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
AL\u0130 ATE\u015e VE D\u0130\u011eERLER\u0130 BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2022\/27930)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 8\/1\/2025<\/p>\n
\u0130K\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
Basri BA\u011eCI<\/p>\n
\u00dcyeler<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Kenan YA\u015eAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00d6mer \u00c7INAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Metin KIRATLI<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
G\u00fcls\u00fcm Gizem G\u00dcRSOY<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucular<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
1. Ali ATE\u015e<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
2. As\u0131m \u00c7EV\u0130K<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
3. Atilla \u00d6ZDO\u011eAN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
4. Ayhan \u00c7AKAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
5. Erdi G\u00dcZEL<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
6. Erdo\u011fan KAYMAZ<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
7. \u0130lhan KAYAN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
8. \u0130smail \u00c7EL\u0130K<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
9. \u0130smail \u00c7ET\u0130N<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
10. Nurullah G\u00dcNE\u015e<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
11. Turgay ALKIZ<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
12. Ya\u015far TA\u015e<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucular Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Ay\u015feg\u00fcl \u015eENOL CAN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN KONUSU<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi feshedilen ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n i\u015fe iade ve sendikal tazminat taleplerinin reddedilmesi nedeniyle sendika hakk\u0131n\u0131n; yarg\u0131laman\u0131n uzun s\u00fcrmesi nedeniyle de makul s\u00fcrede yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
II. BA\u015eVURU S\u00dcREC\u0130<\/p>\n
2. Konu y\u00f6n\u00fcnden hukuki irtibat bulunmas\u0131 nedeniyle 2022\/27931, 2022\/27932, 2022\/27933, 2022\/27934, 2022\/27935, 2022\/27938, 2022\/29634, 2022\/29690, 2022\/30697, 2022\/35328, 2022\/49529 ba\u015fvuru numaral\u0131 dosyalar 2022\/27930 ba\u015fvuru numaral\u0131 dosya \u00fczerinde birle\u015ftirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. Ba\u015fvurular s\u00fcresinde yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
4. Ba\u015fvuru, ba\u015fvuru formu ve eklerinin idari y\u00f6nden yap\u0131lan \u00f6n incelemesinden sonra Komisyona sunulmu\u015ftur. Komisyon, ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. B\u00f6l\u00fcm Ba\u015fkan\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik ve esas incelemesinin birlikte yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. Ba\u015fvuru belgelerinin bir \u00f6rne\u011fi bilgi i\u00e7in Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6nderilmi\u015ftir. Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc bildirmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucular, Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 s\u00fcresinde beyanda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
III. OLAY VE OLGULAR<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuruya Konu S\u00fcre\u00e7<\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n \u00fcyesi oldu\u011fu sendika, 1947 y\u0131l\u0131nda kurulan T\u00fcrkiye Maden-\u0130\u015f Sendikas\u0131 ile 1963 y\u0131l\u0131nda kurulan Otomobil-\u0130\u015f Sendikas\u0131n\u0131n 1993 y\u0131l\u0131nda birle\u015fmesiyle olu\u015fmu\u015f ve Birle\u015fik Metal \u0130\u015f Sendikas\u0131 (Sendika) ad\u0131n\u0131 alm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
7. Sendika, daval\u0131 i\u015fyerinde 2016 y\u0131l\u0131 Eyl\u00fcl ay\u0131ndan itibaren \u00f6rg\u00fctlenmeye ba\u015flam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Daval\u0131 i\u015fyerinde \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan 56 i\u015f\u00e7i Sendika \u00fcyesi olmu\u015ftur. Sendika 11\/3\/2016 tarihinde \u00c7al\u0131\u015fma ve Sosyal G\u00fcvenlik Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na yetkili sendika oldu\u011funun tespiti talebiyle ba\u015fvurmu\u015f ve sendikan\u0131n 26\/9\/2016 tarihinde yetkili sendika oldu\u011fu tespit edilmi\u015ftir. Daval\u0131 i\u015fveren, bu tespite kar\u015f\u0131 12\/10\/2016 tarihinde yetki itiraz\u0131 davas\u0131 a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r; a\u00e7\u0131lan dava olaylar\u0131n meydana geldi\u011fi tarihte derdesttir.<\/p>\n
8. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n iddias\u0131na g\u00f6re daval\u0131, yetki tespitine itiraz sonras\u0131 i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerini sendikal nedenlerle sonland\u0131rm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucular, bu kapsamda i\u015fe iade ve sendikal tazminat talepli dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucular dava dilek\u00e7elerinde mensubu olduklar\u0131 Birle\u015fik Metal \u0130\u015f Sendikas\u0131n\u0131n i\u015fyerinde yetkili oldu\u011funun tespit edilmesi \u00fczerine, i\u015fverenin yetki tespitine itiraz davas\u0131 a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve i\u015f\u00e7ilerin sendikadan istifa etmesi i\u00e7in bask\u0131 uygulamaya ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015flerdir. Ba\u015fvurucular; E.E. isimli sendikal\u0131 arkada\u015flar\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6zc\u00fc se\u00e7tiklerini ve E.E.nin kendileri ad\u0131na i\u015fverenle g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bunun \u00fczerine E.E.nin i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin 25\/10\/2016 tarihinde sonland\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, sonras\u0131nda kendilerinin ve di\u011fer sendikal\u0131 i\u015f\u00e7i arkada\u015flar\u0131n\u0131n i\u015fe geri al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamak ve i\u015fyerindeki sendikan\u0131n g\u00fcc\u00fcn\u00fcn k\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nlemek ad\u0131na 25\/10\/2016 tarihinde i\u015fyerinde beklediklerini ifade etmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucular, bunun \u00fczerine i\u015fyerinin bulundu\u011fu yerin belediye ba\u015fkan\u0131n\u0131n ve kaymakam\u0131n\u0131n fabrikaya gelerek E.E.nin i\u015fe geri al\u0131naca\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6z\u00fc verdi\u011fini ve eylemi b\u0131rakt\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 ancak sonras\u0131nda E.E.nin i\u015fe al\u0131nmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, sonraki g\u00fcnlerde i\u015fyerine gitmelerine kar\u015f\u0131n kendilerine i\u015f verilmedi\u011fini ve sonu\u00e7ta toplam 56 sendikal\u0131 i\u015f\u00e7inin i\u015fine son verildi\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
