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
OSMAN ER BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/24526)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 30\/10\/2024<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/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
Kenan YA\u015eAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00d6mer \u00c7INAR<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Muhammed Nuri \u00d6ZG\u00dcR<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Osman ER<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, yasal \u015fartlar\u0131 olu\u015fmamas\u0131na ra\u011fmen eylemin \u00f6rg\u00fct faaliyeti kapsam\u0131nda kabul edilerek verilen cezada art\u0131r\u0131m yap\u0131lmas\u0131 nedeniyle gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. \u0130stanbul Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k) ba\u015flatt\u0131\u011f\u0131 soru\u015fturma sonucunda ba\u015fvurucunun Fetullah\u00e7\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fc\/Paralel Devlet Yap\u0131lanmas\u0131 (FET\u00d6\/PDY) kurma veya y\u00f6netme su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle hakk\u0131nda iddianame d\u00fczenlemi\u015ftir. \u0130stanbul 26. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi (Mahkeme) iddianameyi kabul etmi\u015f ve yarg\u0131lamaya ba\u015flam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Mahkeme duru\u015fma haz\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015flemleri kapsam\u0131nda di\u011fer i\u015flemler ile birlikte ba\u015fvurucunun ba\u015fkas\u0131 ad\u0131na sahte kimlik belgesi ile yakalanmas\u0131 nedeniyle resm\u00ee belgede sahtecilik su\u00e7undan su\u00e7 duyurusunda bulunulmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7 duyurusu \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda resm\u00ee belgede sahtecilik su\u00e7undan soru\u015fturma ba\u015flatm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Soru\u015fturma sonucunda Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k, ba\u015fvurucunun silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc faaliyetleri \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde resm\u00ee belgede sahtecilik su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle iddianame d\u00fczenlemi\u015f; iddianamede ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda yakalama karar\u0131 oldu\u011fu d\u00f6nemde silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn faaliyetleri \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde ve bu su\u00e7 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yakalanmamak maksad\u0131yla sahte kimlik belgesi d\u00fczenleterek bunu kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
4. Mahkeme, resm\u00ee belgede sahtecilik su\u00e7undan d\u00fczenlenen iddianameyi kabul ederek yarg\u0131lamaya ba\u015flam\u0131\u015f; a\u00e7\u0131lan kamu davas\u0131n\u0131n hukuki ve fiil\u00ee irtibat\u0131 oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esiyle silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc kurma veya y\u00f6netme su\u00e7undan devam eden dava ile birle\u015ftirilmesine karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. Yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcrecinde al\u0131nan savunmas\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucu, hakk\u0131nda arama karar\u0131 oldu\u011funu \u00f6\u011frenince ailesini ma\u011fdur etmemek amac\u0131yla ba\u015fkas\u0131 ad\u0131na d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f kimlik belgesi ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmi\u015ftir. Yarg\u0131lama sonucunda Mahkeme, ba\u015fvurucunun silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc \u00fcyeli\u011fi su\u00e7undan mahk\u00fbmiyetine, resm\u00ee belgede sahtecilik su\u00e7u y\u00f6n\u00fcnden eylemin silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc faaliyetleri \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde i\u015flendi\u011fini kabul ederek 3 y\u0131l 9 ay hapis cezas\u0131 ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. Gerek\u00e7eli karar\u0131n ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
