T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130<\/p>\n
ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00d6ZLEM CO\u015eKUN BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/3268)<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 12\/3\/2025<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fkan<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Basri BA\u011eCI<\/p>\n
\u00dcyeler<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Engin YILDIRIM<\/p>\n
R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7<\/p>\n
Kenan YA\u015eAR<\/p>\n
\u00d6mer \u00c7INAR<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Ay\u015fenur TUNCER<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
\u00d6zlem CO\u015eKUN<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Mehmet G\u00dcLERMAN<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN KONUSU<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, kamudaki g\u00f6revine iade edilirken ataman\u0131n \u00f6nceki g\u00f6reve yap\u0131lmamas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. Ba\u015fvurucu, Gazi \u00dcniversitesi T\u0131p Fak\u00fcltesi Dahili T\u0131p B\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc N\u00f6roloji Anabilim Dal\u0131nda \u00f6\u011fretim \u00fcyesi olarak g\u00f6rev yapmakta iken 31\/10\/2016 tarihli ve 677 say\u0131l\u0131 Ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc H\u00e2l Kapsam\u0131nda Baz\u0131 Tedbirler Al\u0131nmas\u0131 Hakk\u0131nda Kanun H\u00fckm\u00fcnde Kararname (677 say\u0131l\u0131 KHK) kapsam\u0131nda kamu g\u00f6revinden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu, kamu g\u00f6revinden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lma i\u015flemine kar\u015f\u0131 Ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc H\u00e2l \u0130\u015flemleri \u0130nceleme Komisyonu’na (Komisyon) ba\u015fvurmu\u015f, Komisyon 23\/5\/2018 tarihli karar\u0131yla ba\u015fvurucunun talebini kabul ederek kamu g\u00f6revine iadesine karar vermi\u015ftir. Y\u00fcksek\u00f6\u011fretim Kurulu Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Y\u00d6K) Y\u00fcr\u00fctme Kurulu 6\/6\/2018 tarihinde ba\u015fvurucunun K\u0131r\u0131kkale \u00dcniversitesi T\u0131p Fak\u00fcltesi Dahili T\u0131p B\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc N\u00f6roloji Anabilim Dal\u0131na atanmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. Ba\u015fvurucu, an\u0131lan atama i\u015fleminin iptali talebiyle Ankara 13. \u0130dare Mahkemesinde (Mahkeme) dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Dava dilek\u00e7esinde; ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda kovu\u015fturma yap\u0131lmas\u0131na yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair karar verildi\u011fini, akabinde kamu g\u00f6revine iade edildi\u011fini, ancak \u00f6nceki g\u00f6rev yerine atamas\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir. Sonu\u00e7 olarak ba\u015fvurucunun \u00f6nceki g\u00f6rev yerine atanmamas\u0131 nedeniyle dava konusu i\u015flemin ve s\u00f6z konusu i\u015flemin yasal dayana\u011f\u0131n\u0131 olu\u015fturan mevzuat h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinin hukuk devleti ilkesiyle ba\u011fda\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ifade etmi\u015ftir. Daval\u0131 idare ise savunma dilek\u00e7esinde, dava konusu i\u015flemin dayana\u011f\u0131 olan kanun h\u00fckm\u00fcnde kararnamelere y\u00f6nelik yarg\u0131sal denetim yap\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek davan\u0131n reddini talep etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
4. An\u0131lan davada Mahkeme 21\/5\/2019 ve 18\/3\/2020 tarihli ara kararlar\u0131nda Anayasa Mahkemesinin E.2018\/74 ve E.2018\/137 s\u0131ras\u0131na kay\u0131tl\u0131 iptal davalar\u0131nda verilecek kararlar\u0131n davan\u0131n esas\u0131n\u0131 etkileyece\u011fi kanaatiyle bu iptal davalar\u0131n\u0131n sonucunun beklenmesine karar vermi\u015ftir. Akabinde Mahkeme 10\/9\/2020 tarihinde davan\u0131n reddine karar vermi\u015ftir. Kararda, dava konusu i\u015flemin yasal dayana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n 23\/1\/2017 tarihli ve 29957 say\u0131l\u0131 Resm\u00ee Gazete’de yay\u0131mlanarak y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren 685 say\u0131l\u0131 Ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc H\u00e2l \u0130\u015flemleri \u0130nceleme Komisyonu Kurulmas\u0131 Hakk\u0131nda Kanun H\u00fckm\u00fcnde Kararname’nin 10. maddesi ile 1\/2\/2018 tarihli ve 7075 say\u0131l\u0131 Ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc H\u00e2l \u0130\u015flemleri \u0130nceleme Komisyonu Kurulmas\u0131 Hakk\u0131nda Kanun H\u00fckm\u00fcnde Kararnamenin De\u011fi\u015ftirilerek Kabul Edilmesine Dair Kanun’un 10. maddesi oldu\u011funu belirtmi\u015ftir. An\u0131lan mevzuat uyar\u0131nca, y\u00fcksek\u00f6\u011fretim kurumlar\u0131nda g\u00f6rev yapmakta iken kamu g\u00f6revinden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan \u00f6\u011fretim elemanlar\u0131na ili\u015fkin olarak Ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc H\u00e2l \u0130nceleme Komisyonu; kamu g\u00f6revine iade karar\u0131 verilmesi h\u00e2linde bu ki\u015filerin ancak Ankara, \u0130stanbul, \u0130zmir illeri d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda ve kamu g\u00f6revinden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00fcksek\u00f6\u011fretim kurumu haricindeki kurumlara atamalar\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131labilece\u011fi hususunun g\u00f6zetildi\u011fini ve idarece tesis edilen dava konusu i\u015flemde hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna var\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ifade etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. Ba\u015fvurucu karara kar\u015f\u0131 istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur. \u0130stinaf dilek\u00e7esinde; kendisi ile ayn\u0131 ko\u015fullarda ve ayn\u0131 mevzuat h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine tabi olan akademik personelin kamu g\u00f6revinden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmadan \u00f6nceki g\u00f6revlerine atanmalar\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda K\u0131r\u0131kkale \u00dcniversitesine atanmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin karar\u0131n Anayasa’ya ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Bunun yan\u0131nda hakk\u0131nda uygulanan i\u015flemlere dayanak yap\u0131lan ilgili mevzuat\u0131n da Anayasa’ya ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011funu ifade ederek bu Anayasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k iddias\u0131n\u0131 Mahkemede ileri s\u00fcrmelerine ra\u011fmen bu konuda de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmadan davan\u0131n esas\u0131 hakk\u0131nda karar verildi\u011fini vurgulam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ankara B\u00f6lge \u0130dare Mahkemesi 4. \u0130dari Dava Dairesi (B\u00f6lge \u0130dare Mahkemesi) 30\/12\/2020 tarihinde kararda usul ve hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun kesin olarak reddine karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvurucu, nihai h\u00fckm\u00fc 13\/1\/2021 tarihinde tebell\u00fc\u011f ettikten sonra 28\/1\/2021 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
7. Komisyonca ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik ve esas incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME<\/p>\n
8. Ba\u015fvurucu; dava konusu idari i\u015flemin dayana\u011f\u0131 olan KHK maddesinin kanunla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lan h\u00e2linin iptali talebine ili\u015fkin Anayasa Mahkemesinin 2018\/137 esas\u0131na kay\u0131tl\u0131 iptal davas\u0131n\u0131n sonucunun beklenmesini talep ettiklerini, bunun \u00fczerine an\u0131lan dosyan\u0131n sonucunun beklenmesine karar verilmesine ra\u011fmen davan\u0131n reddedildi\u011fini, b\u00f6ylelikle Anayasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k iddias\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilmeden davan\u0131n sonu\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir. Ayr\u0131ca s\u00f6z konusu atama nedeniyle Ankara’daki evini, ailesini ve kurulu d\u00fczenini b\u0131rakarak K\u0131r\u0131kkale’ye ta\u015f\u0131nmak zorunda kald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, \u00f6zel hayat\u0131 ve aile d\u00fczeninin bu durumdan son derece olumsuz bi\u00e7imde etkilendi\u011fini ifade etmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu atama i\u015flemi nedeniyle hukuk devleti ilkesinin, kanunilik ilkesinin, e\u015fitlik ilkesinin, masumiyet karinesinin, adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n, etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131n\u0131n, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma hakk\u0131n\u0131n, \u00f6zel ve aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n, kamu hizmetlerine girme hakk\u0131n\u0131n, \u015feref ve itibar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
9. Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde; somut olay\u0131n ve yarg\u0131laman\u0131n bir \u00f6zeti yap\u0131ld\u0131ktan sonra mevcut ba\u015fvuruda ba\u015fvurucunun \u00f6zel ve aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 haklar\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edilip edilmedi\u011fi konusunda inceleme yap\u0131l\u0131rken Anayasa ve ilgili mevzuat h\u00fck\u00fcmleri, Anayasa Mahkemesi i\u00e7tihad\u0131 ve somut olay\u0131n kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n da dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu, Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 \u00f6nceki beyanlar\u0131 yan\u0131nda ba\u015fvuruya konu olaya ili\u015fkin ayn\u0131 uygulamaya tabi tutulan e\u015fi hakk\u0131nda Anayasa Mahkemesi taraf\u0131ndan ihlal karar\u0131 verildi\u011fini belirterek kendisi i\u00e7in de ayn\u0131 gerek\u00e7elerin s\u00f6z konusu oldu\u011funu ifade etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
10. Ba\u015fvuru konusu olayda, ba\u015fvurucunun daha \u00f6nce g\u00f6rev yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 yerdeki pozisyonuna atanmas\u0131n\u0131n engellenmesinin meslek hayat\u0131nda \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filerle ili\u015fki kurabilme ve geli\u015ftirebilme imk\u00e2n\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nemli \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde zay\u0131flatmas\u0131na, sosyal ve mesleki itibar\u0131n\u0131 koruyabilmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan ciddi sonu\u00e7lar do\u011furmas\u0131na yol a\u00e7aca\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilmektedir. Bu durumda sonuca dayal\u0131 yakla\u015f\u0131m kapsam\u0131nda ba\u015fvurunun \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenebilir nitelikte oldu\u011fu kanaatine var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (benzer y\u00f6ndeki de\u011ferlendirmeler i\u00e7in bkz. U\u011fur Co\u015fkun, B. No: 2020\/9103, 28\/2\/2024, \u00a7 25; Mertihan Kurdo\u011flu, B. No: 2020\/5774, 15\/11\/2023, \u00a7 25; Abdulkadir Tuncay, B. No: 2019\/35343, 30\/3\/2022, \u00a7 39; Tamer Mahmuto\u011flu, [GK], B. No: 2017\/38953, 23\/7\/2020, \u00a7\u00a7 84-90).<\/p>\n
11. 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 \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
12. Somut olayda ba\u015fvurucunun daha \u00f6nce g\u00f6rev yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 Gazi \u00dcniversitesi T\u0131p Fak\u00fcltesi Dahili T\u0131p B\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc N\u00f6roloji Anabilim Dal\u0131nda \u00f6\u011fretim eleman\u0131 olarak atanmamas\u0131n\u0131n dayana\u011f\u0131 7075 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 10. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda bahsi ge\u00e7en ve kamu g\u00f6revine iade edilen personelin daha \u00f6nce g\u00f6rev yapt\u0131klar\u0131 yer ve Ankara, \u0130stanbul, \u0130zmir illeri d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki \u00f6zellikleri maddede belirtilen y\u00fcksek\u00f6\u011fretim kurumlar\u0131ndan birine atanaca\u011f\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcd\u00fcr (U\u011fur Co\u015fkun, \u00a7 33; Mertihan Kurdo\u011flu, \u00a7 33).<\/p>\n
13. Anayasa Mahkemesi U\u011fur Co\u015fkun ve Mertihan Kurdo\u011flu kararlar\u0131nda genel ilkeleri belirleyerek ba\u015fvuru konusu olayla benzer i\u015flemlere ili\u015fkin kararlar vermi\u015ftir. An\u0131lan kararlarda Anayasa Mahkemesinin 30\/6\/2022 tarihli ve E.2018\/137, K.2022\/86 say\u0131l\u0131 iptal karar\u0131yla g\u00f6revlerine iade edilen \u00f6\u011fretim elemanlar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6nceki g\u00f6rev yerleri ile Ankara, \u0130stanbul ve \u0130zmir illerinde bulunan y\u00fcksek\u00f6\u011fretim kurumlar\u0131na atanmalar\u0131na kategorik yasak getiren ve bu ki\u015filerin \u00f6ncelikli olarak 2006 y\u0131l\u0131ndan sonra kurulan y\u00fcksek\u00f6\u011fretim kurumlar\u0131nda istihdam edilmelerini \u00f6ng\u00f6ren kural\u0131n iptal edildi\u011fi vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. B\u00f6ylelikle ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n daha \u00f6nce g\u00f6rev yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fcniversiteye atamas\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lmamas\u0131na ili\u015fkin i\u015flemin kanuni dayana\u011f\u0131n\u0131 olu\u015fturan 7075 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n iptal karar\u0131 nedeniyle kanunilik \u015fart\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