9. A\u00e7\u0131lan davalarda daval\u0131; ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n mensubu oldu\u011fu Birle\u015fik Metal \u0130\u015f Sendikas\u0131n\u0131n yetkili sendika olarak tespit edilmesi \u00fczerine yetki itiraz\u0131 davas\u0131 a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131; bundan sonra E.E. isimli \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n i\u015fyeri \u00fcretim m\u00fcd\u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fcn odas\u0131na giderek “bundan sonra hi\u00e7bir i\u015f\u00e7inin mesaiye kalmayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bir ki\u015fi dahi i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131l\u0131rsa b\u00fct\u00fcn i\u015f\u00e7ilerin i\u015fi b\u0131rakaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131” s\u00f6yledi\u011fini, 25\/10\/2016 tarihinde E.E.nin i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin hakl\u0131 nedenle feshedildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Daval\u0131; E.E.nin i\u015f akdinin feshedilmesi \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n da aralar\u0131nda bulundu\u011fu 56 i\u015f\u00e7inin 25\/10\/2016 tarihinde i\u015fyerini i\u015fgal etti\u011fini, E.E.nin geri i\u015fe al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131 istediklerini, i\u015fgal \u00fczerine i\u015fyerine kolluk kuvvetlerinin geldi\u011fini, Kand\u0131ra Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na \u015fik\u00e2yette bulunuldu\u011funu belirtmi\u015ftir. Daval\u0131, bundan sonra26\/10\/2016 – 27\/10\/2016 – 28\/10\/2016 ve 31\/10\/ 2016 tarihlerinde i\u015f\u00e7ilerin i\u015fyerine gelerek i\u015f yapmaks\u0131z\u0131n bo\u015f \u015fekilde bekledi\u011fini, i\u015f akitlerinin feshedilmemesi i\u00e7in her yolun denendi\u011fini, telefonlar\u0131na mesajlar\u0131n g\u00f6nderildi\u011fini, duyuru yaz\u0131lar\u0131 as\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, i\u015f\u00e7ilerin i\u015f ve i\u015f emri verildi\u011fi h\u00e2lde i\u015f yapmad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131, bu nedenle i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerinin hakl\u0131 nedenle feshedildi\u011fini ifade etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
10. Ba\u015fvurucu Erdo\u011fan Kaymaz d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki ba\u015fvurucular bak\u0131m\u0131ndan yarg\u0131laman\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc Kocaeli 4. \u0130\u015f Mahkemesi, 2017 y\u0131l\u0131n\u0131n Aral\u0131k ay\u0131nda verdi\u011fi kararlarda davalar\u0131n kabul\u00fcne ve ba\u015fvurucular lehine sendikal tazminata h\u00fckmetmi\u015ftir. Mahkeme kararlar\u0131nda, ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n \u00fcye oldu\u011fu sendikan\u0131n yetkisinin \u00c7al\u0131\u015fma ve Sosyal G\u00fcvenlik Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131nca tespiti sonras\u0131nda i\u015f\u00e7iler ile i\u015fveren aras\u0131nda geli\u015fen olaylar oldu\u011fu, daval\u0131n\u0131n yetki tespitine itiraz etti\u011fi, i\u00e7lerinde E.E. isimli i\u015f\u00e7inin de oldu\u011fu s\u00f6zc\u00fclerin daval\u0131 yetkililerle g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, ayn\u0131 zamanda sendikal faaliyet y\u00f6n\u00fcnden aktif oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lan E.E.nin i\u015f akdinin feshedildi\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. Gerek\u00e7eli kararlarda; E.E.nin s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin feshinden sonra olaylar\u0131n geli\u015fti\u011fi, i\u015f \u00e7\u0131k\u0131\u015f saatinde i\u015fyerinin terk edilmedi\u011fi, belediye ba\u015fkan\u0131, kaymakam ve emniyet m\u00fcd\u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fcn i\u015fyerine geldi\u011fi, i\u015f\u00e7ilerle ayn\u0131 g\u00fcn g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fc belirtilmi\u015ftir. Bu a\u015famadan sonra daval\u0131n\u0131n i\u015f\u00e7ilerle muhatap olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, belediye ba\u015fkan\u0131n\u0131n E.E.nin tekrar i\u015fe al\u0131naca\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6z\u00fcn\u00fc daval\u0131n\u0131n sahiplenmedi\u011fi ve E.E.yi i\u015fe ba\u015flatmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, di\u011fer i\u015f\u00e7ilerin kendilerine \u00f6nc\u00fcl\u00fck eden E.E.nin i\u015f akdinin feshi \u00fczerine dayan\u0131\u015fma i\u00e7ine girdikleri, eylemlerin bar\u0131\u015f\u00e7\u0131l ve \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fc oldu\u011fu ifade edilmi\u015ftir. Ayr\u0131ca ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n kendilerini s\u00f6z ve davran\u0131\u015f ile ifade etmelerinin kanunsuz grev olarak de\u011ferlendirilemeyece\u011fi, her ne kadar verilen g\u00f6revi yapmad\u0131klar\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f ise de bar\u0131\u015f\u00e7\u0131l ve \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc a\u015fmayan i\u015f b\u0131rakmalar\u0131n maksad\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6revi yapmama olmay\u0131p i\u015f akdi feshedilen E.E.nin i\u015fe ba\u015flat\u0131lmas\u0131 oldu\u011fu, i\u015f akitleri feshedilen her bir i\u015f\u00e7i y\u00f6n\u00fcnden g\u00f6revlerinin hat\u0131rlat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve yapmamakta \u0131srar etti\u011fini g\u00f6sterir kay\u0131t ve belge olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, haklar\u0131nda uzun y\u0131llard\u0131r g\u00f6revi yapmama gibi bir iddia olmayan i\u015f\u00e7ilerin topluca g\u00f6rev yapmama iradelerinin bulundu\u011fu iddias\u0131n\u0131n ola\u011fan hayat\u0131n ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, daval\u0131n\u0131n olu\u015fan durumu sebep g\u00f6stererek sendikal\u0131 i\u015f\u00e7ilerin tamam\u0131n\u0131 i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131karmay\u0131 tercih etmesinin fesihlerin sendikal nedenle yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 kanaatini olu\u015fturdu\u011fu belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
11. Kararlar\u0131n istinaf yarg\u0131 yoluna g\u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fclmesi \u00fczerine \u0130stanbul B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 32. Hukuk Dairesi 2019 y\u0131l\u0131n\u0131n May\u0131s ay\u0131nda verdi\u011fi kararlarda; feshe konu yap\u0131lan 26\/10\/2016 – 27\/10\/2016 – 28\/10\/2016 ve 31\/10\/ 2016 tarihlerinde i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan i\u015f\u00e7ilere i\u015f verilip verilmedi\u011finin veya \u00f6nceki g\u00fcnlerde verilmekle bu g\u00fcnlere sarkan bitmeyen i\u015f emirlerinin olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n, i\u015f emirlerinin sunulmas\u0131 durumunda i\u015f emirlerinin yerine getirilip getirilmedi\u011finin tespit edilmesi gerekti\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle dosyalar\u0131n mahkemesine g\u00f6nderilmesine karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
12. Kocaeli 4. \u0130\u015f Mahkemesi 2020 y\u0131l\u0131n\u0131n Kas\u0131m ay\u0131nda verdi\u011fi kararlarda davalar\u0131n kabul\u00fcne ve ba\u015fvurucular lehine sendikal tazminata h\u00fckmetmi\u015ftir. Gerek\u00e7eli kararlarda; d\u00f6rt g\u00fcnl\u00fck \u00fcretim formlar\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, son sunulan \u00fcretim formunun 25\/10\/2016 tarihine ait oldu\u011funu, i\u015f emirlerinin i\u015f\u00e7ilere de\u011fil ustaba\u015f\u0131lara verildi\u011fini, \u00fcretimde i\u015f\u00e7ilerin ustaba\u015f\u0131lar taraf\u0131ndan y\u00f6nlendirildi\u011fini, i\u015f\u00e7ilere emir ve talimatlar\u0131n ustaba\u015f\u0131lar taraf\u0131ndan verildi\u011fini, \u00f6nceki i\u015f emirlerinden sarkan i\u015fler olsa dahi i\u015f emirlerinin takibinin ustaba\u015f\u0131lar\u0131n sorumlulu\u011funda oldu\u011funu, ustaba\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan verilen emir ve talimatlara ra\u011fmen i\u015f\u00e7i i\u015fini yerine getirmiyor ise ustaba\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan i\u015f\u00e7inin yapmakla \u00f6devli oldu\u011fu g\u00f6revin i\u015f\u00e7iye hat\u0131rlat\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n gerekti\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir. Kararlarda; i\u015fverence i\u015f\u00e7ilerin usul\u00fcne uygun \u015fekilde uyar\u0131lmad\u0131klar\u0131, bu konuda tutanak tutulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ayr\u0131ca i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan yemekhanede duyuru yap\u0131lmas\u0131, SMS g\u00f6nderilmesi