“San\u0131ktan ele ge\u00e7irilen dijital materyaller \u00fczerinde yap\u0131lan incelemede neticesinde d\u00fczenlenen 11\/03\/2020 tarihli dijital inceleme raporunda, san\u0131\u011fa ait cep telefonlar\u0131nda Kakaotalk, Cleanthemall ve Falcon uygulamalar\u0131na ait kal\u0131nt\u0131lara rastland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n belirtildi\u011fi, yine san\u0131\u011f\u0131n arda adl\u0131 kullan\u0131c\u0131 ile 14\/11\/2019 tarihli yaz\u0131\u015fmas\u0131nda hakk\u0131ndaki yakalama karar\u0131n\u0131 payla\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
San\u0131\u011fa ula\u015f\u0131lamamas\u0131 \u00fczerine san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda yakalama karar\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n 04\/02\/2020 tarihinde \u00dcmraniye il\u00e7esinde g\u00f6revli polislere [M.T.] ad\u0131na d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f ve \u00fczerinde kendi resmi bulunan 12\/02\/2020 tarihli uzmanl\u0131k raporuna g\u00f6re sahte oldu\u011fu tespit edilen n\u00fcfus c\u00fczdan\u0131n\u0131 ibraz etti\u011fi, buna ili\u015fkin 04\/02\/2020 tarihli tutanak tutuldu\u011fu, mahkeme heyetinin duru\u015fmada yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6zlem ve incelemede s\u00f6z konusu n\u00fcfus c\u00fczdan\u0131n\u0131n ‘[M.T.]’ ad\u0131na \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, […] TC kimlik numaral\u0131 […] Seri ve[…] numaral\u0131 oldu\u011fu, \u00fczerinde san\u0131\u011fa ait foto\u011fraf\u0131n oldu\u011fu, bask\u0131 tekni\u011fi ve so\u011fuk m\u00fchr\u00fcn bulunmas\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ise ilk bak\u0131\u015fta ve kolayl\u0131kla sahtecili\u011finin anla\u015f\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131 ve bu itibarla i\u011ffal kabiliyetini haiz oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
…<\/p>\n
Yine san\u0131\u011f\u0131n yakaland\u0131\u011f\u0131nda polislere sahte kimlik ibraz etmi\u015f olmas\u0131, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n polislerin evine gelmesi nedeniyle sahte kimlik yapt\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair tevil yollu ikrar\u0131, 04\/02\/2020 tarihli tutanak, 12\/02\/2020 tarihli \u0130stanbul KPLM Uzmanl\u0131k raporu ve mahkeme g\u00f6zlemi ile san\u0131\u011f\u0131n hakk\u0131ndaki yakalama karar\u0131na ra\u011fmen yakalanamam\u0131\u015f olu\u015fu ve hakk\u0131ndaki \u00f6rg\u00fct su\u00e7lamas\u0131na ili\u015fkin yakalama karar\u0131ndan haberdar olmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen yakalanmamak amac\u0131 ve kast\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131mas\u0131, ancak sahte kimli\u011fi kime ve nas\u0131l yapt\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair \u00e7eli\u015fkili beyanlar\u0131, bu noktada bildiklerini samimi olarak payla\u015fmamas\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011fine (ayr\u0131ca temel cezan\u0131n alt s\u0131n\u0131rdan uzakla\u015fmay\u0131 gerektirmi\u015ftir); san\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00fczerine at\u0131l\u0131 resmi belgede sahtecilik su\u00e7unu i\u015fledi\u011fi sabit g\u00f6r\u00fclerek 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK.n\u0131n 61. maddesi uyar\u0131nca su\u00e7un i\u015fleni\u015f bi\u00e7imi, su\u00e7un zaman\u0131 ve yeri, su\u00e7ta kullan\u0131lan ara\u00e7, su\u00e7un konusunun \u00f6nem ve de\u011feri, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kast\u0131 ile g\u00fctt\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ama\u00e7 ve saiki g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131narak san\u0131\u011f\u0131n eylemine uyan 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK’nun 204\/1. maddesi gere\u011fince su\u00e7un i\u015flenmesindeki \u00f6zelliklere g\u00f6re ceza tayini ile takdiren ve te\u015fdiden san\u0131\u011f\u0131n 3 y\u0131l hapis cezas\u0131 ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n cezas\u0131n\u0131n, 3713 say\u0131l\u0131 kanunun 4\/-1-a, 5\/1. maddesi uyar\u0131nca 1\/2 oran\u0131nda art\u0131r\u0131larak san\u0131\u011f\u0131n 4 y\u0131l 6 ay hapis cezas\u0131 ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcrecindeki tutum ve davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131 takdiri indirim nedeni kabul edilerek 5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 TCK.n\u0131n 62. maddesi uyar\u0131nca san\u0131\u011f\u0131n cezas\u0131nda takdiren 1\/6 oran\u0131nda indirim yap\u0131lmak suretiyle san\u0131\u011f\u0131n 3 y\u0131l 9 ay hapis cezas\u0131 ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.”