14. Somut olayda da Komisyon taraf\u0131ndan g\u00f6revine iade edilen ba\u015fvurucunun daha \u00f6nce g\u00f6rev yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fcniversiteye atamas\u0131n\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmesi bizzat 7075 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 10. maddesi ile yasaklanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Nitekim Anayasa Mahkemesi benzer \u015fik\u00e2yetleri ele ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 Mertihan Kurdo\u011flu ve U\u011fur Co\u015fkun kararlar\u0131nda, an\u0131lan iptal karar\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7esini de g\u00f6zeterek \u00f6zel hayata m\u00fcdahale i\u00e7eren 7075 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 10. maddesinin muhataplar\u0131n\u0131, yetki a\u015f\u0131m\u0131na ve keyf\u00eeli\u011fe kar\u015f\u0131 koruyabilecek niteli\u011fe ve a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131\u011fa sahip olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle m\u00fcdahalenin kanunilik \u015fart\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 vurgulayarak \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar vermi\u015ftir (U\u011fur Co\u015fkun, \u00a7\u00a7 36-38; Mertihan Kurdo\u011flu, \u00a7\u00a7 36-38). Eldeki ba\u015fvuru y\u00f6n\u00fcnden de Mertihan Kurdo\u011flu ve U\u011fur Co\u015fkun kararlar\u0131nda yer alan ilkelerden ve ula\u015f\u0131lan sonu\u00e7tan ayr\u0131lmay\u0131 gerektiren bir durum bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca ba\u015fvuruya konu m\u00fcdahalenin kanunilik \u015fart\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan s\u00f6z konusu m\u00fcdahale a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan di\u011fer g\u00fcvence \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctlerine riayet edilip edilmedi\u011finin ayr\u0131ca de\u011ferlendirilmesine gerek g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir (Ayn\u0131 y\u00f6nde de\u011ferlendirme i\u00e7in bkz. U\u011fur Co\u015fkun, \u00a7 38; Mertihan Kurdo\u011flu, \u00a7 38).<\/p>\n
15. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle ba\u015fvurucunun Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 20. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M<\/p>\n
16. Ba\u015fvurucu; ihlalin tespiti, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yenilenmesi ve 50.000 TL tazminat talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
17. Ba\u015fvuruda tespit edilen anayasal hak ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131nda hukuki yarar ve zorunluluk bulunmaktad\u0131r. Anayasa’n\u0131n 148. ve 153. maddeleri ile 30\/3\/2011 tarihli ve 6216 say\u0131l\u0131 Anayasa Mahkemesinin Kurulu\u015fu ve Yarg\u0131lama Usulleri Hakk\u0131nda Kanun’un 50. ve 66. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca ihlal karar\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6nderildi\u011fi yarg\u0131 mercilerince yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken i\u015f, yeniden yarg\u0131lama i\u015flemlerini ba\u015flat\u0131p Anayasa Mahkemesinin ihlal karar\u0131nda belirtilen ilkelere ve gerek\u00e7elere uygun bi\u00e7imde y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclecek yarg\u0131lama sonunda hak ihlalinin nedenlerini gidererek yeni bir karar vermektir (yeniden yarg\u0131lama konusunda 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