gibi uygulaman\u0131n yasan\u0131n arad\u0131\u011f\u0131 hat\u0131rlatma unsuru mahiyetinde bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, i\u015f\u00e7ilere genel olarak de\u011fil her bir i\u015f\u00e7iye somut olarak hangi g\u00f6revin yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken g\u00f6revin hangi s\u00fcrede tamamlanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi hususunda a\u00e7\u0131k hat\u0131rlatma bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dikkat \u00e7ekmi\u015ftir. Ayr\u0131ca; fesih d\u00f6neminde daval\u0131 i\u015fyerinde sendikal \u00f6rg\u00fctlenme \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131n\u0131n oldu\u011fu, sendikan\u0131n daval\u0131 i\u015fyerinde \u00e7o\u011funlu\u011fu sa\u011flamas\u0131 ve yetki almas\u0131 \u00fczerine daval\u0131n\u0131n sendika \u00fcyelerinin tamam\u0131n\u0131n i\u015f akitlerini feshetmek suretiyle i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kartt\u0131\u011f\u0131, dava tarihinde daval\u0131 i\u015fyerinde \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan sendika \u00fcyesinin bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n alt\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7izmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
13. Kararlar, istinaf edilmi\u015ftir. \u0130stanbul B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 32. Hukuk Dairesi 26\/10\/2016, 27\/10\/2016, 28\/10\/2016 ve 31\/10\/2016 tarihlerinde ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n tamamlanmayan ve tamamlanmas\u0131 gereken i\u015f emirleri olmas\u0131na, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla kendilerine i\u015f verilmesine ra\u011fmen, s\u00f6zl\u00fc ve yaz\u0131l\u0131 uyar\u0131lara uymayarak 4 g\u00fcn i\u015f yapmama eylemine devam ettiklerini ve bu eylemin kanunsuz grev oldu\u011funu de\u011ferlendirerek davalar\u0131n reddine kesin olarak karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
14. Ba\u015fvurucu Erdo\u011fan Kaymaz y\u00f6n\u00fcnden Kocaeli 6. \u0130\u015f Mahkemesinin 22\/5\/2018 tarihinde verdi\u011fi kararda; ba\u015fvurucu ve di\u011fer i\u015f\u00e7ilerin hen\u00fcz yetkisi kesinle\u015fmemi\u015f bir sendika ile i\u015fvereni anla\u015fmaya zorlad\u0131klar\u0131 ve d\u00f6rt g\u00fcn s\u00fcreyle kanunsuz grev yapt\u0131klar\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle yap\u0131lan feshin hakl\u0131 oldu\u011fu sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir. An\u0131lan karar \u0130stanbul B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 47. Hukuk Dairesinin 3\/2\/2022 tarihli istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun esastan ret karar\u0131yla kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
15. Nihai kararlar\u0131n tebli\u011fi \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucular, s\u00fcresinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
2. Ba\u015fvuru Konusu Olmayan S\u00fcre\u00e7<\/p>\n
16. Daval\u0131, ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n da aralar\u0131nda bulundu\u011fu i\u015f\u00e7iler hakk\u0131nda 26\/10\/2016 tarihinde i\u015fyerini terk etmedikleri gerek\u00e7esiyle su\u00e7 duyurusunda bulunmu\u015ftur. Buna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k i\u015f\u00e7iler de daval\u0131 hakk\u0131nda sendikal haklar\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n engellenmesi su\u00e7undan \u015fik\u00e2yet\u00e7i olmu\u015ftur. Kand\u0131ra Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 9\/1\/2019 tarihinde ba\u015fvurucular ve di\u011fer i\u015f\u00e7iler hakk\u0131nda kovu\u015fturmaya yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair karar vermi\u015f, an\u0131lan karar 8\/5\/2019 tarihinde kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir. Kararda, i\u015f\u00e7ilerin eylemlerinin kanun d\u0131\u015f\u0131 grev kapsam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirilebilece\u011fi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn ise de bu eylemlerin su\u00e7 te\u015fkil etmedi\u011fini belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
17. Daval\u0131 i\u015fyeri y\u00f6neticileri K.Y ve \u015e.\u00d6. hakk\u0131nda ise Kand\u0131ra 2. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesinin 28\/10\/2020 tarihli karar\u0131yla sendikal haklar\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n engellenmesi su\u00e7undan hapis cezas\u0131 ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmalar\u0131na ve h\u00fckm\u00fcn a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131n\u0131n geri b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015f, karar 18\/6\/2021 tarihinde kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir. Gerek\u00e7eli kararda; Kocaeli 4. \u0130\u015f Mahkemesinin sendikal feshin ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011fi tespitlerinin yan\u0131 s\u0131ra; K.Y.nin “10 trilyon para harcar\u0131m, bir kuru\u015f size vermem. Gerekirse 30-40 k\u00fcrt bulurum, onlar\u0131 \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131r\u0131m, sizi \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131rmam” dedi\u011fi, \u015e.\u00d6.n\u00fcn ise “Arkada\u015f\u0131n\u0131z\u0131 i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kard\u0131k, zaten \u00fcretim yapmayaca\u011f\u0131z, i\u015flerimiz k\u00f6t\u00fc durumda, sipari\u015fleri iptal ettik, hep beraber bo\u015f oturaca\u011f\u0131z, sabah gelip ak\u015fam gidece\u011fiz, Birle\u015fik Metal \u0130\u015f Sendikas\u0131na \u00fcye olmu\u015fsunuz, o y\u00fczden arkada\u015f\u0131n\u0131z\u0131 i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kard\u0131k, ba\u015fka ki\u015fileri de i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131karacakt\u0131k ama i\u015fe yeni girdikleri i\u00e7in i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131karmad\u0131k” \u015feklinde s\u00f6zler s\u00f6yledi\u011fi bu \u015fekilde at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7u i\u015fledikleri belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
IV. \u0130LG\u0130L\u0130 HUKUK<\/p>\n
18. Mevcut ba\u015fvuruya ili\u015fkin ulusal ve uluslararas\u0131 hukuk kaynaklar\u0131n\u0131n derli toplu verildi\u011fi karar i\u00e7in bkz. Abdullah \u00c7elik ve di\u011ferleri, B. No: 2022\/14506, 18\/9\/2024, \u00a7\u00a7 19-35.<\/p>\n
V. \u0130NCELEME VE GEREK\u00c7E<\/p>\n
19. Anayasa Mahkemesinin 8\/1\/2025 tarihinde yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu toplant\u0131da ba\u015fvuru incelenip gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/p>\n
A. Makul S\u00fcrede Yarg\u0131lanma Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia<\/p>\n
20. Ba\u015fvurucular, makul s\u00fcrede yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Anayasa Mahkemesi, olay ve olgular\u0131 somut ba\u015fvuru ile benzer nitelikte olan Veysi Ado ([GK] B. No: 2022\/100837, 27\/4\/2023) karar\u0131nda uygulanacak anayasal ilkeleri belirlemi\u015ftir. Bu \u00e7er\u00e7evede Anayasa Mahkemesi 9\/1\/2013 tarihli ve 6384 say\u0131l\u0131 Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 Mahkemesine Yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f Baz\u0131 Ba\u015fvurular\u0131n Tazminat \u00d6denmek Suretiyle \u00c7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fcne Dair Kanun’un ge\u00e7ici 2. maddesinde 28\/3\/2023 tarihli ve 7445 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 40. maddesi ile yap\u0131lan de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011fe g\u00f6re 9\/3\/2023 tarihi (bu tarih d\u00e2hil) itibar\u0131yla derdest olan, yarg\u0131lamalar\u0131n makul s\u00fcrede sonu\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddialar\u0131yla yap\u0131lan ba\u015fvurulara ili\u015fkin olarak Tazminat Komisyonuna ba\u015fvuru yolu t\u00fcketilmeden yap\u0131lan ba\u015fvurunun incelenmesinin bireysel ba\u015fvurunun ikincil niteli\u011fi ile ba\u011fda\u015fmayaca\u011f\u0131 neticesine varm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Somut ba\u015fvuruda, an\u0131lan kararda a\u00e7\u0131klanan ilkelerden ve ula\u015f\u0131lan sonu\u00e7tan ayr\u0131lmay\u0131 gerektiren bir durum bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
21. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle ba\u015fvurunun bu k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcketilmemesi nedeniyle kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
B. Sendika Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n \u0130ddialar\u0131 ve Bakanl\u0131k G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc<\/p>\n
22. Ba\u015fvurucular; i\u015fverenin sendikala\u015fmay\u0131 \u00f6nlemek ad\u0131na kendilerini i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kard\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve bu kapsamda sendika hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015flerdir.<\/p>\n
23. Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde; ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n sendika hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine y\u00f6nelik \u015fik\u00e2yetleri incelenirken yarg\u0131lama makamlar\u0131 kararlar\u0131n\u0131n yeterli gerek\u00e7eyi i\u00e7erip i\u00e7ermedi\u011fi, verilen kararlardaki tespit ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n, yasan\u0131n uygulanmas\u0131 niteli\u011finde olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve a\u00e7\u0131k bir keyf\u00eelik i\u00e7erip i\u00e7ermedi\u011fi ve bu ba\u011flamda sendika hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edilip edilmedi\u011fi konusunda Anayasa ve mevzuat h\u00fck\u00fcmleri do\u011frultusunda somut olay\u0131n kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6z\u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
2. De\u011ferlendirme<\/p>\n
24. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n \u015fik\u00e2yetlerinin \u00f6z\u00fc sendikal nedenlerle i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmalar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131n i\u015fe iade ve sendikal tazminat taleplerinin reddedilmesidir. Bu nedenle ba\u015fvuru sendika hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
a. Kabul Edilebilirlik Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden<\/p>\n
25. 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 sendika hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddialar\u0131n kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
b. Esas Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden<\/p>\n
i. Genel \u0130lkeler<\/p>\n
26. Anayasa’n\u0131n 51. maddesinde yer alan \u201c\u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar … \u00fcyelerinin menfaatlerini korumak i\u00e7in\u201d ibaresi, \u00fcyelerin mesleki menfaatlerini korumak i\u00e7in ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirecekleri sendikal faaliyetlerinin Anayasa taraf\u0131ndan korundu\u011funu a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a ortaya koymaktad\u0131r (Kristal-\u0130\u015f Sendikas\u0131 [GK], B. No: 2014\/12166, 02\/07\/2015, \u00a7 54). Bu ba\u011flamda sendika hakk\u0131, mensuplar\u0131n\u0131n menfaatlerini korumak \u00fczere yap\u0131lan sendikal faaliyetlere izin verilmesini de gerektirmektedir (Tayfun Cengiz, B. No: 2013\/8463, 18\/9\/2014, \u00a7 31).<\/p>\n
27. Anayasa’n\u0131n 51. maddesinde temel bir hak olarak g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015f olan sendika hakk\u0131n\u0131n ger\u00e7ekten ve etkili bir \u015fekilde korunabilmesi yaln\u0131zca devletin m\u00fcdahaleden ka\u00e7\u0131nmas\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir. Sendika hakk\u0131, bu hakka y\u00f6nelik kamu g\u00fcc\u00fc taraf\u0131ndan ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen m\u00fcdahalelerin yan\u0131 s\u0131ra \u00fcyesi olduklar\u0131 sendikalarca veya kimi durumlarda \u00f6zel hukuk ki\u015filerince yap\u0131lan m\u00fcdahalelere kar\u015f\u0131 da anayasal koruma sa\u011flamaktad\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla sendika hakk\u0131 devlete, m\u00fcdahalede bulunmama bi\u00e7imindeki negatif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn yan\u0131 s\u0131ra \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filerden gelebilecek m\u00fcdahalelere kar\u015f\u0131 ilgiliye koruma sa\u011flama \u015feklindeki birtak\u0131m pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fckler de y\u00fcklemektedir (Bar\u0131\u015f Ad\u0131g\u00fczel, B. No: 2016\/15802, 8\/9\/2021, \u00a7 29; Ahmet Sefa Topuz ve di\u011ferleri, \u00a7 52; An\u0131l P\u0131nar ve \u00d6mer Bilge, B. No: 2014\/15627, 5\/10\/2017, \u00a7 36).<\/p>\n
28. Devletin sendika hakk\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fckleri kayna\u011f\u0131n\u0131 Anayasa’n\u0131n 5. ve 51. maddelerinden almaktad\u0131r. Bu y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fck devlete, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filerin ve \u00f6zellikle i\u015fverenin, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar\u0131n sendikaya \u00fcye olma veya olmama ile sendikal faaliyette bulunma haklar\u0131n\u0131 kullanmay\u0131 engelleyici davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131ndan ka\u00e7\u0131nmas\u0131na y\u00f6nelik ve s\u0131rf bu haklar\u0131ndan yararland\u0131klar\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle yapt\u0131r\u0131ma tabi tutulmalar\u0131n\u0131, ayr\u0131mc\u0131l\u0131\u011fa maruz kalmalar\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nleyici tedbirler alma \u00f6devi y\u00fcklemektedir. Bu \u00e7er\u00e7evede al\u0131nacak tedbirlerin \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filerin ve \u00f6zellikle i\u015fverenin \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar\u0131n sendika hakk\u0131na m\u00fcdahalede bulunmalar\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan cayd\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 nitelik ta\u015f\u0131mas\u0131 gerekir. \u00d6te yandan \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filer taraf\u0131ndan sendika hakk\u0131na m\u00fcdahale edilmesi durumunda m\u00fcdahaleye kar\u015f\u0131 itirazlar\u0131n \u00f6ne s\u00fcr\u00fclebilece\u011fi ve m\u00fcdahalenin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n giderilmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan ger\u00e7ek ve etkili koruma temin edecek hukuksal mekanizmalar\u0131n olu\u015fturulmas\u0131, savunma ve iddialar\u0131n\u0131 yetkili makamlar \u00f6n\u00fcnde ortaya koyabilme olana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tan\u0131nmas\u0131, gerekiyorsa tazminat ve benzeri giderimler i\u00e7in dava a\u00e7ma imk\u00e2n\u0131n\u0131n getirilmesi devletin pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fcklerindendir (benzer y\u00f6ndeki de\u011ferlendirmeler i\u00e7in bkz. Muharrem \u00c7imen, \u00a7\u00a7 39,40; Bar\u0131\u015f Ad\u0131g\u00fczel, \u00a7 30; An\u0131l P\u0131nar ve \u00d6mer Bilge, \u00a7 37; Bekir Yaz\u0131c\u0131 [GK], B. No: 2013\/3044, 17\/12\/2015, \u00a7 71; Kemal K\u0131l\u0131\u00e7 [GK], B. No: 2019\/16400, 28\/7\/2022, \u00a7 59). Devletin s\u00f6z konusu y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fcklerini yerine getirip getirmedi\u011finin denetimi ise y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen s\u00fcrecin b\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcne bak\u0131larak yap\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