<\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvurucu, mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 di\u011fer nedenlerle birlikte resm\u00ee belgede sahtecilik su\u00e7unun ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc faaliyeti kapsam\u0131nda i\u015flenmemesine ra\u011fmen bu gerek\u00e7eyle cezada art\u0131r\u0131m yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011funu, istinaf mahkemelerinin bu konuda \u00e7eli\u015fkili kararlar verdi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrerek istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur. \u0130stanbul B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 3. Ceza Dairesi incelenen karara at\u0131fla istinaf ba\u015fvurusunu reddetmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
7. Ba\u015fvurucu 31\/5\/2021 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
8. Komisyon; adli yard\u0131m talebinin kabul\u00fcne, gerek\u00e7eli karar 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, kanuni \u015fartlar\u0131 olu\u015fmamas\u0131na ra\u011fmen resm\u00ee belgede sahtecilik su\u00e7undan verilen cezada su\u00e7un \u00f6rg\u00fct faaliyetleri \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde i\u015flendi\u011fi kabul edilerek art\u0131r\u0131m yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ilk derece mahkemeleri ve b\u00f6lge adliye mahkemelerinin ayn\u0131 eyleme ili\u015fkin farkl\u0131 uygulamalar\u0131 oldu\u011funu belirtmi\u015f; su\u00e7ta ve cezada kanunilik ilkesinin ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde; Mahkemenin karar\u0131nda esas ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 delilleri inceleyerek eylemlerle ili\u015fkilendirdi\u011fi, ula\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucu ilgili ve yeterli gerek\u00e7eyle a\u00e7\u0131klad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bildirilmi\u015ftir. Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 ba\u015fvurucu; ba\u015fvuru formunda belirtti\u011fi iddialar\u0131 yinelemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
10. Ba\u015fvuru, adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvencelerinden biri olan gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
11. Anayasa Mahkemesi, \u00f6n\u00fcne gelen bir\u00e7ok ba\u015fvuruda gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n kapsam ve i\u00e7eri\u011fini belirlemi\u015ftir. Anayasa Mahkemesi \u00f6zellikle a\u00e7\u0131k ve somut bir bi\u00e7imde \u00f6ne s\u00fcr\u00fclen iddia ve savunmalar\u0131n davan\u0131n sonucuna etkili olmas\u0131, ba\u015fka bir deyi\u015fle davan\u0131n sonucunu de\u011fi\u015ftirebilecek nitelikte bulunmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde davayla do\u011frudan ilgili olan bu hususlara mahkemelerce makul bir gerek\u00e7e ile yan\u0131t verilmesi gerekti\u011fine dikkat \u00e7ekmi\u015ftir (Muhittin Kaya ve Muhittin Kaya \u0130n\u015faat Taahh\u00fct Madencilik G\u0131da Turizm Pazarlama Sanayi ve Ticaret Ltd. \u015eti., B. No: 2013\/1213, 4\/12\/2013, \u00a7\u00a7 25, 26; Vesim Parlak, B. No: 2012\/1034, 20\/3\/2014, \u00a7\u00a7 33, 34; Yasemin Ek\u015fi, B. No: 2013\/5486, 4\/12\/2013, \u00a7\u00a7 56, 57; Sencer Ba\u015fat ve di\u011ferleri [GK], B. No: 2013\/7800, 18\/6\/2014, \u00a7\u00a7 31-39; M\u00fcn\u00fcr Ata, B. No: 2014\/4958, 22\/1\/2015, \u00a7\u00a7 37-43; Hikmet \u00c7elik ve di\u011ferleri, B. No: 2013\/4894, 15\/12\/2015, \u00a7\u00a7 54-59; \u015eah Tar\u0131m \u0130n\u015f. Tur. Ltd. \u015eti., B. No: 2013\/7847, 9\/3\/2016, \u00a7\u00a7 36-48).<\/p>\n
12. Yarg\u0131 mercilerinin ayn\u0131 maddi veya hukuki olguyla ilgili olarak ba\u015fka bir yarg\u0131 merciinin vard\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonu\u00e7tan farkl\u0131 bir sonuca ula\u015fmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde bunun dayanaklar\u0131n\u0131 gerek\u00e7eli karar\u0131nda g\u00f6stermesi kendisinden beklenir. Anayasa’da g\u00fcvenceye ba\u011flanan t\u00fcm temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklerin yorumunda g\u00f6zetilmesi gereken temel ilke olarak d\u00fczenlenen hukuk devleti ilkesi, yarg\u0131 organlar\u0131n\u0131n ayn\u0131 maddi veya hukuki olgularla ilgili olarak \u00e7eli\u015fkili kararlar vermekten m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011funca ka\u00e7\u0131nmalar\u0131n\u0131 gerekli k\u0131lar. Ayn\u0131 maddi veya hukuki vak\u0131alarla ilgili olarak farkl\u0131 