcyeler : Yusuf \u015eevki HAKYEMEZ \u00a0 \u00a0 Selahaddin MENTE\u015e \u00a0 \u00a0 \u0130rfan F\u0130DAN \u00a0 \u00a0 Y\u0131lmaz AK\u00c7\u0130L Raport\u00f6r : Ay\u00e7a GAN\u0130DA\u011eLI DEM\u0130RC\u0130 Ba\u015fvurucu : Mehmet Bozan KARAYILAN Vekili : Av. Sedat G\u00d6ZKIRAN \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru, beyanlar\u0131 belirleyici \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde h\u00fckme esas al\u0131nan tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan sorgulanmas\u0131na imk\u00e2n verilmemesi nedeniyle tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. Suru\u00e7 Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen soru\u015fturma kapsam\u0131nda PKK\/KCK \u00fcyeli\u011fi su\u00e7undan tutuklu bulunan G.P. isimli \u015f\u00fcpheli, kolluk birimlerine vermi\u015f oldu\u011fu ifadede kendisinin \u00fclkeye giri\u015finde ve kalmas\u0131nda yard\u0131mc\u0131 olan ki\u015finin ba\u015fvurucu oldu\u011funu belirtmi\u015ftir. Ayr\u0131ca \u00e7oktan se\u00e7meli foto\u011fraflar ile yap\u0131lan te\u015fhis tutana\u011f\u0131nda, kendine yard\u0131m eden \u015fahs\u0131n ba\u015fvurucu oldu\u011funu te\u015fhis etmi\u015ftir. Bunun \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan soru\u015fturma ba\u015flat\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 3. Suru\u00e7 Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n 2011\/1977 say\u0131l\u0131 soru\u015fturma dosyas\u0131nda dinlenen K\u0131smet isimli gizli tan\u0131k beyan\u0131nda; Suru\u00e7 Belediyesinin ta\u015feron \u015firketi olan B. Limited \u015eirketinde 2008-2012 y\u0131llar\u0131 aras\u0131 \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ba\u015fvurucunun da bu firmada \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu firmada \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131rken kendisi gibi \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar\u0131n maa\u015flar\u0131ndan kesinti yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu paralar\u0131n PKK\/KCK ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne g\u00f6nderildi\u011fini, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar\u0131n aras\u0131nda bu …<\/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-21021","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber","category-uncategorized-tr"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n