29. Kamu g\u00fcc\u00fc kullanan makamlar\u0131n her t\u00fcrl\u00fc i\u015f ve i\u015flemlerinde \u00f6ncelikle Anayasa h\u00fck\u00fcmlerini g\u00f6zetmeleri zorunludur. Nitekim Anayasa’n\u0131n 11. maddesinde Anayasa h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinin yasama, y\u00fcr\u00fctme ve yarg\u0131 organlar\u0131n\u0131, idare makamlar\u0131n\u0131, di\u011fer kurulu\u015f ve ki\u015fileri ba\u011flayan temel hukuk kurallar\u0131 oldu\u011fu ifade edilmi\u015ftir. Di\u011fer taraftan Anayasa’n\u0131n 138. maddesine g\u00f6re h\u00e2kimler Anayasa’ya, kanuna ve hukuka uygun olarak vicdani kanaatlerine g\u00f6re h\u00fck\u00fcm verir. G\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc \u00fczere yarg\u0131 organlar\u0131n\u0131n uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar\u0131 \u00f6ncelikle Anayasa h\u00fck\u00fcmlerini dikkate alarak \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcme kavu\u015fturmalar\u0131 anayasal bir zorunluluktur. Bu ba\u011flamda bireysel ba\u015fvurunun ikincilli\u011fi ilkesi, Anayasa Mahkemesinin ilk elden yani do\u011frudan inceleme yapmamas\u0131n\u0131 ifade etti\u011fi gibi esas itibar\u0131yla idari ve yarg\u0131sal makamlar\u0131n \u00f6nlerindeki meseleleri ve uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar\u0131 \u00f6ncelikle Anayasa’ya uygun bi\u00e7imde sonuca ba\u011flamalar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden birincil derecede sorumlu olduklar\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6stermektedir. \u00d6zellikle temel kanunlarda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen d\u00fcr\u00fcstl\u00fck ve iyi niyet kurallar\u0131, hakk\u0131n k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 yasa\u011f\u0131 gibi genel ilkeler ile baz\u0131 h\u00e2llerde olay\u0131n \u00f6zelliklerine ve durumun gereklerine g\u00f6re h\u00e2kime takdir yetkisi tan\u0131nmas\u0131 uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar\u0131n \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fcnde Anayasa’ya uygun yorum imk\u00e2n\u0131 tan\u0131yan s\u00f6z konusu etkili hukuksal koruman\u0131n bir gere\u011fi olarak g\u00f6r\u00fclmelidir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla ister \u00f6zel ki\u015filer aras\u0131 isterse de taraflardan birinin kamu g\u00fcc\u00fc oldu\u011fu uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar olsun her durumda h\u00e2kimin hukuk kurallar\u0131n\u0131 Anayasa’ya uygun bir bi\u00e7imde yorumlamas\u0131 ve yarg\u0131 yetkisinin kullan\u0131m\u0131 \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde \u00f6zellikle Anayasa ile g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan temel hak ve h\u00fcrriyetlerin korunmas\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6zetmesi beklenmektedir (baz\u0131 de\u011fi\u015fikliklerle birlikte bkz. Mehmet Apayd\u0131n, B. No: 2015\/13099, 8\/1\/2020, \u00a7\u00a7 46,47).<\/p>\n
30. Di\u011fer bir ifadeyle Anayasa’ya uygun yorum ilkesi h\u00e2kimin hukuk kurallar\u0131n\u0131 yorumlama serbest\u00eesinin s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131n\u0131 olu\u015fturmaktad\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla h\u00e2kimin bir hukuk kural\u0131n\u0131n anlam ve kapsam\u0131n\u0131 tespit ederken Anayasa’y\u0131 ve anayasal ilkeleri hesaba katmamas\u0131 Anayasa’n\u0131n normlar hiyerar\u015fisinin tepesinde yer almas\u0131n\u0131 anlams\u0131z h\u00e2le getirir. Bu ba\u011flamda Anayasa k\u00e2\u011f\u0131t \u00fczerinde kalan bir metin de\u011fil ya\u015fayan, hukuk sistemini y\u00f6nlendiren, her t\u00fcrl\u00fc kamusal tasarrufta g\u00f6zetilmesi gereken hukuki bir belgedir (Mehmet Fatih Bulucu [GK], B. No: 2019\/26274, 27\/10\/2022, \u00a7 76). Anayasa h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinin ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n gere\u011fi olarak h\u00e2kimin maddi hukuk h\u00fck\u00fcmlerini uygularken temel hak ve h\u00fcrriyetlere ili\u015fkin s\u0131n\u0131rlama \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctlerini ve g\u00fcvenceleri \u00f6ncelikle dikkate almas\u0131 anayasal bir gerekliliktir.<\/p>\n
31. Bu kapsamda eldeki ba\u015fvuruda oldu\u011fu gibi sendikal nedenlerle bir i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin sonland\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddia edildi\u011finde mevzuat\u0131n gerektirdi\u011fi hususlar\u0131n ve ispat ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fip ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011fini de\u011ferlendirmek \u00f6ncelikle yarg\u0131 mercilerinin g\u00f6revidir. Yarg\u0131 mercilerinin olay\u0131n ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmek a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan daha avantajl\u0131 konumda oldu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Anayasa Mahkemesinin rol\u00fc ise bu kurallar\u0131n yorumunun Anayasa\u2019ya uygun olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirlemekle s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131d\u0131r. \u00d6nemle de\u011finmek gerekir ki yarg\u0131 mercileri \u00f6n\u00fcndeki uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k ne kadar Anayasa\u2019da yer alan temel hak ve h\u00fcrriyetleri ilgilendirirse Anayasa Mahkemesinin bireysel ba\u015fvuru kapsam\u0131nda bu hak veya h\u00fcrriyete ili\u015fkin s\u0131n\u0131rlama \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctlerini ve g\u00fcvencelerini denetleme yetkisi o kadar artar. Anayasa Mahkemesinin temel g\u00f6revi Anayasa\u2019da yer alan h\u00fck\u00fcmlerin yeknesak ve do\u011fru bir bi\u00e7imde uygulanmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamakt\u0131r. Bu nedenle Anayasa Mahkemesi, yarg\u0131 mercileri taraf\u0131ndan izlenen usul\u00fc denetlemek ve \u00f6zellikle mahkemelerin Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 51. maddesindeki g\u00fcvenceleri g\u00f6zetip g\u00f6zetmedi\u011fini belirlemekle yetinmektedir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla yap\u0131lan incelemede, yarg\u0131 mercilerinin yeri al\u0131nmamakta; kamusal makamlar\u0131n s\u00fcre\u00e7 i\u00e7indeki tutumlar\u0131 sendika hakk\u0131 ba\u011flam\u0131ndaki usule ili\u015fkin g\u00fcvenceler a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan de\u011ferlendirilmektedir (benzer de\u011ferlendirmeler i\u00e7in bkz. T\u00fcrkiye G\u0131da ve \u015eeker Sanayi \u0130\u015f\u00e7ileri Sendikas\u0131, B. No: 2016\/13328, 19\/11\/2020, \u00a7 40; T\u00fcrkiye Petrol, Kimya ve Lastik Sanayi \u0130\u015f\u00e7ileri Sendikas\u0131, B. No: 2016\/13531, 15\/12\/2020, \u00a7 40; Ahmet Sefa Topuz ve di\u011ferleri, \u00a7 57; Muharrem \u00c7imen, \u00a7 42).<\/p>\n
32. Bununla birlikte sendika hakk\u0131n\u0131n gerektirdi\u011fi pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fcklerin yerine getirildi\u011finden s\u00f6z edilebilmesi i\u00e7in her iki taraf\u0131n menfaatlerinin de m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011funca dengelenmesi ve taraflardan biri aleyhine \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcs\u00fcz bir sonuca yol a\u00e7\u0131lmamas\u0131 gerekir. Menfaatler dengesinin kurulmas\u0131nda taraflardan biri aleyhine bireysel olarak a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 ve ola\u011fan d\u0131\u015f\u0131 bir k\u00fclfetin y\u00fcklenmesi, pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fcklerin ihlali sonucunu do\u011furabilir. Olay\u0131n b\u00fct\u00fcn ko\u015fullar\u0131 ve taraflara tan\u0131nan t\u00fcm imk\u00e2nlar ile taraflar\u0131n tutum ve davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131 g\u00f6z\u00f6n\u00fcnde bulundurularak menfaatlerin adil bir \u015fekilde dengelenip dengelenmedi\u011fi de\u011ferlendirilmelidir (Faik Tari ve Sultan Tari, B. No: 2014\/12321, 20\/7\/2017, \u00a7 52; Kemal K\u0131l\u0131\u00e7, \u00a7 61). Bu noktada Anayasa Mahkemesinin yapaca\u011f\u0131 inceleme, ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n sendikal nedenlerle i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131klar\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle a\u00e7t\u0131klar\u0131 davalarda devletin pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn gerektirdi\u011fi \u015fekilde yarg\u0131sal bir de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131l\u0131p yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve \u00f6zellikle yarg\u0131 mercilerinin kararlar\u0131n\u0131n konuyla ilgili ve yeterli gerek\u00e7e i\u00e7erip i\u00e7ermedi\u011fine ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