kararlar verilmesi hukuk devleti ilkesini zedeleyebilece\u011fi gibi ki\u015filerin hukuka olan inanc\u0131n\u0131 da zay\u0131flatabilir. Bu nedenle bir maddi veya hukuki vak\u0131a ile ilgili olarak ba\u015fka bir yarg\u0131 mercii taraf\u0131ndan bir kimse lehine karar verildi\u011fi ancak di\u011fer bir yarg\u0131 merciinin ayn\u0131 olgu hakk\u0131nda farkl\u0131 bir sonuca ula\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 durumlarda bunun gerek\u00e7esini belirtmesi gerekir. Yarg\u0131 merciinin bu gibi durumlarda gerek\u00e7e g\u00f6sterme y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, ki\u015filerin hukuka olan g\u00fcvenlerinin sars\u0131lmamas\u0131 i\u00e7in hayati \u00f6nemdedir (Mehmet Okyar, B. No: 2017\/38342, 13\/2\/2020, \u00a7 29).<\/p>\n
13. \u00d6te yandan istinaf\/temyiz merciinin yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 yapan mahkemenin karar\u0131n\u0131 uygun bulmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde bunu ya ayn\u0131 gerek\u00e7eyi kullanarak ya da bir at\u0131fla karar\u0131na yans\u0131tmas\u0131 yeterlidir. Burada \u00f6nemli olan husus istinaf\/temyiz merciinin bir \u015fekilde istinafta\/temyizde dile getirilmi\u015f ana unsurlar\u0131 inceledi\u011fini, mahkeme karar\u0131n\u0131 inceleyerek onad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ya da bozdu\u011funu g\u00f6stermesidir (baz\u0131 de\u011fi\u015fikliklerle birlikte bkz. Yasemin Ek\u015fi, \u00a7 57). Ancak istinaf\/temyiz incelemesi s\u0131ras\u0131nda ayr\u0131 ve a\u00e7\u0131k bir yan\u0131t verilmesini gerektiren usul veya esasa dair iddialar\u0131n istinaf\/temyiz mercilerince cevaps\u0131z b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131 gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlaline neden olabilir (baz\u0131 de\u011fi\u015fikliklerle birlikte bkz. Caner Kand\u0131rmaz, B. No: 2013\/3672, 30\/12\/2014, \u00a7 31).<\/p>\n
14. Anayasa Mahkemesi tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131na ili\u015fkin verdi\u011fi bir kararda, bir delilin belirleyici olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n sadece ba\u015fvurucunun mahk\u00fbmiyeti y\u00f6n\u00fcnden de\u011fil temel cezan\u0131n alt s\u0131n\u0131rdan uzakla\u015f\u0131larak tayin edilmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan da dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir (benzer y\u00f6ndeki de\u011ferlendirmeler i\u00e7in bkz. Hasan Bati, B. No: 2019\/8419, 28\/6\/2022, \u00a7\u00a7 33-35). Anayasa Mahkemesi bir\u00e7ok karar\u0131nda ise cezan\u0131n miktar\u0131n\u0131 ya da niteli\u011fini etkileyen bireyselle\u015ftirme kurumlar\u0131n\u0131n uygulanmas\u0131na ya da uygulanmamas\u0131na karar verilirken mahkemelerce ayr\u0131 ve a\u00e7\u0131k bir de\u011ferlendirmeye yer verilmemesinin de gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131 ihlal etti\u011fine karar vermi\u015ftir (\u0130zzet Pirbudak, B. No: 2015\/392, 27\/6\/2018, \u00a7 37; Emre Ongurlar, B. No: 2016\/9607, 10\/1\/2019, \u00a7 26). Bu \u00e7er\u00e7evede ba\u015fvurucunun somut olaydaki gibi ceza miktar\u0131na \u00f6nemli \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde etki eden su\u00e7un \u00f6rg\u00fct faaliyeti kapsam\u0131nda i\u015flenmedi\u011fi iddias\u0131na da yarg\u0131lama mercilerince ilgili ve yeterli bir yan\u0131t verilmesi gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n bir gere\u011fi olarak kabul edilmelidir.<\/p>\n
15. Somut olayda ba\u015fvurucu, hakk\u0131nda arama karar\u0131 bulundu\u011funu \u00f6\u011frenince ailesini ma\u011fdur etmemek amac\u0131yla ba\u015fkas\u0131 ad\u0131na d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f kimlik belgesi ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmi\u015ftir (bkz. \u00a7 5). Ba\u015fvurucunun sahte kimlik belgesini kolluk g\u00f6revlilerine ibraz etmesi nedeniyle resm\u00ee belgede sahtecilik su\u00e7undan mahk\u00fbmiyetine karar verilmi\u015f, su\u00e7un \u00f6rg\u00fct faaliyeti kapsam\u0131nda i\u015fledi\u011fi kabul edilerek cezas\u0131 art\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Gerek\u00e7eli kararda hakk\u0131nda yakalama karar\u0131 oldu\u011funu bilen ba\u015fvurucunun silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc faaliyetleri \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde yakalanmamak amac\u0131yla sahte kimlik belgesi ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmesi yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (bkz. \u00a7 5). Ba\u015fka bir ifadeyle Mahkemenin hangi gerek\u00e7e ile cezada art\u0131r\u0131m yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ilgili ve yeterli gerek\u00e7e ile a\u00e7\u0131klad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Kanun yolu incelemesi sonucunda verilen kararda, de\u011ferlendirme konusu h\u00fck\u00fcm ve gerek\u00e7esinin uygun bulundu\u011fu da dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131na y\u00f6nelik bir ihlal olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
16. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle ba\u015fvurunun a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmas\u0131 nedeniyle kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
III. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. Gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmas\u0131 nedeniyle KABUL ED\u0130LEMEZ OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
B. 12\/1\/2011 tarihli ve 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu\u2019nun 339. maddesinin (2) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca tahsil edilmesi ma\u011fduriyete neden olaca\u011f\u0131ndan adli yard\u0131m talebi kabul edilen ba\u015fvurucunun yarg\u0131lama giderlerini \u00f6demekten TAMAMEN MUAF TUTULMASINA 30\/10\/2024 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 30\/10\/2024 tarihli ve 2021\/24526 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 OSMAN ER BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/24526) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 30\/10\/2024 \u00a0 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 Ba\u015fkan : Basri BA\u011eCI \u00dcyeler : Engin YILDIRIM \u00a0 \u00a0 R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7 \u00a0 \u00a0 Kenan YA\u015eAR \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00d6mer \u00c7INAR Raport\u00f6r : Muhammed Nuri \u00d6ZG\u00dcR Ba\u015fvurucu : Osman ER \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru, yasal \u015fartlar\u0131 olu\u015fmamas\u0131na ra\u011fmen eylemin \u00f6rg\u00fct faaliyeti kapsam\u0131nda kabul edilerek verilen cezada art\u0131r\u0131m yap\u0131lmas\u0131 nedeniyle gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. \u0130stanbul Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k) ba\u015flatt\u0131\u011f\u0131 soru\u015fturma sonucunda ba\u015fvurucunun Fetullah\u00e7\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fc\/Paralel Devlet Yap\u0131lanmas\u0131 (FET\u00d6\/PDY) kurma veya y\u00f6netme su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle hakk\u0131nda iddianame d\u00fczenlemi\u015ftir. \u0130stanbul 26. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi (Mahkeme) iddianameyi kabul etmi\u015f ve yarg\u0131lamaya ba\u015flam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Mahkeme duru\u015fma haz\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015flemleri kapsam\u0131nda di\u011fer i\u015flemler ile birlikte ba\u015fvurucunun ba\u015fkas\u0131 ad\u0131na sahte kimlik belgesi ile yakalanmas\u0131 nedeniyle resm\u00ee belgede sahtecilik su\u00e7undan su\u00e7 duyurusunda bulunulmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. 3. Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7 duyurusu \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda resm\u00ee belgede sahtecilik su\u00e7undan soru\u015fturma ba\u015flatm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Soru\u015fturma sonucunda Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k, ba\u015fvurucunun silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc faaliyetleri \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde resm\u00ee belgede sahtecilik su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle iddianame d\u00fczenlemi\u015f; iddianamede ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda yakalama karar\u0131 oldu\u011fu d\u00f6nemde silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn faaliyetleri \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde ve bu su\u00e7 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yakalanmamak maksad\u0131yla sahte kimlik belgesi d\u00fczenleterek bunu …<\/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-20198","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber","category-uncategorized-tr"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n