18. \u00d6te yandan hak ihlali karar\u0131ndan Anayasa Mahkemesinin davan\u0131n sonucuyla ilgili olarak bir tutum sergiledi\u011fi sonucu \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmamal\u0131d\u0131r.Anayasa Mahkemesince verilen hak ihlali karar\u0131 uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n sonu\u00e7lar\u0131ndan ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z olup davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne, reddine ya da beraate veya mahk\u00fbmiyete karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi anlam\u0131na gelmemektedir. Kural olarak yarg\u0131laman\u0131n her a\u015famas\u0131nda oldu\u011fu gibi ihlalin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 gidermek \u00fczere yeniden yap\u0131lacak yarg\u0131lama sonunda da delillerin dava ile ili\u015fkisini kurma ve bunlar\u0131 de\u011ferlendirip sonu\u00e7 \u00e7\u0131karma yetkisi ilgili mahkemelere aittir.<\/p>\n
19. \u00d6te yandan ba\u015fvurucu, tazminat talebinde bulunmu\u015f ise de ihlalin 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 tazminat talebinin reddine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM <\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. \u00d6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
B. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 20. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
C. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere Ankara 13. \u0130dare Mahkemesine (E.2018\/1860, K.2020\/1539) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
D. Ba\u015fvurucunun tazminat talebinin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. 487,60 TL har\u00e7 ve 30.000 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan toplam 30.487,60 TL yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
F. \u00d6demelerin 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 12\/3\/2025 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 12\/3\/2025 tarihli ve 2021\/3268 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 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM KARAR \u00d6ZLEM CO\u015eKUN BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/3268) Karar Tarihi: 12\/3\/2025 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM KARAR Ba\u015fkan : Basri BA\u011eCI \u00dcyeler : Engin YILDIRIM R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7 Kenan YA\u015eAR \u00d6mer \u00c7INAR Raport\u00f6r : Ay\u015fenur TUNCER Ba\u015fvurucu : \u00d6zlem CO\u015eKUN Vekili : Av. Mehmet G\u00dcLERMAN I. BA\u015eVURUNUN KONUSU 1. Ba\u015fvuru, kamudaki g\u00f6revine iade edilirken ataman\u0131n \u00f6nceki g\u00f6reve yap\u0131lmamas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. Ba\u015fvurucu, Gazi \u00dcniversitesi T\u0131p Fak\u00fcltesi Dahili T\u0131p B\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc N\u00f6roloji Anabilim Dal\u0131nda \u00f6\u011fretim \u00fcyesi olarak g\u00f6rev yapmakta iken 31\/10\/2016 tarihli ve 677 say\u0131l\u0131 Ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc H\u00e2l Kapsam\u0131nda Baz\u0131 Tedbirler Al\u0131nmas\u0131 Hakk\u0131nda Kanun H\u00fckm\u00fcnde Kararname (677 say\u0131l\u0131 KHK) kapsam\u0131nda kamu g\u00f6revinden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu, kamu g\u00f6revinden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lma i\u015flemine kar\u015f\u0131 Ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc H\u00e2l \u0130\u015flemleri \u0130nceleme Komisyonu’na (Komisyon) ba\u015fvurmu\u015f, Komisyon 23\/5\/2018 tarihli karar\u0131yla ba\u015fvurucunun talebini kabul ederek kamu g\u00f6revine iadesine karar vermi\u015ftir. Y\u00fcksek\u00f6\u011fretim Kurulu Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Y\u00d6K) Y\u00fcr\u00fctme Kurulu 6\/6\/2018 tarihinde ba\u015fvurucunun K\u0131r\u0131kkale \u00dcniversitesi T\u0131p Fak\u00fcltesi Dahili T\u0131p B\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc N\u00f6roloji Anabilim Dal\u0131na atanmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. 3. Ba\u015fvurucu, an\u0131lan atama i\u015fleminin iptali talebiyle Ankara 13. \u0130dare Mahkemesinde (Mahkeme) dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Dava dilek\u00e7esinde; ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda kovu\u015fturma yap\u0131lmas\u0131na yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair karar verildi\u011fini, akabinde kamu g\u00f6revine iade edildi\u011fini, ancak \u00f6nceki g\u00f6rev yerine atamas\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir. Sonu\u00e7 olarak ba\u015fvurucunun \u00f6nceki g\u00f6rev yerine atanmamas\u0131 …<\/p>","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-101752","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n