ii. Somut Olay\u0131n De\u011ferlendirilmesi<\/p>\n
33. \u00d6ncelikle ba\u015fvuruya konu olaylar\u0131n meydana geldi\u011fi tarihte i\u015fyerinde ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n mensubu oldu\u011fu sendikan\u0131n yetkili sendika olarak tespit edildi\u011finin ancak i\u015fverenin bu yetkiye itiraz etti\u011finin ve yetki itiraz\u0131na ili\u015fkin dava s\u00fcrecinin devam etti\u011finin alt\u0131 \u00e7izilmelidir. 18\/10\/2012 tarihli ve 6356 say\u0131l\u0131 Sendikalar ve Toplu \u0130\u015f S\u00f6zle\u015fmesi Kanunu’nun 41. maddesinde sendikalar\u0131n toplu i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi(T\u0130S) s\u00fcrecinde ne \u015fekilde yetkili olabilecekleri d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. An\u0131lan maddeye g\u00f6re bir i\u015f\u00e7i sendikas\u0131 kurulu bulundu\u011fu i\u015f kolunda \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan i\u015f\u00e7ilerin en az y\u00fczde birinin \u00fcyesi bulunmas\u0131 ve T\u0130S’in kapsam\u0131na girecek i\u015fyerinde ba\u015fvuru tarihinde \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan i\u015f\u00e7ilerin yar\u0131dan fazlas\u0131n\u0131n, i\u015fletmede ise y\u00fczde k\u0131rk\u0131n\u0131n kendi \u00fcyesi bulunmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde T\u0130S yapmaya yetkili olacakt\u0131r. Sendika da bu \u015fartlar\u0131 sa\u011flayarak daval\u0131 i\u015fyerinde yetkili sendika olmu\u015ftur. Ancak i\u015fveren yetki tespitine itiraz davas\u0131 a\u00e7m\u0131\u015f, 6356 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 43. maddesinin son f\u0131kras\u0131 gere\u011fince yetki i\u015flemleri durmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
34. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n iddias\u0131na g\u00f6re, sendikan\u0131n yetki tespitine itiraz davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131 sonras\u0131nda i\u015fveren, sendikal\u0131 i\u015f\u00e7iler \u00fczerine bask\u0131 kurmu\u015f ve 25\/10\/2016 tarihinde sendika \u00f6nc\u00fcs\u00fc olarak hareket eden E.E.nin i\u015fine son vermi\u015ftir. Bunun \u00fczerine i\u015f\u00e7ilerin beyan\u0131na g\u00f6re; arkada\u015flar\u0131 E.E.nin tekrar i\u015fe al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamak ve sendikal faaliyetlerin engellenmesini \u00f6nlemek ad\u0131na 25\/10\/2016 tarihinde i\u015fyerinde bekleme eyleminde bulunmu\u015flar; belediye ba\u015fkan\u0131n\u0131n E.E.nin geri i\u015fe al\u0131naca\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6z\u00fc vermesi \u00fczerine eylemlerini sonland\u0131rm\u0131\u015flard\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucular sonraki g\u00fcnlerde E.E.nin i\u015fe al\u0131nmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve kendileri de i\u015fyerine gittikleri h\u00e2lde i\u015f verilmedi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015flerdir.<\/p>\n
35. \u0130\u015fveren ise E.E.nin i\u015fyeri yetkililerini tehdit etmesi nedeniyle i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin 25\/10\/2016 tarihinde hakl\u0131 nedenle sonland\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, buna kar\u015f\u0131n ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n E.E.nin i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 bahane ederek ayn\u0131 g\u00fcn i\u015fyerini i\u015fgal ettiklerini \u00f6ne s\u00fcrerek haklar\u0131nda su\u00e7 duyurusunda bulunmu\u015ftur. \u0130\u015fverenin beyan\u0131na g\u00f6re sonraki d\u00f6rt g\u00fcnl\u00fck s\u00fcre\u00e7te i\u015f\u00e7iler i\u015fyerine gelmi\u015f ancak kendilerine verilen i\u015fleri yapmayarak bo\u015f bir \u015fekilde beklemi\u015fler, bunun \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n da aralar\u0131nda bulundu\u011fu 56 i\u015f\u00e7inin i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi hakl\u0131 nedenle sona erdirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
36. Eldeki ba\u015fvuruda olaylar\u0131n i\u015fverenin i\u015fyerinde T\u0130S ba\u011f\u0131tlama yetkisini elde eden sendikaya kar\u015f\u0131 yetki tespiti davas\u0131 a\u00e7arak T\u0130S s\u00fcrecini durdurmas\u0131 sonras\u0131nda ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve sendikal\u0131 i\u015f\u00e7ilerin i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131yla devam etti\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Bu noktada Anayasa Mahkemesinin T\u00fcrkiye Devrimci Kara, Hava ve Demiryolu Ta\u015f\u0131mac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u0130\u015f\u00e7ileri Sendikas\u0131 ([GK], B. No: 2020\/34550, 15\/2\/2024) karar\u0131nda yetki tespitine itiraz davalar\u0131n\u0131n sendika hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlali sonucu do\u011furan yap\u0131sal bir sorun h\u00e2line geldi\u011fi sonucuna var\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n alt\u0131 \u00e7izilmelidir.<\/p>\n
37. Buna g\u00f6re esasen i\u015f\u00e7ilerin eylemlerinin ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 noktas\u0131n\u0131 Sendika ile i\u015fyeri aras\u0131nda T\u0130S akdedilemeyece\u011fi endi\u015fesi olu\u015fturmu\u015ftur. T\u0130S, i\u015f\u00e7i sendikas\u0131 ile i\u015fveren sendikas\u0131 veya sendika \u00fcyesi olmayan i\u015fveren aras\u0131nda akdedilen bir i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesidir. T\u0130S, sendikalar i\u00e7in \u00fcyelerinin hak ve \u00e7\u0131karlar\u0131n\u0131 koruma ve geli\u015ftirmelerinde yads\u0131namaz bir \u00f6nem ta\u015f\u0131yan anayasal bir g\u00fcvencedir. T\u0130S akdetme yetkisi ile birlikte sendikalar \u00f6rg\u00fctl\u00fc bir \u015fekilde hareket etme ve taleplerini g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc bir \u015fekilde dile getirme imk\u00e2n\u0131na sahip olur. Bu ba\u011flamda T\u0130S ve sendikal faaliyet \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc s\u0131k\u0131 s\u0131k\u0131ya ba\u011fl\u0131 iki kavram olarak kar\u015f\u0131m\u0131za \u00e7\u0131kmaktad\u0131r (benzer de\u011ferlendirmeler i\u00e7in bkz. T\u00fcrkiye G\u0131da ve \u015eeker Sanayi \u0130\u015f\u00e7ileri Sendikas\u0131, \u00a7 35; T\u00fcrkiye Petrol, Kimya ve Lastik Sanayi \u0130\u015f\u00e7ileri Sendikas\u0131, \u00a7 35).<\/p>\n
38. Bu itibarla i\u015f\u00e7ilerin ekonomik, sosyal ve \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131 etkileyen uygulamalara y\u00f6nelik k\u0131sa s\u00fcreli, bar\u0131\u015f\u00e7\u0131l demokratik bir hakk\u0131n kullan\u0131m\u0131 niteli\u011findeki protesto eylemlerine tolerans g\u00f6sterilmelidir. Ancak hangi y\u00f6ntem se\u00e7ilirse se\u00e7ilsin bu eylemler i\u015fverene zarar verme kast\u0131 i\u00e7ermemeli, se\u00e7ilen y\u00f6ntem dile getirilen problemlerin hakl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla orant\u0131l\u0131 olmal\u0131 ve izlenen ama\u00e7lara uygun \u015fekilde ortaya konmal\u0131d\u0131r (Ahmet Sefa Topuz ve di\u011ferleri,\u00a7 64). S\u00fcrenin k\u0131sal\u0131\u011f\u0131 ise her olay\u0131n kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc olan ko\u015fullar\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirilebilecek bir k\u0131stas olmakla birlikte, burada kastedilen s\u00fcre, s\u00f6z konusu eylemler kapsam\u0131nda i\u015f\u00e7ilerin seslerini i\u015fverene yeterince duyurmalar\u0131 i\u00e7in gerekli olan makul bir zaman aral\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan az olmamal\u0131d\u0131r (Abdullah \u00c7elik ve di\u011ferleri,\u00a7 57).<\/p>\n
39. \u0130ncelenen ba\u015fvuruda i\u015f\u00e7ilerin eylemlerinin T\u0130S’e ili\u015fkin yap\u0131sal sorun te\u015fkil eden uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar\u0131n dile getirilmesine ve sendikal\u0131 arkada\u015flar\u0131n\u0131n i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin ve bar\u0131\u015f\u00e7\u0131l oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Zira i\u015f\u00e7ilerin s\u00f6z konusu eylemi ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirirken herhangi bir \u015fiddet eylemine tevess\u00fcl ettikleri y\u00f6n\u00fcnde bir bilgi veya belgeye yahut iddiaya veya bir yarg\u0131sal tespite dosya kapsam\u0131nda rastlanm\u0131\u015f de\u011fildir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla an\u0131lan eylemler sendika hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirilmelidir (benzer de\u011ferlendirmeler i\u00e7in bkz. Muharrem \u00c7imen,\u00a7 47).<\/p>\n
40. \u00d6te yandan ba\u015fvuru konusu eylemlere i\u015fverenin ne derecede katlanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi de ele al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r. \u0130\u015f\u00e7iler mensubu olduklar\u0131 ve T\u0130S imzalama yetkisini elde etmi\u015f Sendikan\u0131n i\u015fyerinde g\u00fcc\u00fcn\u00fcn k\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nlemek ad\u0131na hareket ettiklerini ifade etmi\u015flerdir. \u0130\u015fverenin yetki tespitine itiraz davas\u0131 a\u00e7mas\u0131 ve sendika \u00f6nc\u00fcs\u00fc E.E.yi i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kartmas\u0131 olgular\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda i\u015f\u00e7ilerde b\u00f6yle bir endi\u015fenin ya\u015fanmas\u0131 makul g\u00f6r\u00fcnmektedir. Nitekim Kand\u0131ra 2.Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 sonucunda i\u015fyeri yetkililerinin sendikal haklar\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n engellenmesi su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmalar\u0131 ile i\u015fyerinde sendikal\u0131 i\u015f\u00e7i kalmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespiti g\u00f6z\u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda i\u015f\u00e7ilerin duydu\u011fu endi\u015fenin temelsiz olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ortadad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
41. Bu do\u011frultuda olay\u0131n geli\u015fimine bak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda \u00f6ncelikle 25\/10\/2016 tarihinde i\u015f\u00e7ilerin i\u015fyerini terk etmeme eylemi yapt\u0131klar\u0131nda ihtilaf olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Bununla birlikte d\u00f6rt g\u00fcn boyunca ya\u015fanan geli\u015fmeler konusunda mahkeme de\u011ferlendirmelerinin farkl\u0131la\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Kocaeli 4. \u0130\u015f Mahkemesinin de\u011ferlendirmesine g\u00f6re (bkz.\u00a712) ba\u015fvuruculara usul\u00fcne g\u00f6re i\u015f verilmemi\u015f; Kand\u0131ra 2.Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi de\u011ferlendirmesine g\u00f6re ise i\u015fyeri yetkilileri i\u015f\u00e7ilere \u00f6zellikle i\u015f vermediklerini belirtmi\u015flerdir (bkz.\u00a717). Buna kar\u015f\u0131n Kocaeli 6. \u0130\u015f Mahkemesi ve B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemelerine g\u00f6re ba\u015fvurucular tamamlanmayan ve tamamlanmas\u0131 gereken i\u015f emirleri olmas\u0131na, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla kendilerine i\u015f verilmesine ra\u011fmen, s\u00f6zl\u00fc ve yaz\u0131l\u0131 uyar\u0131lara uymayarak 4 g\u00fcn i\u015f yapmama eylemine devam etmi\u015fler ve bu suretle kanunsuz grev yapm\u0131\u015flard\u0131r.<\/p>\n
42. Bu a\u015famada bir kez daha \u00f6nemle belirtilmelidir ki olay\u0131n ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmek bak\u0131m\u0131ndan yarg\u0131 mercilerine g\u00f6re dezavantajl\u0131 konumda olan Anayasa Mahkemesinin g\u00f6revi, davaya ili\u015fkin yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131sal de\u011ferlendirmelerden birine \u00fcst\u00fcnl\u00fck tan\u0131mak ya da bunlardan birini tercih etmek de\u011fildir. Bununla birlikte Anayasa Mahkemesi, ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n sendikal haklar\u0131na yap\u0131lan m\u00fcdahalenin Anayasa’ya uygun olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 denetimini, ba\u015fvuruya konu nihai yarg\u0131sal kararda ilgili ve yeterli gerek\u00e7enin bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczerinden yapacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n
43. Kocaeli 6. \u0130\u015f Mahkemesi ve B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi kararlar\u0131nda i\u015f\u00e7ilerin kanunsuz grevde bulunduklar\u0131 sonucuna var\u0131lmakla birlikte i\u015f\u00e7ilerin bu eylemleri nedeniyle i\u015fyerindeki i\u015flerin ne \u015fekilde azald\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u00fcretimde ya\u015fanan kay\u0131plar\u0131n boyutu ve bunlar\u0131n telafi edilip edilemeyece\u011fi gibi \u00f6nemli olabilecek hususlar a\u00e7\u0131klanmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu bak\u0131mdan ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n i\u015fverene y\u00f6nelik hak arama amac\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6tesine ge\u00e7en eylemlerde bulunduklar\u0131 gerek\u00e7eli kararlarda g\u00f6sterilememi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
44. Son olarak ba\u015fvurucular olduk\u00e7a a\u011f\u0131r bir sonu\u00e7la kar\u015f\u0131la\u015fm\u0131\u015f ve i\u015flerini kaybetmi\u015ftir. T\u00fcrk i\u015f hukukunda, doktrin ve Yarg\u0131tay uygulamalar\u0131 ile feshin son \u00e7are olmas\u0131 ilkesi benimsenmi\u015ftir. Kar\u015f\u0131la\u015f\u0131lan a\u011f\u0131r sonu\u00e7 nedeniyle feshin son \u00e7are olmas\u0131 prensibinin bu t\u00fcr davalarda uygulanmas\u0131n\u0131n temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklerin korunmas\u0131 i\u00e7in hayati \u00f6nemde oldu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Buna g\u00f6re i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin feshine son \u00e7are olarak ba\u015fvurulmal\u0131, daha hafif tedbirlerle ya da y\u00f6ntemlerle i\u015f ili\u015fkisinin s\u00fcrd\u00fcr\u00fclmesinin m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmamas\u0131 durumunda ancak fesih d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclmelidir (bkz. \u00a7 24; Yarg\u0131tay 9. Hukuk Dairesi, 22\/3\/2007, E.2006\/36997, K.2007\/8174; Yarg\u0131tay 9. Hukuk Dairesi, 24\/2\/2016, E.2015\/26193, K.2016\/3803; Yarg\u0131tay 7. Hukuk Dairesi, 17\/3\/2016, E.2015\/39141, K.2016\/6555; Yarg\u0131tay 9. Hukuk Dairesi, 12\/6\/2007, E.2007\/8740, K.2007\/18743; Yarg\u0131tay 9. Hukuk Dairesi, 14\/12\/2009, E.2009\/11733, K.2009\/34774). Zira son \u00e7are oldu\u011fu g\u00f6sterilmeden temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklerini kullanan i\u015f\u00e7ilerin i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerinin feshedilmesi s\u00f6z konusu i\u015f\u00e7iler ve di\u011ferleri \u00fczerinde temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklerini kullanmalar\u0131 s\u0131ras\u0131nda cayd\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 bir etkiye neden olacakt\u0131r. O h\u00e2lde bir i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin feshinin temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklerin ihlaline neden olmamas\u0131 i\u00e7in i\u015f ili\u015fkisinin devam ettirilmesini imk\u00e2ns\u0131z k\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilen ve do\u011frudan en a\u011f\u0131r yapt\u0131r\u0131ma ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015f olan bu sebeplerin i\u015fverence ve daha sonra denetleme yapan yarg\u0131 mercilerince hi\u00e7bir \u015f\u00fcpheye yer b\u0131rakmayacak \u015fekilde ortaya konulmu\u015f olmas\u0131 gerekir (Kardelen Yo\u011fungan ve Sonay Tezcan, B. No: 2018\/24097, 2\/5\/2023, \u00a7 63).<\/p>\n
45. Buna kar\u015f\u0131n ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n i\u015f akdinin sonland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131nda feshin son \u00e7are olmas\u0131 prensibinin de de\u011ferlendirilmedi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Her iki taraf\u0131n menfaatleri g\u00f6z\u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerinin sonland\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fvuruculara a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 ve ola\u011fan d\u0131\u015f\u0131 bir k\u00fclfet y\u00fckledi\u011fi ve i\u015f akitlerinin feshedilmesinin ka\u00e7\u0131n\u0131lmaz oldu\u011funun g\u00f6sterilemedi\u011fi de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir (benzer de\u011ferlendirmeler i\u00e7in bkz. Muharrem \u00c7imen, \u00a7 50).<\/p>\n
46. T\u00fcm bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda eldeki ba\u015fvuruda i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n sendika hakk\u0131na yap\u0131lan m\u00fcdahale onlar\u0131n ve ba\u015fkalar\u0131n\u0131n sendika haklar\u0131n\u0131 kullanmalar\u0131 \u00fczerinde cayd\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 bir etkiye yol a\u00e7acakt\u0131r. Buna kar\u015f\u0131n ba\u015fvurucu Erdo\u011fan Kaymaz y\u00f6n\u00fcnden Kocaeli 6. \u0130\u015f Mahkemesi ve t\u00fcm ba\u015fvurucular y\u00f6n\u00fcnden B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemelerinin sendika hakk\u0131n\u0131n gerektirdi\u011fi bi\u00e7imde taraflar\u0131n menfaatlerini ilgili ve yeterli bir gerek\u00e7eyle adil bir \u015fekilde dengelemedi\u011fi, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla devletin pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn gerektirdi\u011fi \u015fekilde yarg\u0131sal bir de\u011ferlendirme yapmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
47. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 51. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan sendika hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
VI. G\u0130DER\u0130M<\/p>\n
48. Ba\u015fvurucular ihlalin tespiti ve yeniden yarg\u0131lama talebi ile ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 50.000 TL manevi, 150.000 TL maddi tazminat \u00f6denmesi talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
49. 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 (30\/3\/2011 tarihli ve 6216 say\u0131l\u0131 Anayasa Mahkemesinin Kurulu\u015fu ve Yarg\u0131lama Usulleri Hakk\u0131nda 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
50. \u00d6te yandan sendika hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edilmesi nedeniyle yaln\u0131zca yeniden yarg\u0131lamaya karar verilmesiyle giderilemeyecek olan manevi zararlar\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ba\u015fvuruculara ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 net 34.000 TL manevi tazminat \u00f6denmesine karar verilmesi gerekir. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n u\u011frad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 iddia ettikleri maddi zarar talebi yeniden yarg\u0131lama kapsam\u0131nda giderilebilece\u011finden maddi tazminat taleplerinin reddine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
VII. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A. 1. Makul s\u00fcrede yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcketilmemesi nedeniyle KABUL ED\u0130LEMEZ OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
2. Sendika hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
B. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 51. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan sendika hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
C. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin sendika hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak amac\u0131yla \u0130stanbul B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 32. Hukuk Dairesine (E.2021\/1168, K.2022\/2206; E.2021\/1172,K.2021\/221; E.2021\/1171, K.2021\/2209; E.2021\/1170, K.2021\/2210; E.2021\/1169, K.2021\/2207; E.2021\/1167, K.2021\/2208; E.2021\/1166, K.2021\/2200; E.2021\/1165, K.2021\/2205; E.2021\/1164, K.2021\/2204; E.2021\/1163, K.2021\/2203; E.2021\/1162, K.2021\/2202) iletilmek \u00fczere Kocaeli 4. \u0130\u015f Mahkemesine (E.2019\/554, K.2020\/890; E.2019\/552,K.2020\/888; E.2019\/582,K.2020\/891; E.2019\/550, K.2020\/889; E.2019\/544, K.2020\/886; E.2019\/532, K.2020\/881; E.2019\/520, K.2020\/880; E.2019\/534, K.2020\/882; E.2019\/540, K.2020\/884; E.2019\/538, K.2020\/883; E.2019\/542, K.2020\/885) ve Kocaeli 6. \u0130\u015f Mahkemesine(E.2016\/1564, K.2018\/511) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
D. Ba\u015fvuruculara ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 net 34.000 TL manevi tazminat \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE, tazminata ili\u015fkin di\u011fer taleplerin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. 7.969,20 TL har\u00e7 ve 30.000 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan toplam 37.969,20 TL yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvuruculara M\u00dc\u015eTEREKEN \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
F. \u00d6demelerin 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
G. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 8\/1\/2025 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 8\/1\/2025 tarihli ve 2022\/27930 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 AL\u0130 ATE\u015e VE D\u0130\u011eERLER\u0130 BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2022\/27930) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 8\/1\/2025 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 \u00a0 Ba\u015fkan : Basri BA\u011eCI \u00dcyeler : Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU \u00a0 \u00a0 Kenan YA\u015eAR \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00d6mer \u00c7INAR \u00a0 \u00a0 Metin KIRATLI Raport\u00f6r : G\u00fcls\u00fcm Gizem G\u00dcRSOY Ba\u015fvurucular : 1. Ali ATE\u015e \u00a0 \u00a0 2. As\u0131m \u00c7EV\u0130K \u00a0 \u00a0 3. Atilla \u00d6ZDO\u011eAN \u00a0 \u00a0 4. Ayhan \u00c7AKAR \u00a0 \u00a0 5. Erdi G\u00dcZEL \u00a0 \u00a0 6. Erdo\u011fan KAYMAZ \u00a0 \u00a0 7. \u0130lhan KAYAN \u00a0 \u00a0 8. \u0130smail \u00c7EL\u0130K \u00a0 \u00a0 9. \u0130smail \u00c7ET\u0130N \u00a0 \u00a0 10. Nurullah G\u00dcNE\u015e \u00a0 \u00a0 11. Turgay ALKIZ \u00a0 \u00a0 12. Ya\u015far TA\u015e Ba\u015fvurucular Vekili : Av. Ay\u015feg\u00fcl \u015eENOL CAN \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN KONUSU 1. Ba\u015fvuru, i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi feshedilen ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n i\u015fe iade ve sendikal tazminat taleplerinin reddedilmesi nedeniyle sendika hakk\u0131n\u0131n; yarg\u0131laman\u0131n uzun s\u00fcrmesi nedeniyle de makul s\u00fcrede yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. II. BA\u015eVURU S\u00dcREC\u0130 2. Konu y\u00f6n\u00fcnden hukuki irtibat bulunmas\u0131 nedeniyle 2022\/27931, 2022\/27932, 2022\/27933, 2022\/27934, 2022\/27935, 2022\/27938, 2022\/29634, 2022\/29690, 2022\/30697, 2022\/35328, 2022\/49529 ba\u015fvuru numaral\u0131 dosyalar 2022\/27930 ba\u015fvuru numaral\u0131 dosya \u00fczerinde birle\u015ftirilmi\u015ftir. 3. Ba\u015fvurular s\u00fcresinde yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 4. Ba\u015fvuru, ba\u015fvuru formu ve eklerinin idari y\u00f6nden yap\u0131lan \u00f6n incelemesinden sonra …<\/p>","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-35358","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n